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

Selby District Submission Draft Core Strategy – May 2011
___________________________________________________________________
5.15 The total amount of housing development directed to Selby town is
considered to be an appropriate maximum, bearing in mind existing
highway and flood risk constraints, and the desirability of preventing
the coalescence of Selby with surrounding villages, particularly
Brayton.
5.16 Outside Selby, housing development is orientated towards meeting
local needs and creating balanced communities. Bearing in mind that
for the District as a whole, the annual affordable housing needs over
the next five years amounts to an unattainable 90% of the total annual
requirement 8 , it is more realistic and equitable to consider need on a
proportionate basis for each part of the District, rather than on the
absolute numbers.
5.17 The proportion of development allocated to Sherburn in Elmet is less
than that suggested through a recent Strategic Housing Market
Assessment, in recognition of the scale of recent development and
current permissions. These include provision for significant numbers of
affordable properties catering for short-term need. It is also considered
desirable not to exacerbate high levels of commuting, particularly to
Leeds.
The proportion of development allocated to Sherburn in Elmet and the
Tadcaster area corresponds with that identified through the 2009
SHMA in order that these Local Service Centres meet the local needs
identified. The Tadcaster figure of 7% includes the identified affordable
need in the ‘northern sub-area’ owing to the absence low number (PC
6.35) of Designated Service Villages (DSVs) in the sub-area and
limited development opportunities in surrounding villages. There are
limited opportunities for new housing (scale and nature of settlements)
in these DSVs and this is compounded by the geographical
remoteness of the northern sub-area (partly due to the configuration of
the river here which makes access tortuous). The scale of envisaged
growth in the DSVs here may not cater for affordable need (with an
increased reliance on rural exception sites) and as such Tadcaster
should also provide for meeting the needs of the rest of the Northern
Sub-area. (PC5.14)
5.18 In Tadcaster the scale of development proposed reflects the fact that
only limited opportunities have been available over some considerable
time, combined with the need to increase the vitality of the town and its
centre through additional housing growth.
This is not the case for Sherburn because the Western Sub-Area
contains more DSVs which by their location, nature and scale could
reasonably be expected to cater for the identified need in that Sub-
Area. (PC5.15)
8 Selby District Strategic Housing Market Assessment 2009
- 48 -