Tracked Version of Core Strategy, November 2012 - Selby District ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Selby District Submission Draft Core Strategy – May 2011 ___________________________________________________________________ Byram/Brotherton 1, 2 Monk Fryston/Hillam 1, 2 Carlton Cawood North Duffield Riccall Church Fenton South Milford 2 Eggborough/Whitley 1, 2 Escrick (PC6.32) 2 Fairburn [CP7.7[ Thorpe Willoughby Ulleskelf Notes: 1 Villages with close links and shared facilities 2 These settlements are to varying degrees constrained by Green Belt. It will be for any Green Belt review, undertaken in accordance with Policy CPXX, to determine whether land may be removed from the Green Belt for development purposes. [PC7.6] Proposals for speculative residential (windfall) development development on non-allocated sites (PC1.19) must meet the requirements of Policy CP1A. (b) Limited amounts of residential development may be absorbed inside Development Limits 11 of secondary villages where it will enhance or maintain the vitality of rural communities (PC6.26) and (inside Development Limits) through ‘exception sites’ through small scale allocations (PC3.3) for 100% affordable housing or mixed market/affordable sites in line with Policy CP6 and through small scale speculative (windfall) proposals development on nonallocated sites (PC5.8) inside development limits (PC3.3) which conform to the provisions of Policy CP1A and Policy CP6. [PC7.8] (c) Development in the countryside (outside Development Limits) will be limited to the replacement or extension of existing buildings, the reuse of buildings preferably for employment purposes, and well-designed new buildings to proposals of an appropriate scale, which would diversify the local economy which would contribute towards and improve the local economy (PC1.20) and where it will enhance or maintain the vitality of rural communities (PC6.27), in accordance with Policy CP9; or meet rural affordable housing need (which meets the provisions 11 References to Development Limits in this document refer to the Development Limits as defined on the Policies Map. Development Limits will be reviewed through further Local Plan documents. - 42 -
Selby District Submission Draft Core Strategy – May 2011 ___________________________________________________________________ of Policy CP6), (PC6.29) or other exceptional special (PC6.28) circumstances. PC7.9 (d) In Green Belt, including villages washed over by Green Belt, development must conform to Policy CPXX and (PC5.9) national Green Belt policies. B. Land will be allocated for development in Selby, Sherburn in Elmet, Tadcaster and Designated Service Villages through a Site Allocations DPD with preference to land of least environmental or amenity value (PC6.30) based on the following ‘sequential approach’: 1. Previously developed land and buildings within the settlement; 2. Suitable greenfield land within the settlement; 3. Extensions to settlements on previously developed land; 4. Extensions to settlements on greenfield land. A sequential approach will also be adopted to direct development to areas with the lowest flood risk identified through the Selby Strategic Flood Risk Assessment, taking account of the vulnerability of the type of development proposed and its contribution to achieving vital and sustainable communities. Where appropriate sequential approach to the assessment of sites will form part of a PPS25 Sequential Test in order to direct development to areas with the lowest flood risk, taking account of the most up to date flood risk data available from the Environment Agency, the vulnerability of the type of development proposed and its contribution to achieving vital and sustainable communities (PC3.2 & PC4.3). C. The target for the proportion of housing development on previously developed land is 40% over the period 2004 – 2017. (PC6.31) Major Developed Sites in the Green Belt 4.39c The existence of established businesses and infrastructure already present in the Green Belt area are constrained from otherwise legitimate development by the designation. The Council is sympathetic to such cases and recognises that these sites are at - 43 -
Page 1 and 2:
Selby District Local Development Fr
Page 3 and 4: The Status of RSS and the Implicati
Page 5 and 6: List of Maps, Figures and Appendice
Page 7 and 8: General PC6.1 PC6.2 PC6.3 Selby Dis
Page 9 and 10: Selby District Submission Draft Cor
Page 53: Selby District Submission Draft Cor
Page 105 and 106:
Selby District Submission Draft Cor
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Selby District Publication Draft Co
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
gradually diminish as those sites a
Page 175 and 176:
Table 2 Settlement Hierarchy (Round
Page 177 and 178:
in total over the Plan period. A fu
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
show all

Tracked Version of Core Strategy, November 2012 - Selby District ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?