Agenda with Maps and Applications (21Mb) - pdf - Selby District ...
Agenda with Maps and Applications (21Mb) - pdf - Selby District ... Agenda with Maps and Applications (21Mb) - pdf - Selby District ...
5) Appropriate community and small-scale local shopping facilities, including the reservation of land for a new primary school. 2.22.3 Circular guidance requires that such contributions are fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the proposed development; are necessary to remedy any shortfalls or adverse impacts resulting from the proposed development; and are necessary to make the proposal acceptable in land use planning terms. 2.22.4 In terms of developer contributions then the “Approved Development Brief” for the wider site sets out a series of elements for consideration by the developers and the Council in progressing schemes for the site. 2.22.5 The submitted S106 Heads of Terms refers to education, recycling, and recreational open space provision. Affordable housing and Recreational Open Space have been considered earlier in this report. Taking the other matters in turn. Education 2.22.6 In terms of education matters then Policy SHB/1B (9) states that proposals must make provision for “appropriate community and smallscale local shopping facilities, including the reservation of land for a new primary school”. 2.22.7 Since the previous refusal on the adjacent site for 498 units, the agents have submitted an application for change of use from agricultural to educational (use Class D1) and formation of new access road to Milford Road on land to the southern edge of Athelston CP School and this would be transferred to North Yorkshire County Council upon occupation of the first dwelling which would be secured via a Section 106 agreement. In addition they have offered a contribution towards the enhancement of education facilities at Athelstan CP School which would be secured via the Section 106 agreement. 2.22.8 North Yorkshire County Council have confirmed that they withdraw their previous objections and this decision has been taken in the expectation of the future expansion of Athelstan CP School and following; 1) Approval of the change of use application NY/2012/0171/COU for land adjacent to the school site. 2) Consideration of the local and national planning policies which would influence a future detailed planning application for development of the enlarged site including the National Planning Policy Framework. This is subject to developer contributions to secure education infrastructure, both land and financial, via s.106 provision. 78
2.22.9 As such the scheme is considered to accord with Criterion 3 of ENV1, Policy CS6 of the Local Plan and the Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) on Developer Contributions. Primary Care Trust 2.22.10 In terms of developer contributions to healthcare then the “Approved Development Brief” for the wider site outlines that the development “will be required to meet the healthcare needs generated by the development and the overall scheme should allow for the reservation of land for such facilities if necessary”, going on to state that “the preferred method of delivery and the level of payment required will be discussed with the PCT and suitable provision will be made to secure these improvements through a legal agreement”. As such alongside CS6, the Council’s SPD on Developer Contributions and the Development Brief there is a policy context to seek contributions to improvements in healthcare provision as a result of the development. 2.22.6 The PCT have confirmed that additional health care provision may need to be considered, however the PCT have not confirmed what contribution they would seek and what these monies would be utilised for. Therefore in the absence of this information it is considered that a contribution cannot be justified at this stage, as it cannot be shown by the LPA to be necessary or reasonably related in scale and kind to the development proposed (in the absence of evidence supporting the level of contribution). Waste and Recycling Facilities 2.22.11 As part of any S106 and in line with Policy CS6 and the Council’s SPD on Developer Contributions the provision of waste recycling for the dwellings would be based on the following levels subject to prices changing based on all of the units being “Dwellings with Gardens”. Therefore the total contribution would equate for the provision of 2 bins and 3 recycling bins and this would be secured via a Section 106 agreement. Community or Small Scale Retail Provision 2.22.12 In terms of developer contributions to community venues and retail provision the “Approved Development Brief” for the wider site outlines that as the site would ultimately accommodate more than 3000 residents, this level of population “may require a venue for meeting purposes and / other community needs”. 2.22.9 The scheme (together with other development on this Phase 2 site) does not include such a provision and the Parish Council although highlighting issues with capacity on existing services, have not identified specific proposals to which the developer could be asked to 79
- Page 27 and 28: Further comments were received from
- Page 29 and 30: expected to accommodate in the orde
- Page 31 and 32: sufficient sites available within S
- Page 33 and 34: The Council has a 5.57 year supply
- Page 35 and 36: scheme of this size therefore has t
- Page 37 and 38: the site and other panned hedgerows
- Page 39 and 40: een carried out. Although it would
- Page 41 and 42: character of surrounding dwellings
- Page 43 and 44: • It would appear that the develo
- Page 45 and 46: problems for local residents who, f
- Page 47 and 48: 2. The Report allow a further 8 yea
- Page 49 and 50: Taking these in turn. vi) Provision
- Page 51 and 52: 2.8.11 The Regional Spatial Strateg
- Page 53 and 54: compliance of the proposals with th
- Page 55 and 56: • Vehicular site access arrangeme
- Page 57 and 58: vehicles; and consider the needs of
- Page 59 and 60: 2.9.33 NYCC Highways have confirmed
- Page 61 and 62: 2.10.5 At a regional level the RSS
- Page 63 and 64: 2.11.5 The report concludes that th
- Page 65 and 66: 10) An appropriate flood risk asses
- Page 67 and 68: ii. and a site-specific flood risk
- Page 69 and 70: carried out in accordance with the
- Page 71 and 72: earlier in this Report seeking use
- Page 73 and 74: 2.17.8 In conclusion, it is conside
- Page 75 and 76: The indicative plans submitted demo
- Page 77: infrastructure) and came into force
- Page 81 and 82: 2.23 Climate Change, Energy Efficie
- Page 83 and 84: have raised the need for affordable
- Page 85 and 86: ii) affordable housing provision, r
- Page 87 and 88: climate change flood event. Details
- Page 89 and 90: The agreed drawings must be approve
- Page 91 and 92: No dwellings shall be constructed w
- Page 95 and 96: Public Session Report Reference Num
- Page 97 and 98: Low Street to the south of the vill
- Page 99 and 100: Reason for Refusal 1 The proposal b
- Page 101 and 102: • The increase in numbers of resi
- Page 103 and 104: of adoption an indicative capacity
- Page 105 and 106: • Types and Sizes - Affordable Ho
- Page 107 and 108: and that further clarification/evid
- Page 109 and 110: ecording a condition should be appe
- Page 111 and 112: • The provision of well designed
- Page 113 and 114: presented as an Appendix within the
- Page 115 and 116: We support the proposed preservatio
- Page 117 and 118: - When travelling around Leeds and
- Page 119 and 120: - The traffic projections are woefu
- Page 121 and 122: - The Sherburn village centre is al
- Page 123 and 124: determination must be made in accor
- Page 125 and 126: xvi) xvii) xviii) Climate Change, E
- Page 127 and 128: the Regional Spatial Strategy Polic
2.22.9 As such the scheme is considered to accord <strong>with</strong> Criterion 3 of ENV1,<br />
Policy CS6 of the Local Plan <strong>and</strong> the Supplementary Planning<br />
Document (SPD) on Developer Contributions.<br />
Primary Care Trust<br />
2.22.10 In terms of developer contributions to healthcare then the “Approved<br />
Development Brief” for the wider site outlines that the development “will<br />
be required to meet the healthcare needs generated by the<br />
development <strong>and</strong> the overall scheme should allow for the reservation of<br />
l<strong>and</strong> for such facilities if necessary”, going on to state that “the<br />
preferred method of delivery <strong>and</strong> the level of payment required will be<br />
discussed <strong>with</strong> the PCT <strong>and</strong> suitable provision will be made to secure<br />
these improvements through a legal agreement”. As such alongside<br />
CS6, the Council’s SPD on Developer Contributions <strong>and</strong> the<br />
Development Brief there is a policy context to seek contributions to<br />
improvements in healthcare provision as a result of the development.<br />
2.22.6 The PCT have confirmed that additional health care provision may<br />
need to be considered, however the PCT have not confirmed what<br />
contribution they would seek <strong>and</strong> what these monies would be utilised<br />
for. Therefore in the absence of this information it is considered that a<br />
contribution cannot be justified at this stage, as it cannot be shown by<br />
the LPA to be necessary or reasonably related in scale <strong>and</strong> kind to the<br />
development proposed (in the absence of evidence supporting the<br />
level of contribution).<br />
Waste <strong>and</strong> Recycling Facilities<br />
2.22.11 As part of any S106 <strong>and</strong> in line <strong>with</strong> Policy CS6 <strong>and</strong> the Council’s<br />
SPD on Developer Contributions the provision of waste recycling for<br />
the dwellings would be based on the following levels subject to prices<br />
changing based on all of the units being “Dwellings <strong>with</strong> Gardens”.<br />
Therefore the total contribution would equate for the provision of 2 bins<br />
<strong>and</strong> 3 recycling bins <strong>and</strong> this would be secured via a Section 106<br />
agreement.<br />
Community or Small Scale Retail Provision<br />
2.22.12 In terms of developer contributions to community venues <strong>and</strong> retail<br />
provision the “Approved Development Brief” for the wider site outlines<br />
that as the site would ultimately accommodate more than 3000<br />
residents, this level of population “may require a venue for meeting<br />
purposes <strong>and</strong> / other community needs”.<br />
2.22.9 The scheme (together <strong>with</strong> other development on this Phase 2 site)<br />
does not include such a provision <strong>and</strong> the Parish Council although<br />
highlighting issues <strong>with</strong> capacity on existing services, have not<br />
identified specific proposals to which the developer could be asked to<br />
79