Annex 1
Cityof York Local Plan
Consolidated Main Modifications
January 2023
MM2.2 Policy DP2: Sustainable Development
MM2.3 Policy DP2: Sustainable Development
MM2.4 Policy DP2 explanation – paragraphs 2.19a and 2.19b
MM2.5 Policy DP4: Approach to Development Management
2. SECTION 3: SPATIAL STRATEGY
MM3.1 Policy SS1: Delivering Sustainable Growth for York
MM3.2 Policy SS1 explanation – new paragraphs
MM3.4 Table 1a and 1b (housing supply and distribution)
MM3.5 Policy SS1 Explanation – paragraph 3.3
MM3.6 Policy SS2: The Role of York’s Green Belt
MM3.7 Policy SS3: York City Centre
MM3.8 Policy SS4: York Central
MM3.9 Policy SS4: York Central
MM3.10 Policy SS4: York Central
MM3.11 Policy SS5: Castle Gateway
MM3.12 Policy SS5: Castle Gateway
MM3.13 Policy SS5: Castle Gateway
MM3.14 Policy SS5 explanation – new paragraph
MM3.15 Policy SS6: British Sugar/Manor School
MM3.16 Policy SS7: Civil Service Sports Ground
MM3.17 Policy SS8: Land Adjacent to Hull Road
MM3.18 Policy SS9: Land East of Metcalfe Lane
MM3.19 Policy SS9: Land East of Metcalfe Lane
MM3.20 Policy SS9: Land East of Metcalfe Lane
MM3.21 Policy SS9: Land East of Metcalfe Lane
MM3.22 Policy SS9: Land East of Metcalfe Lane
MM3.23 Policy SS9: Land East of Metcalfe Lane
MM3.24 Policy SS9: Land East of Metcalfe Lane
MM3.25 Policy SS9 explanation – paragraph 3.48
MM3.26 Policy SS10: Land North of Monks Cross
MM3.27 Policy SS10: Land North of Monks Cross
MM3.28 Policy SS10: Land North of Monks Cross
MM3.29 Policy SS10: Land North of Monks Cross
MM3.30 Policy SS10: Land North of Monks Cross
MM3.31 Policy SS11: Land North of Haxby
MM3.32 Policy SS11: Land North of Haxby
MM3.33 Policy SS11: Land North of Haxby
MM3.34 Policy SS11: Land North of Haxby
MM3.35 Policy SS11: Land North of Haxby
MM3.36 Policy SS11 explanation – paragraph 3.56
MM3.37 Policy SS12: Land West of Wigginton Road
MM3.38 Policy SS12: Land West of Wigginton Road
MM3.39 Policy SS12: Land West of Wigginton Road
MM3.40 Policy SS12: Land West of Wigginton Road
MM3.41 Policy SS12: Land West of Wigginton Road
MM3.42 Policy SS12: Land West of Wigginton Road
MM3.43 Policy SS12: Land West of Wigginton Road
MM3.44 Policy SS12: Land West of Wigginton Road
MM3.45 Policy SS12: Land West of Wigginton Road
MM3.46 Policy SS12 explanation – paragraph 3.61
MM3.47 Policy SS13: Land West of Elvington Lane
MM3.48 Policy SS13: Land West of Elvington Lane
MM3.49 Policy SS13: Land West of Elvington Lane
MM3.50 Policy SS13: Land West of Elvington Lane
MM3.51 Policy SS13: Land West of Elvington Lane
MM3.52 Policy SS13: Land West of Elvington Lane
MM3.53 Policy SS13: Land West of Elvington Lane
MM3.54 Policy SS13: Land West of Elvington Lane
MM3.55 Policy SS13: Land West of Elvington Lane
MM3.56 Policy SS13: Land West of Elvington Lane
MM3.57 Policy SS13 explanation – paragraph 3.64
MM3.58 Policy SS13 explanation – paragraph 3.67
MM3.59 Policy SS14: Terrys Extension Sites
MM3.60 Policy SS15: Nestle South
MM3.61 Policy SS16: Land at Tadcaster Road, Copmanthorpe
MM3.62 Policy SS16: Land at Tadcaster Road, Copmanthorpe
MM3.63 Policy SS16: Land at Tadcaster Road, Copmanthorpe
MM3.64 Policy SS16: Land at Tadcaster Road, Copmanthorpe
MM3.66 Policy SS18: Station yard, Wheldrake
MM3.67 Policy SS18: Station yard, Wheldrake
MM3.68 Policy SS18: Station yard, Wheldrake
MM3.69 Policy SS18: Station yard, Wheldrake
MM3.70 Policy SS19: Queen Elizabeth Barracks, Strensall
MM3.71 Policy SS20: Imphal Barracks, Fulford Road
MM3.72 Policy SS20: Imphal Barracks, Fulford Road
MM3.73 Policy SS20: Imphal Barracks, Fulford Road
MM3.74 Policy SS20: Imphal Barracks, Fulford Road
MM3.75 Policy SS20: Imphal Barracks, Fulford Road
MM3.76 Policy SS21: Land South of Airfield Business Park, Elvington
MM3.77 Policy SS22: University of York Expansion
MM3.78 Policy SS22 Explanation
MM3.79 Policy SS23: Land at Northminster Business Park
MM3.80 Policy SS24: Whitehall Grange, Wigginton Road
3. SECTION 4: ECONOMY AND RETAIL
MM4.1 Policy EC1: Provision of Employment Land
MM4.2 Policy EC1 Provision of Employment Land
MM4.4 Policy EC1 explanation – table 4.1
MM4.5 Policy EC1 Explanation paragraph 4.8a
MM4.6 Policy EC2 Explanation paragraph 4.9
MM4.7 Policy EC5: Rural Economy
MM4.8 Policy EC5 Explanation – paragraph 4.17
MM4.9 Policy R1: Retail Hierarchy and Sequential Approach
MM4.10 Policy R2: District and Local Centres and Neighbourhood Parades
MM4.11 Policy R3: York City Centre Retail
MM5.1 Policy H1: Housing Allocations
MM5.3 Policy H1 Explanation – paragraphs 5.4 to 5.16
MM5.6 Policy H2: Density of Residential Development
MM5.8 Policy H3: Balancing the Housing Market
MM5.9 Policy H3: Balancing the Housing Market
MM5.10 Policy H4: Promoting and Custom House Building
MM5.11 Policy H5: Gypsies and Travellers
MM5.12 Policy H5: Gypsies and Travellers
MM5.13 Policy H6: Travelling Showpeople
MM5.14 Policy H6: Travelling Showpeople
MM5.15 Policy H5 and H6 Explanation Para 5.38 and Table 5.3
MM5.16 Policy H5 and H6 Explanation – paragraph 5.42
MM5.17 Policy H7: Student Housing
MM5.18 Policy H7 Explanation – paragraph 5.47
MM5.19 Policy H9: Older Persons Specialist Housing
MM5.20 Policy H9 explanation – paragraph 5.59
MM5.21 Policy H10: Affordable Housing
5. SECTION 6: HEALTH AND WELLBEING
MM6.1 Policy HW1: Protecting Existing Facilities
MM6.2 Policy HW1 explanation – paragraph 9.5
MM6.3 Policy HW1 explanation – paragraph 6.9
MM6.4 Policy HW1 explanation – paragraph 6.10
MM6.5 Policy HW2: New Community Facilities
MM6.7 Policy HW3: Built Sport Facilities
MM6.8 Policy HW3 explanation – Paragraph 6.20
MM6.9 Policy HW4: Childcare provision
MM6.10 Policy HW5: Healthcare services
MM6.11 Policy HW5: Healthcare services
MM6.12 Policy HW5 explanation – Paragraph 6.36
MM6.13 Policy HW6: Emergency Services
MM6.14 Policy HW7: Healthy Places
MM7.1 Policy ED1; University of York
MM7.2 Policy ED1 explanation - paragraphs 7.1a (new) to 7.2
MM7.3 Policy ED1 explanation - paragraphs 7.2a, 7.2b, 7.2c, 7.2d and 7.2e
MM7.5 Policy ED2 explanation – paragraphs 7.4, 7.4b and 7.5
MM7.8 Policy ED3 explanation – paragraphs 7.6 to 7.12
MM7.9 Policy ED5: York St. John University Further Expansion
MM7.10 Policy ED5 explanation – paragraph 7.16
MM7.11 Policy ED5 explanation – paragraph 7.18a
7. SECTION 8: PLACEMAKING, HERITAGE, DESIGN AND CULTURE
MM8.3 Policy D2; Landscape Setting
MM8.4 Policy D3: Cultural Provision
MM8.5 Policy D4: Conservation Areas
MM8.6 Policy D4 Explanation – new paragraph 8.26a
MM8.7 Policy D5: Listed Buildings
MM8.8 Policy D5 Explanation – new paragraphs
MM8.11 Policy D7: The Significance of Non-Designated heritage Assets
MM8.12 Policy D7 Explanation – paragraphs 8.35 to 8.37
MM8.13 Policy D8: Historic Parks and Gardens
MM8.14 Policy D8 Explanation – new paragraph
MM8.15 Policy D10: York City Walls and St Marys Abbey Walls (York Walls)
MM8.16 Policy D13: Advertisements
8. SECTION 9: GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE
MM9.1 Policy GI1 Green Infrastructure
MM9.2 Policy GI2: Biodiversity and Access to Nature
MM9.3 Policy GI2: Biodiversity and Access to Nature
MM9.4 Policy GI2 explanation – paragraph 9.5
MM9.5 Policy GI2 explanation – paragraph 9.6
MM9.6 Policy GI2a: Strensall Common Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
MM9.7 Policy GI4: Trees and Hedgerows
MM9.8 Policy GI5: Protection of Open Space and Playing Fields
MM9.9 Policy GI5 explanation – paragraph 9.17
MM9.10 Policy GI6: New Open Space provision
MM9.11 Policy GI6: New Open Space provision
MM9.12 Policy GI6: New Open Space provision
9. SECTION 10: MANAGING DEVELOPMENT IN THE GREEN BELT
MM10.1 Policy GB1: Development in the Green Belt
MM10.2 Policy GB1 Explanation – paragraph 10.8
MM10.3 Policy GB1 Explanation – new paragraph
MM10.4 Policy GB2: Development in Settlements within the Green Belt
MM10.5 Policy GB3: Reuse of Buildings
MM10.6 Policy GB4:’Exception’ Sites for Affordable Housing in the Green Belt
10. SECTION 11: CLIMATE CHANGE
MM11.1 Policy CC1: Renewable and Low Carbon Energy Generation Storage
MM11.2 Policy CC1: Renewable and Low Carbon Energy Generation Storage
MM11.3 Policy CC1 explanation – paragraph 11.8 – 11.11
MM11.4 Policy CC2: Sustainable Design and Construction of New Development
MM11.5 Policy CC2: Sustainable Design and Construction of New Development
MM11.6 Policy CC2: Sustainable Design and Construction of New Development
MM11.7 Policy CC2: Sustainable Design and Construction of New Development
MM11.8 Policy CC2: Sustainable Design and Construction of New Development
MM11.9 Policy CC2 explanation – paragraph 11.15
MM11.10 Policy CC2 Explanation
MM11.11 Policy CC2 Explanation
MM11.12 Policy CC2 explanation – paragraph 11.18 – 11.23
MM11.13 Policy CC3: District Heating and Combined Heat and Power Networks
MM11.14 Policy CC3 explanation – paragraph11.28 – 11.34
11. SECTION 12: ENVIRONMENT QUALITY AND FLOOD RISK
MM12.1 Policy ENV1: Air Quality
MM12.2 Policy ENV1 Explanation
MM12.3 Policy ENV2: Managing Environmental Quality
MM12.4 Policy ENV3: Land Contamination
MM12.5 Policy ENV4: Flood Risk
12. SECTION 14: TRANSPORT AND COMMUNICATIONS
MM14.1 Section 14 Introduction – paragraphs 14.2-14.3
MM14.2 Policy T1: Sustainable Access
MM14.3 Policy T1 explanation – paragraph 14.4
MM14.4 Policy T2: Strategic Public Transport Improvements
MM14.5 Policy T2 Explanation – paragraphs 14.15 to 14.23
MM14.6 Policy T3: York Railway Station and Associated Operational Facilities
MM14.7 Policy T4: Strategic Highway Network Capacity Improvements
MM14.8 Policy T5: Strategic Cycle and Pedestrian Network Links and Improvements
MM14.9 Policy T6: Development at or Near Public Transport Corridors, Interchanges and Facilities
MM14.10 Policy T7 Explanation – paragraph 14.49
MM14.11 Policy T8: Demand Management
MM14.12 Policy C1: Communications Infrastructure
13. SECTION 15: DELIVERY AND MONITORING
MM15.1 Policy DM1: Infrastructure and Developer Contributions
MM15.2 Policy DM1 explanation – paragraph 15.13
MM15.3 Policy DM1 explanation – paragraph 15.15 and Table 15.1
MM15.4 Policy DM1 explanation – paragraph 15.21
Section 2: Vision |
|
|
Modification Reference |
Proposed Modification |
Reason for change |
This will require the provision of sufficient land for
minimum average annual net
provision of 822 dwellings over the plan period to
2032/33 |
To reference the modified housing requirement figure as discussed in phase 2 hearings (matter 2). |
|
iii. Development will help Conserve, Maintain and Enhance the Environment through: …
·
Maintaining the natural geomorphology of
watercourse, water quality and the ecological value of the water
environment including i · Ensuring that these is no deterioration in the status of any surface or ground water body;
·
Making positive progress towards achieving ‘good’
status or higher in surface and groundwater bodies, in line with
the Water Framework Directive; … |
To reflect the requirements of the Water Directive Framework as agreed in Statement of Common Ground with the Environment Agency (EX/SoCG/4). |
|
· Mitigate and adapt to climate change through designing new communities and buildings, transport networks and services that support each community to be energy and resource efficient and reduce carbon emissions.
|
To make explicit the Plan’s contribution to, and requirement for the mitigation of, and adaptation to, climate change in accordance with Section 19(1A) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. |
|
2.19a The Water Framework Directive (WFD) establishes a legislative framework for the protection of surface waters (including rivers, lakes and coastal waters) and ground waters.
2.19b The Water Environment (WFD)(E&W) Regulations 2017 place a duty on each public body, including Local Planning Authorities to ‘have regard to’ River Basin Management Plans (RBMP), and so the City of York Council must ensure that new development is compliant with the requirements of the WFD and Humber RBMP. York’s water resources are a crucial part of the district’s environment which provide important wildlife habitats and encourage biodiversity, provide opportunities for recreation and form an important element to alleviate flood risk to the city. Many of York’s watercourses have been physically changed over time for example by land drainage, culverting or being run through artificial channels, which can reduce their amenity value and harm their ecology. Opportunities to re-naturalise watercourses should be supported, for example by removing existing artificial engineering works. Any new physical changes to watercourses in the district should be avoided unless there are compelling grounds for doing so and all alternative options have been considered.
|
To reflect the requirements of the Water Directive Framework as agreed in Statement of Common Ground with the Environment Agency(EX/SoCG/4). |
|
Policy DP4 and explanation at paragraph 2.21 deleted. |
Notwithstanding the transition arrangements, the NPPF section of DP4 is inconsistent with the latest NPPF (2021) which will technically apply to planning applications. For clarity and effectiveness, the policy is therefore to be deleted. |
2. SECTION 3: SPATIAL STRATEGY
Section 3: Spatial Strategy |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Modification Reference |
Proposed Modification |
Reason for change |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.1 Policy SS1: Delivering Sustainable Growth for York |
Policy SS1: Delivering Sustainable Growth for York
Development during the plan period (2017 - 2032/33) will be consistent with the priorities below. To ensure Green Belt permanence beyond the plan period, sufficient land is allocated for development to meet a further, minimum, period of 5 years to 2038.
· Provide sufficient land to accommodate an annual provision of around 650 new jobs that will support sustainable economic growth, improve prosperity and ensure that York fulfils its role as a key economic driver within both the Leeds City Region and the York, North Yorkshire and East Riding Local Enterprise Partnership area.
·
Deliver a minimum average annual net provision of · Deliver 15 new permanent pitches for Gypsies and Travellers and 4 permanent plots for Showpeople (as defined by Planning Policy for Traveller Sites) over the plan period. Whilst the needs of Gypsies, Travellers and Travelling Showpeople who do not meet the planning definition fall outside this allocation, in order to meet their assessed needs the Plan makes provision for 25 permanent pitches for Gypsies and Travellers who do not meet the definition. · Deliver at least 45% of the 9,396 affordable dwellings that are needed to meet the needs of residents unable to compete on the open market
The location of development through the plan will be guided by the following five spatial principles.
· Conserving and enhancing York’s historic and natural environment. This includes the city’s character and setting and internationally, nationally and locally significant nature conservation sites, green corridors and areas with an important recreation function. · Prioritise making the best use of previously developed land.
·
Directing development to the most sustainable locations,
· Preventing unacceptable levels of congestion, pollution and/or air quality. · Ensuring flood risk is appropriately managed.
·
York City Centre, as defined on the |
To aid effectiveness and enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012.
Modifications to the list of priorities make clear the approach to securing Green Belt permanence; the plan’s overall housing requirement (including affordable housing); the Council’s target for meeting affordable housing need; and, the plan’s provision for Gypsies, Travellers and Travelling Showpeople. These matters were discussed during phase 2 and 3 hearings.
Figures updated to reflect latest evidence in the Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Assessment 2022. Basis for the affordable housing target set out in EX/CYC/107/2). Modification to spatial principles respond to matters discussed during phase 1, recognising that it is unreasonable to require brownfield redevelopment to come forward first.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.2 Policy SS1 explanation – new paragraphs |
3.1a The Plan’s strategic policies set out an overall strategy for the pattern, scale and quality of development over the Plan period.
3.1b The Plan focusses on identifying sufficient land to meet housing and economic growth (spatial drivers) in a pattern of development aligned to the factors which shape growth (spatial shapers) set out in SS1. Development is directed to the most sustainable locations, making as much use as possible of suitable previously developed land (with some release of Green Belt land). As is set out in SS1, sustainable growth for York emphasises conserving and enhancing York’s historic environment. The scale and pattern of development is guided by the need to safeguard a number of key elements identified as contributing to the special character and setting of the historic City. These include the City’s size and compact nature, the perception of York being a free-standing historic city set within a rural hinterland, key views towards the City from the ring road and the relationship of the City to its surrounding settlements.
3.1c Development is focussed on the main urban area of York and in new free-standing settlements with some urban and village extensions. The development strategy limits the amount of growth proposed around the periphery of the built-up area of York. While new settlements will clearly affect the openness of Green Belt in those locations, their impact is considered to be less harmful to the elements which contribute to the special character and setting of York. Their size and location has taken into account the potential impact on those elements, and on the identity and rural setting of neighbouring villages.
3.1d There will also be opportunities for rural exception sites, these small scale developments provide affordable homes in locations where new homes would not usually be appropriate.
3.1e The proposed distribution of development identified in the Plan’s allocations and deliverable unimplemented consents is described in the following table (Table 1). The anticipated pattern of development as identified in the Plan’s strategic allocations is shown on the Key Diagram. |
New text associated with MM3.1, MM3.3 and MM3.4 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.3 Key Diagram |
KEY DIAGRAM 2018
Proposed modification
|
To clarify range of sites delivered within the Spatial Strategy and to be consistent with the recommendations of the HRA (2020) Key diagram amendments to clarify strategic allocations and their locations in line with the spatial strategy and the removal of ST35] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.4 Table 1a and 1b (housing supply and distribution) |
Table 1a Sources of supply over the Plan period 2017-2032/33
*Requirement = annual requirement (822dpa) x 16 years. Includes housing requirement for Gypsies and Travellers who do not meet the Planning definition.
Informed by our spatial development strategy, the anticipated distribution of allocated sites is reflected in Table 1b below.
Table 1b: Spatial Strategy: Distribution of Housing allocations
*Note: in the first instance, provision is made within larger allocations for those Gypsies and Travellers not meeting the Planning definition. Alternative provision in line with policy H5 may alter the overall stated spatial distribution. ** Note: the figures in Table 1b include delivery of whole allocations which may extend beyond 2032/33 and for a minimum of 5 years to define a permanent Green Belt. |
To provide clarity on the housing supply and distribution, reflecting EX/CYC/76 and 76a, EX/CYC/86, EX/CYC/88 and EX/CYC/107-1. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.5 Policy SS1 Explanation – paragraph 3.3
|
Housing Growth
3.3
Technical
work has been carried out by GL Hearn in the Strategic Housing
Market Assessment Update (2017). This work has updated the
demographic baseline for York based on the July 2016 household
projections.
Evidence suggests that there is a need for 9,396 affordable homes in York between 2017-2033. To help meet this need it is important that a reasonable, but viable, proportion of all new housing developments are affordable.
Policies H7 and H10 set out the Plan’s policy approach to this, and at least 2,360 affordable homes are expected to be delivered within the plan period through the operation of these policies. Combined with recorded completions (to 1st April 2022), other sources of forecast supply on windfall sites and known provision secured through the Council’s Housing Delivery Programme, it is estimated that around 3,265 affordable homes will be delivered in the plan period.
To help increase the proportion of need being met to more than 35%, the Council has set a target of providing at least 45% of its affordable housing need. Through its annual monitoring (in accordance with the delivery and monitoring framework at table 15.2), the Council will review progress on meeting the target and take appropriate action and intervention should delivery rates fall short. |
Additional explanation of the approach to meeting housing needs as evidenced during phase 2 and phase 3 hearings (and evidenced in EX/CYC/43a and EX/CYC/107/2). |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.6 Policy SS2: The Role of York’s Green Belt |
…
To
ensure that there is |
To aid effectiveness and enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.7 Policy SS3: York City Centre |
…
Within
the city centre, as defined on the
Retail
(
Office
( Food and Drink (A3/A4/A5 E); …
Finance
and Professional Services (
As
shown on the
ST32:
Hungate ( ST20: Castle Gateway (mixed use); and Elements of ST5: York Central falling within the city centre boundary (mixed use).
The
city centre will remain the focus for main town centre uses (unless
identified on the
…
York
Minster Cathedral Precinct is approximately 8 hectares in size (as
shown on the
… |
To align policy to use classes which came into force September 2020. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.8 Policy SS4: York Central |
York Central (ST5), as identified on the Policies Map, will enable the creation of a new piece of the city… |
To make clear the location of York Central for effectiveness. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.9 Policy SS4: York Central |
The following mix of uses will be permitted within York Central:
|
To align policy to use classes which came into force September 2020. To clarify that ancillary retail serving day to day needs does not require an impact assessment, in line with the requirements of Policy R1. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.10 Policy SS4: York Central |
Land
within York Central is allocated for 1,700 – 2,500 dwellings,
|
Replacing 'minimum' with 'around' and including ‘approximately’ to provide appropriate flexibility. Revision to 950 dwellings is for consistency with the latest housing trajectory. Reference to class E to reflect use class which came into force September 2020. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.11 Policy SS5: Castle Gateway |
Castle
Gateway (ST20) is allocated as an Area of Opportunity, as indicated
on the |
To correct the reference to the ‘policies’ map. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.12 Policy SS5: Castle Gateway |
… The purpose of the regeneration is to:
…
|
Additional regeneration purpose in recognition of the historic assets in the wider area. Text deleted for clarity and effectiveness, recognising the matters are duplicated within the sub-area criteria. Text moved to explanation (paragraph 3.33A).
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.13 Policy SS5: Castle Gateway |
Development within the five Castle Gateway sub-areas will be
permitted
|
To aid effectiveness and enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012: Introduction to sub-area makes clear that, where appropriate, development should have regard to the broad regeneration objectives along with specific sub-area principles. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.14 Policy SS5 explanation – new paragraph |
3.33a To achieve these aims development in the Castle Gateway will be delivered through the following: · Removing the Castle Car Park to create new public space and high quality development opportunities. · Provision of a replacement car park within the Castle Gateway area. · The addition of a new landmark River Foss pedestrian cycle bridge. · Where possible, the opening up of both frontages of the River Foss with riverside walkways. · Engagement with stakeholders in the development of masterplan and public realm proposals. · Securing public realm, transport and infrastructure investment as a catalyst for wider social and economic improvement. · Funding the implementation of public space, transport improvements and infrastructure through developer contributions and commercial uplift from development sites across the area. |
Text moved to explanation in accordance with MM3.12 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.15 Policy SS6: British Sugar/Manor School |
i.
|
Deleted because housing mix is addressed under policy H3. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.16 Policy SS7: Civil Service Sports Ground |
|
Criteria deleted because matters addressed under policy H3 and D1 respectively. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.17 Policy SS8: Land Adjacent to Hull Road |
ii.
Provide access to the site from
iii.
v.
Maintain and enhance existing trees and hedgerows
vi.
… vii. Undertake an air quality assessment as there is potential for increased traffic flows which may present new opportunities for exposure if not designed carefully. The assessment should also consider the impact of the University of York boiler stacks. Identified adverse impacts should be appropriately mitigated. . viii. Undertake a noise survey given the site’s proximity to the A1079 and the Grimston Bar Park & Ride. Identified adverse impacts should be appropriately mitigated. |
To aid effectiveness and enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012: At vii and viii to make clear the requirement for impacts to be mitigated. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.18 Policy SS9: Land East of Metcalfe Lane |
ii.
|
Deleted because housing mix is addressed under policy H3. Replaced with wording to secure strong green belt boundaries around the site in response to the assessment at EX/CYC/59g. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.19 Policy SS9: Land East of Metcalfe Lane |
iv. |
To aid effectiveness and enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012: Recognition of further work that that has clarified onsite provision is not required (and consistency with modified wording across strategic site policies). |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.20 Policy SS9: Land East of Metcalfe Lane |
v. |
To aid effectiveness and enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012: making clear a ‘proportionate’ approach is to be applied and that mitigation will be required where there is evidence of need. Wording consistent with modifications to other strategic site policies. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.21 Policy SS9: Land East of Metcalfe Lane |
vi.
Provide
vehicular access from Stockton Lane to the north of the site and/or
Murton Way to the south of the site (as shown indicatively on the |
To aid effectiveness and enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.22 Policy SS9: Land East of Metcalfe Lane |
vii. Deliver
high quality, frequent and accessible public transport services
through the whole site, to provide attractive links to York City
Centre. |
For effectiveness, making clear how meeting the 15% target should be demonstrated through a travel plan.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.23 Policy SS9: Land East of Metcalfe Lane |
ix. Provide a detailed site wide recreation and open space strategy and demonstrate its application in site masterplanning. This must include:
o
o Open space provision that satisfies policies GI2a and GI6 |
To ensure impacts identified in the HRA (2020) as a result of recreational pressure on Strensall Common SAC are mitigated.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.24 Policy SS9: Land East of Metcalfe Lane |
x. Minimise impacts of access from Murton Way to the south on ‘Osbaldwick Meadows’ Candidate Site of Importance for Nature Conservation and provide compensatory provision for any loss. |
For clarity. Inclusion of ‘candidate’ recognises the habitats are still of value, but do not fully meet the SINC criteria. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.25 Policy SS9 explanation – paragraph 3.48 |
|
Deleted for consistency with MM3.19. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.26 Policy SS10: Land North of Monks Cross |
Protect and, where appropriate, strengthen existing boundary features that are recognisable and likely to remain permanent. Where the site’s boundary is not defined by recognisable or permanent features it should be addressed through the masterplan and design process in order for strong and defensible Green Belt boundaries to be created and secured. |
Deleted because housing mix is addressed under policy H3. Criterion replaced with wording to secure strong green belt boundaries around the site in response to the assessment at EX/CYC/59g.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.27 Policy SS10: Land North of Monks Cross |
iv.
|
For clarity and effectiveness, recognising the green wedge is deliverable south of the Garth Road link.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.28 Policy SS10: Land North of Monks Cross |
vi. Provide a detailed site wide recreation and open space strategy and demonstrate its application in site masterplanning. This must include:
|
To ensure impacts identified in the HRA (2020) as a result of recreational pressure on Strensall Common SAC are mitigated.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.29 Policy SS10: Land North of Monks Cross |
x.
|
To aid effectiveness and enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012: making clear a ‘proportionate’ approach is to be applied and that mitigation will be required where there is evidence of need. Wording consistent with modifications to other strategic site policies |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.30 Policy SS10: Land North of Monks Cross |
xi.
Deliver high quality, frequent and accessible public transport
services through the whole site including facilitation of links to
local employment centres and York City Centre. |
For effectiveness, making clear how meeting the 15% target should be demonstrated through a travel plan. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.31 Policy SS11: Land North of Haxby |
Land North of Haxby (ST9) will deliver approximately 735 dwellings… |
For appropriate flexibility |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.32 Policy SS11: Land North of Haxby |
i.
ii.
|
Deleted because matters are addressed under policy H3 and other design and placemaking policy, including D1. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.33 Policy SS11: Land North of Haxby |
iii. Provide a detailed site wide recreation and open space strategy and demonstrate its application in site masterplanning. This must include:
·
· Open space provision that satisfies policies GI2a and GI6. |
To ensure impacts identified in the HRA (2020) as a result of recreational pressure on Strensall Common SAC are mitigated.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.34 Policy SS11: Land North of Haxby |
i.
Create
new local facilities |
To aid effectiveness and enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.35 Policy SS11: Land North of Haxby |
viii.
|
To aid effectiveness and enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012 – making clear a ‘proportionate’ approach is to be applied and that mitigation will be required where there is evidence of need. Wording consistent with modifications to other strategic site policies. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.36 Policy SS11 explanation – paragraph 3.56 |
The
new open space shown on the |
To correct the map reference. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.37 Policy SS12: Land West of Wigginton Road |
…
It
will deliver approximately 1,348 dwellings, approximately
|
To update the expected delivery beyond the plan period in accordance with EX/CYC/107 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.38 Policy SS12: Land West of Wigginton Road |
|
Deleted because matters are addressed under policy H3 and H10. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.39 Policy SS12: Land West of Wigginton Road |
iv.
Deliver on site
v.
Secure developer contributions for secondary school places as
necessary to meet the need |
For clarity and effectiveness. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.40 Policy SS12: Land West of Wigginton Road |
vi.
Ensure provision of new all purpose access roads to the east/south
from A1237 Outer Ring Road/ |
To correct the roundabout reference and make clear the locations on the policy map are indicative. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.41 Policy SS12: Land West of Wigginton Road |
vii.
|
For clarity and effectiveness; making clear a ‘proportionate’ approach is to be applied and that mitigation will be required where there is evidence of need. Wording consistent with modifications to other strategic site policies |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.42 Policy SS12: Land West of Wigginton Road |
viii.
Phased development which reflects the delivery of dualling works to the A1237 outer ring road, upgrades and creation of a 4th arm to the Clifton Moor Gate roundabout and pedestrian/cycle underpass to connect Clifton Moor to the site. |
For clarity and effectiveness and to reflect the off-site highway works required. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.43 Policy SS12: Land West of Wigginton Road |
ix.
Deliver
high quality, frequent and accessible public transport services
throughout the development site, which provide links to other local
rural communities where feasible, as well as to main employment
centres.
x.
To encourage the maximum take-up of more active forms of transport
(walking and cycling), ensure the provision of high quality, safe,
direct and accessible pedestrian and cycle links which create
well-connected internal streets and walkable neighbourhoods
a)
the
community, retail and employment facilities immediately to the
south, (
b)
the surrounding green infrastructure network (with particular
regard to public rights of way immediately west of the site)
c) existing pedestrian and cycle networks across the city via pedestrian/cycle underpass that will connect Clifton Moor to the site. |
For clarity and effectiveness relating to active and sustainable transport requirements. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.44 Policy SS12: Land West of Wigginton Road |
xii.
|
To ensure strong green belt boundaries around the site are secured in response to the assessment at EX/CYC/59g. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.45 Policy SS12: Land West of Wigginton Road |
xiv. Provide a detailed site wide recreation and open space strategy and demonstrate its application in site masterplanning. Open space provision must satisfy policies GI2a and GI6. |
To ensure impacts identified in the HRA (2020) as a result of recreational pressure on Strensall Common SAC are mitigated. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.46 Policy SS12 explanation – paragraph 3.61 |
The design and layout of the road should minimise the impact upon the openness of the Green Belt and demonstrate how it would safeguard those elements which contribute to the special character and setting of the historic City. |
In response to ongoing negotiation, and to provide clarity on the wider access considerations. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.47 Policy SS13: Land West of Elvington Lane |
…It
will deliver approximately 3,339 dwellings, |
To update the expected delivery beyond the plan period in accordance with EX/CYC/107 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.48 Policy SS13: Land West of Elvington Lane |
|
Deleted because matters are addressed under policy H3. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.49 Policy SS13: Land West of Elvington Lane |
iii.
… |
To ensure strong green belt boundaries around the site are secured in response to the assessment at EX/CYC/59g. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.50 Policy SS13: Land West of Elvington Lane |
iv.
Create
new open space |
Correction to erroneous reference to the proposals map. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.51 Policy SS13: Land West of Elvington Lane |
v.
Impacts to Elvington Airfield
SINC and
vi. Securing a minimum of 10% provision of biodiversity net gain in relation to ST15.
vii.
·
incorporation of a new nature conservation area (as shown on the
· provision of a detailed site wide recreation and access strategy to minimise indirect recreational disturbance resulting from development and complement the wetland habitat buffer area which will be retained and monitored in perpetuity. A full understanding of the proposed recreational routes is required at an early stage.
viii.
|
To aid effectiveness and enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.52 Policy SS13: Land West of Elvington Lane |
ix.
x.
Provide an appropriate range of shops, services and facilities
for |
To aid effectiveness and enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.53 Policy SS13: Land West of Elvington Lane |
xi.
|
To aid effectiveness and enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012 – recognising land identified for a secondary school if required. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.54 Policy SS13: Land West of Elvington Lane |
xii.
xiii.
|
Clarity and effectiveness on the approach to access and highway infrastructure requirements, recognising additional work that has been undertaken. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.55 Policy SS13: Land West of Elvington Lane |
xiv.
xv.
|
Drafting improvements to aid effectiveness and enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.56 Policy SS13: Land West of Elvington Lane |
xvi.
xvii.
…
xix.
|
Drafting improvements to aid effectiveness and enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.57 Policy SS13 explanation – paragraph 3.64 |
…Any large-scale development solely relying on Elvington Lane would not be supported. Initial modelling work suggests that the Elvington Lane access can accommodate around 1,000 units (approximately 30% of final development at 3,339 units). Public transport improvements, as well as pedestrian and cycle connections, between ST15, ST26 and ST27 should be considered in order to maximise opportunities to secure non car travel between these three sites.
|
To reference to latest evidence on access and transport to support the effectiveness of Policy SS13. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.58 Policy SS13 explanation – paragraph 3.67 |
A
joined up transport approach would need to be taken to consider the
site in combination with other potential developments in the city
including the University Expansion Site (ST27) and Elvington Airfield Business Park
(ST26). The
provision of a new grade
separated junction onto the A64 would |
To support the implementation and effectiveness of Policy SS13. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.59 Policy SS14: Terrys Extension Sites |
Terry’s
Extension Sites (ST16) will deliver
|
For clarity in recognition that the site rear of the factory (phase 3) is being developed for an alternative healthcare use. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.60 Policy SS15: Nestle South |
Nestle
South (ST17) will deliver …
ii.
|
To provide flexibility around the quantum of development, but with updated reference to numbers of homes approved on the site. Criterion ii deleted because matters are addressed under policy H3. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.61 Policy SS16: Land at Tadcaster Road, Copmanthorpe |
Land at Tadcaster Road, Copmanthorpe (ST31) will deliver approximately 158 dwellings |
For flexibility and effectiveness. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.62 Policy SS16: Land at Tadcaster Road, Copmanthorpe |
|
Criterion deleted because matters are addressed under policy H3. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.63 Policy SS16: Land at Tadcaster Road, Copmanthorpe |
|
For clarity and to enhance developability. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.64 Policy SS16: Land at Tadcaster Road, Copmanthorpe |
v.
Provide …
vii.
|
To aid effectiveness and enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012, recognising that Learmans Way does not adjoin the site. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.65 Policy SS17: Hungate |
Hungate
(ST32) – Phases 5+ as
identified on the Policies Map will deliver
approximately
|
To aid effectiveness and enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012 – recognising that all undeveloped blocks on the Hungate site form part of the allocation. Requirement for compliance with planning permissions removed for flexibility. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.66 Policy SS18: Station yard, Wheldrake |
i.
|
Criterion deleted because matters are addressed under policy H3. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.67 Policy SS18: Station yard, Wheldrake |
ii.
|
To aid effectiveness and enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.68 Policy SS18: Station yard, Wheldrake |
iv. Undertake a comprehensive evidence based approach in relation to biodiversity to address potential impacts of recreational disturbance on the Lower Derwent Valley Special Protection Area (SPA)/Ramsar/SSSI. This will require the developer to publicise and facilitate the use of other, less sensitive countryside destinations nearby (e.g. Wheldrake Woods) and provide educational material to new homeowners to promote good behaviours when visiting the European site. The former could be supported by enhancing the local footpath network and improving signage. |
To clarify the mitigation required as detailed in the Habitat Regulation Assessment (2018). |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.69 Policy SS18: Station yard, Wheldrake |
viii.
|
For consistency with re-wording across strategic site policies. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.70 Policy SS19: Queen Elizabeth Barracks, Strensall |
Policy SS19 and explanatory text at paragraphs 3.82 – 3.88 deleted. |
Site removed following Habitat Regulations Assessment (Feb 2019) which did not rule out adverse effects on the integrity of Strensall Common Special Area of Conservation (SAC). |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.71 Policy SS20: Imphal Barracks, Fulford Road |
Following
the Defence Infrastructure Organisation’s |
For flexibility and effectiveness. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.72 Policy SS20: Imphal Barracks, Fulford Road |
Demonstrate
that all transport issues have been addressed, |
For clarity and effectiveness; making clear a ‘proportionate’ approach is to be applied and that mitigation will be required where there is evidence of need. Wording consistent with modifications to other strategic site policies |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.73 Policy SS20: Imphal Barracks, Fulford Road |
ii.
|
Criterion deleted because matters are addressed under policy H3. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.74 Policy SS20: Imphal Barracks, Fulford Road |
iii. An agreed masterplan to ensure the site’s redevelopment will make a positive contribution to the character and distinctiveness of the local area, informed by: o the architectural and historic interest of the site and its buildings, including the parade ground and other open areas, related to the site’s military use and York’s development as a garrison town; and, o the impact of development on the Fulford Road Conservation Area
|
For clarity and effectiveness, and conformity with the NPPF regarding approach to retaining buildings of historic interest. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.75 Policy SS20: Imphal Barracks, Fulford Road |
x.
Consider in detail the proximity and relationship of the site with
Walmgate Stray, including undertaking further hydrological work to
assess the potential impact of development on the Stray and to the
value of the grassland, and to explore any water logged
archaeological deposits. Recreational disturbance/pressure on the
Stray and the Tillmire SSSI (individual and cumulative effects)
should be
xii.
Create new local facilities as
|
To aid effectiveness and enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.76 Policy SS21: Land South of Airfield Business Park, Elvington |
Land
South of Airfield Business Park, Elvington (ST26) will provide
25,080sqm of
…
ii.
…
iv.
v.
vi.
… |
To aid effectiveness and enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012. Modifications delete superfluous text, recognising that there is no justification to include reference to historic field boundaries and that issues related to criteria v and vii are dealt with under free standing development management policies.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.77 Policy SS22: University of York Expansion
|
New policy SS22, wholly replacing submission policy.
Policy SS22: University of York Expansion
As shown on the Policies Map as ST27, 21.2 ha of land to the south of the existing Campus East site is allocated for the future expansion of the university during the plan period. It will provide university uses consistent with Policy ED3 having regard to the following considerations together with those in ED1:
|
The proposed changes will enhance the effectiveness of the Policy and improve clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012. The modifications to Policy SS22 and Policy EC1 clarify the importance of the landscape setting without conflating it with reference to defined ‘key’ views. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.78 Policy SS22 Explanation |
Explanation
3.97a The University of York retains a high profile in both the UK and in the rest of the world. The university’s status is reflected in the high demand for student places, excellence in research and demand for research co-locations and it is currently projected that its growth will continue over the duration of the plan period. Without the campus extension, the university will not be able to continue to grow beyond 2026. As one of the leading higher education institutions, the university needs to continue to facilitate growth, within the context of its landscaped setting which gives it a special character and quality, to guarantee its future contribution to the need for higher education and research and to the local, regional and national economies. The 21.5ha of land at ST27 is allocated for university uses to support this growth.
3.98
The
University of York is a key component of the long term success of
the city and it is important to provide a long term opportunity for
the University to expand. It offers a unique opportunity to attract
businesses that draw on the Universities applied research to create
marketable products. There is
3.98a ST27 plays a critical part in the attractive setting of the city. The land to the west is particularly important for maintaining the setting of Heslington village and key views. it has a distinctive landscape quality and provides accessible countryside to walkers and cyclists on the land and public footpaths. The expansion will bring development close to the A64 Ring Road with implications for the interface between the southern edge of York and the countryside to its south. To mitigate any impacts on the historic character and setting of the city, the expansion site must provide a landscape buffer between development on the site and the A64. This can be provided within the site where parallel to the A64, but beyond it on the other boundaries – maximising the developable area while responding sensitively to the landscape setting.
3.99a The site has a distinctive landscape quality and provides accessible countryside to walkers and cyclists on the land and public footpaths. The land to the west is particularly important for maintaining the setting of Heslington village and key views. To mitigate any impacts on the historic character and setting of the city the expansion site must create an appropriately landscaped buffer between development on the site and the A64. This can be buffer will be provided within the site where parallel to the A64, but beyond it on the other boundaries – maximising the developable area while responding sensitively to the landscape setting. This will be established through the masterplanning of the site. 3.100 Campus East was designed and established with the development area being car-free. It facilitates the majority of journeys being by non-car modes. Development of ST27 is expected to incorporate this principle. ST27 will be accessed from Hull Road via Campus East. In addition, the development should exploit any shared infrastructure opportunities arising from the proximity of the housing allocation at ST15: Land to the west of Elvington Lane to the University of York. The existing Heslington East campus is designed and established to offer significant proportions of journeys by walking, cycling and public transport. Any future proposals must continue this existing provision (including bus services).
3.101 ‘Vehicular access to ST27 will be from Hull Road or Field Lane via Kimberlow Lane and Lakeside Way, then south from Lakeside Way into the site’. The Heslington East Campus Extended Master Plan (June 2014) shows no additional entry points into the Campus from those already existing (Lakeside Way (bus and cycle only), Field Lane/Kimberlow Lane and Kimberlow Lane running south from Hull Road Grimston Bar Park & Ride link road.
3.101a A development brief for ST27 will be prepared by the University in line with relevant Plan policies. The University will engage with the Council and communities in preparing this development brief,.. |
Changes to the supporting text reflect the amended policy wording. Text is proposed for inclusion more clearly describe the wider site context and its importance. The detailed text describing the site and boundaries is proposed for deletion as the content of this is unnecessary for inclusion as it neither justifies nor explains the policy. likewise |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.79 Policy SS23: Land at Northminster Business Park |
Land at Northminster Business Park (ST19) will provide 49,500sqm
…
|
To aid effectiveness and enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012. Modifications reflect changes to use classes and delete superfluous text, recognising that criteria i and ii do not add anything to the policy’s effectiveness. Criterion iv is deleted as the links are dealt with in v.
Criteria vii and viii are deleted as these matters are dealt with under separate development management policies (ENV2 and D6).
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM3.80 Policy SS24: Whitehall Grange, Wigginton Road |
Whitehall Grange, Wigginton Road (ST37) will provide up to
33,330sqm for B8 storage use. In addition to complying with the
policies within this Local Plan, the site must be delivered in
accordance with |
To provide appropriate flexibility. |
3. SECTION 4: ECONOMY AND RETAIL
Section 4: Economy and Retail |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Modification Reference |
Proposed Modification |
Reason for change |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM4.1 Policy EC1: Provision of Employment Land |
Provision
for a range of employment uses during the plan period will be made
on the following strategic sites |
To enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM4.2 Policy EC1 Provision of Employment Land |
*This is an approximate and indicative figure based on the
University of York’s predicated growth and may be reduced
to accommodate other employment generating University uses
identified in Policy ED1 Provision for a range of employment uses during the plan period will be made on the following other sites:
|
Updated to reflect changes in the Use Classes Order.
References to York City Centre removed as covered under policies SS3, R1 and R2.
Changes also reflect the Status of Employment Allocations identified in Policy EC1 Note August 2022 (EX/CYC/107/7)
ST27: the 25ha quantum of knowledge business is deleted and replaced with ‘approximately 40,000 sqm’ provided that can be accommodated within the 21.2 ha of ST 27, and reflecting the latest estimates from the University. Expressing the quantum in square metres rather than hectares will make the policy more effective and monitoring delivery easier.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM4.3 Policy EC1 explanation |
4.6 …
The ELR Update (2017) has adjusted floorspace requirements to take
account of development between 2012-2017 and to reflect
the
|
To update Plan period and reflected amendments to data in Table 4.1. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM4.4 Policy EC1 explanation – table 4.1 |
Table 4.1: Employment Land Requirements 2017-2038 (including 5% vacancy), Factoring in Change of Supply 2012-2017 and Including 2 Years Extra Supply, updated March 2022
|
Updated Table 4.1, to take account of the changes to supply since Plan submission. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM4.5 Policy EC1 Explanation paragraph 4.8a |
4.8a The location of allocation E18 adjacent to Strensall Common SAC means that a comprehensive evidence base to understand the potential impacts on biodiversity from further development is required. Strensall Common is designated for its heathland habitats but also has biodiversity value above its listed features in the SSSI/SAC designations that will need to be fully considered. Although the common is already under intense recreational pressure, there are birds of conservation concern amongst other species and habitats which could be harmed by the intensification of disturbance. In addition, the heathland habitat is vulnerable to changes in the hydrological regime and air quality, which needs to be explored in detail. The mitigation hierarchy should be used to identify the measures required to first avoid impacts, then to mitigate unavoidable impacts or compensate for any unavoidable residual impacts, and be implemented in the masterplanning approach. Potential access points into the planned development also need to consider impacts on Strensall Common. |
To acknowledge the location of E18 and its relationship to Strensall Common SAC. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM4.6 Policy EC2 Explanation paragraph 4.9 |
4.9
When
considering the loss of employment land and/or buildings the
Council will expect the applicant to provide evidence proportionate
to the size of the site of effective marketing the site/premises
for employment uses for a reasonable period of time and in most cases not less than 18
months. Where an
applicant is seeking to prove a site is no longer appropriate for
employment use because of business operations, and/or condition,
the council will expect the applicant to provide an objective
assessment of the shortcomings of the land/premises that
demonstrates why it is no longer appropriate for employment use.
This includes all
employment generating uses, not
just office or industrial uses c…. |
To enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012 and to reflect changes in the Use Classes Order. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM4.7 Policy EC5: Rural Economy |
In addition to the allocation in villages in Policy EC1, York’s rural economy will be sustained and diversified through:
·
Supporting appropriate farm and rural diversification activity
including office and leisure development · permitting camping and caravan sites (on a temporary or permanent basis) for holiday and recreational use where proposals can be satisfactorily integrated into the landscape without detriment to its character, are in a location accessible to local facilities and within walking distance of public transport to York, and would not generate significant volumes of traffic. Such development would also need to address Green Belt policies, where relevant; and … |
To enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012 and to cross-reference with relevant Green Belt policy. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM4.8 Policy EC5 Explanation – paragraph 4.17 |
…The scale of the proposals will be an important factor as often small sites are assimilated into the landscape more easily than larger sites. In Green Belt locations, caravan sites are inconsistent with policy requirements to protect openness, temporary permissions may be considered, where other criteria are met. |
To provide clarity and explanation relating to MM4.7 with regards Green Belt policy. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM4.9 Policy R1: Retail Hierarchy and Sequential Approach |
…Main town centre uses will be directed to the city,
district and local centres defined in this policy
Proposals for main town centre uses outside an identified centre should undertake a sequential test to identify why the proposal cannot be accommodated in a sequentially preferable location. Proposals for main town centre uses outside a defined city, district or local centre must be subject to an impact assessment where the floorspace of the proposed development exceeds the following thresholds: · outside York city centre: greater than 1,500 sqm gross floorspace. · outside a district centre: greater than 500 sqm gross floorspace. · outside a local centre: greater than 200 sqm gross floorspace.
These thresholds should also be applied where variation of condition applications are proposed to change the nature of goods sold within a unit.
Where new retail provision is proposed as part of the development of a strategic site then this will not be subject to an impact assessment, providing the provision is appropriate in scale to serve only the local day to day shopping needs of residents of the site.
Advice should be sought … |
To ensure conformity with the NPPF 2012 by requiring a sequential test for all main town centre uses outside of an identified centre.
Clarity in relation to the requirements for new retail provision proposed as part of a strategic site. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM4.10 Policy R2: District and Local Centres and Neighbourhood Parades |
…
|
To provide clarity and avoid repetition. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM4.11 Policy R3: York City Centre Retail |
The vitality and viability of the city centre is supported and
enhanced, with the Primary Shopping Area (PSA) as shown on
the
In the PSA, proposals for new retail floorspace (use
class
E
Primary Shopping Frontages
The concentration of retail
i.the
proposal has an active frontage and contributes to the vitality and
viability of the primary shopping frontage; the proposed uses will
provide a service direct to members of the public and can
demonstrate a comparable footfall generation to ii.the proposal will have an attractive shop front which contributes positively to the appearance of the street; iii.the proposal would not result in non-retail uses being grouped together in such a way that would undermine the retail role of the street;
iv.a
minimum of 70% E
… Secondary Shopping Frontages
In secondary frontage areas, changes to non-retail use at ground
floor level will be
… |
To enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012 and update to reflect changes to the Use Classes Order. |
Section 5: Housing |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Modification Reference |
Proposed Modification |
Reason for change |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM5.1 Policy H1: Housing Allocations |
Policy H1: Housing Allocations
In order to meet
the housing requirement set out in Policy SS1 the following sites,
as shown on the
·
·
·
Development proposals will be permitted where the following criteria are satisfied: · For sites that contain existing open space (**), where appropriate, it should be retained on-site or re-provided off-site. · For sites located within 5.5km of Strensall Common SAC (#) the development must accord with the requirements of Policy GI2 and GI2a · On site H39 the western boundary is not defined by recognisable or permanent features and the design should create and secure a strong and defensible Green Belt boundary |
Requirement for phasing deleted to aid effectiveness and enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012.
Further modifications also for effectiveness and clarity, to identify notable development considerations for certain sites, including cross reference to Policy GI2a to ensure impacts identified in the HRA (2020) as a result of recreational pressure on Strensall Common SAC are mitigated. Reference to existing open space relocated from below table 5.1.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM5.2 Policy H1, table 5.1 |
Table 5.1: Housing Allocations
|
Updates to table to aid effectiveness and clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012.
Phasing column deleted in accordance with MM5.1; various updates and corrections to site size and estimated capacity.
Completed sites deleted.
ST35 and H59 removed following the outcomes of the Habitat Regulations Assessment (Feb 2019), which has not been able to rule out adverse effects on the integrity of Strensall Common Special Area of Conservation (SAC).
SH1 included in acknowledgement of its contribution to housing supply. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM5.3 Policy H1 Explanation – paragraphs 5.4 to 5.16 |
|
To aid effectiveness and enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012.
Superfluous text removed where it does not relate to the implementation of Policy H1. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM5.4 Policy H1 Explanation |
Figure 5.1: Housing Trajectory - replaced
|
Graph updated to reflect current position on housing supply in the context of the modified housing requirement. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM5.5 Table 5.2 |
|
Table deleted given revisions to graph in MM5.4 and further supply information added to Section 3: Spatial Strategy (MM3.4)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM5.6 Policy H2: Density of Residential Development |
Where appropriate, development proposals
|
For clarity and to aid effectiveness in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM5.7 Policy H2 explanation |
Figure 5.2 Density Zones
|
Figure replaced for clarity and effectiveness, with legend corrected to reflect zones in policy H2. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM5.8 Policy H3: Balancing the Housing Market
|
Policy H3: Balancing the Housing Market
The Council will expect developers to provide housing solutions that contribute to meeting York's housing needs, as identified in the latest Local Housing Needs Assessment (LHNA) and in any other appropriate local evidence. New residential development should therefore maintain, provide or contribute to a mix of housing tenures, types and sizes to help support the creation of mixed, balanced and inclusive communities.
·
·
|
To aid effectiveness with reference to latest evidence and enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM5.9 Policy H3: Balancing the Housing Market
|
Proposals will
be supported that are suitable for the intended occupiers in
relation to the
Housing should be built as flexible as possible to accommodate peoples’ changing circumstances over their lifetime. The Council will encourage developers to deliver an appropriate proportion of housing that meets the higher access standards of Part M Building Regulations (Access to and use of buildings), unless it is demonstrated that characteristics of the site provide reasons for delivery to be inappropriate, impractical or unviable.
|
To aid effectiveness, recognising the needs highlighted in the LHNA and to enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM5.10 Policy H4: Promoting and Custom House Building |
Policy H4: Promoting Self and Custom House Building
As
part of meeting housing need, proposals for self and custom house
building, to be occupied as homes by those individuals, will be
supported where they are in conformity with
Proposals for residential development on strategic
sites |
To aid effectiveness and clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM5.11 Policy H5: Gypsies and Travellers |
Safeguarding Existing Supply
Proposals which
fail to protect existing Gypsy and Traveller sites or involve a
loss of pitches/plots will not be permitted unless it can be
demonstrated that they are no longer required or equivalent
alternative provision can be made. Existing Gypsy and Traveller sites are shown on the
...
a) Within Existing Local Authority Sites
In
order to meet the need of Gypsies and Travellers that meet the
planning definition, 10 · Water Lane, Clifton; and · Outgang Lane, Osbaldwick.
b) Within Strategic Allocations
In
order to meet the need of those 30
Residential development proposals on strategic sites
Commuted sum payments to contribute to development of pitches elsewhere will only be considered where it is demonstrated that on site delivery is not achievable due to site constraints and that there are no suitable and available alternative sites for the required number of pitches that can be secured by the developer
… |
To ensure the Plan is justified, reflecting up to date evidence in the published 2022 GTAA, and to provide clarity, including in the application of the policy cascade. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM5.12 Policy H5: Gypsies and Travellers |
c) Planning Applications
… ...
vii.
ensure that the
size and density of pitches/plots |
To ensure consistency with the NPPF and to provide clarity. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM5.13 Policy H6: Travelling Showpeople |
… Safeguarding Existing Supply
Proposals
which fail to protect existing Travelling Showpeople yards or
involve a loss of pitches/plots will not be permitted unless it can
be demonstrated that they are no longer required or equivalent
alternative provision can be made. Existing Travelling Showman
yards are shown on the
Meeting Future Need
There
is a total need of ... |
To ensure the Plan is justified, reflecting up to date evidence in the published 2022 GTAA, and to provide clarity. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM5.14 Policy H6: Travelling Showpeople |
… c) Planning Applications
... ...
vii.
ensure that the
size and density of pitches/plots |
To ensure consistency with the NPPF and to provide clarity.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM5.15 Policy H5 and H6 Explanation Para 5.38 and Table 5.3 |
...
5.38
Table
5.3 overleaf is taken from the City of York Gypsy and Travellers
Accommodation Assessment (2022)
Table
5.3: Need for Gypsy and
Traveller Households broken down by Local Plan Policy
Type
|
Delivery Status |
Gypsy and Traveller Policy |
Housing Policy |
Total |
Meet Planning Definition |
15 |
- |
15 |
Do not meet Planning Definition |
- |
25 |
25 |
Total |
15 |
25 |
40 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[1]
GTAA – Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation
Assessment
[2]
SHMA – Strategic Housing Market Assessment
…
5.41
Three Two plots for Travelling Showpeople
have has been identified for the first
5 years of the plan period at The Stables, Elvington, with a further 1 plot in the same yard for
the future expansion of the existing family in year
2032.
…
To ensure the Plan is justified, reflecting up to date evidence in the published 2022 GTAA, and to provide clarity.
MM5.16 Policy H5 and H6 Explanation – paragraph 5.42
5.42 The suitability of the location of any further sites for
Gypsies, Travellers or Travelling Showpeople which come forward
during the plan period will be determined in accordance with
criteria i - v of Policies H5 and H6. These consider the natural
and historic environment, access to public transport and services,
road access and congestion, flood risk and amenity. The development
of the allocated sites and any further sites that come forward
during the plan period will be determined in accordance with
Policies H5 and H6 criteria vi – x. These consider the
provision of storage and recreation space, amenity provision, size
and density of pitches/plots, landscaping of the site, amenity of
nearby residents and future occupiers of the site.
5.42 The suitability of sites not allocated for Gypsies, Travellers or Travelling Showpeople in this Local Plan will be assessed against the locational principles within criteria i-v of Policies H5 and H6 (Part C) as appropriate. All development proposals (including those forming part of a strategic allocation) will need to demonstrate that the site’s design and layout observes the principles within criteria vi-x of Policies H5 and H6, as appropriate.
Where proposals seek to provide a commuted sum in lieu of either on or off-site pitch provision, applications will need to comprehensively demonstrate the following:
1. That the design parameters (vi – x in part C of Policy H6) cannot be satisfactorily achieved through evidence of a site and masterplan appraisal (which should include layout and capacity assessments as well as a demonstration of all reasonable attempts to overcome any site constraints); and,
2. That there are no available sites which would be suitable for the number of pitches required. Evidence should include an appraisal of sites on the market at the time of the application with clear justification for their rejection.
Commuted sums will be calculated on the basis that costs are met in full including, where appropriate, land purchase, professional fees, construction, and operating costs.
To provide clarity on the policy approach and planning application requirements
MM5.17 Policy H7: Student Housing
Policy H7: Off Campus Purpose Built Student Housing
The
University of York and York St. John University must address the
need for any additional student housing which arises because of
their future expansion of student numbers. In assessing need,
consideration will be given to off campus provision and the
capacity of independent providers of bespoke student housing in the
city and whether it is
economically prudent to provide additional student
accommodation. To meet any projected shortfall,
provision by the University of York can be made on either campus.
Provision by York St. John University is expected to be off campus
but in locations convenient to the main
campus.
SH1:
Land at Heworth Croft, as shown on the proposals Policies Map, is allocated for
student housing for York St. John University
students.
Proposals for
new off campus purpose built student accommodation,
other than the allocation at
SH1, will be permitted supported where all of the following
criteria are satisfied:
i.
there is a proven
it can be demonstrated that
there is a need for student housing which cannot be met on campus;
and
ii. it is in an appropriate location for education institutions and accessible by sustainable transport modes;
iia The rooms in the development are secured through a nomination agreement for occupation by students of one or more of the University of York and York St. John University; and
iii. the development would not be detrimental to the amenity of nearby residents and the design and access arrangements would have a minimal impact on the local area.
iv. The accommodation shall be occupied only by full-time students enrolled in courses of one academic year or more and conditions or obligations shall be imposed to secure compliance with this requirement and for the proper management of the properties
For new student accommodation a financial contribution should be secured towards delivering affordable housing elsewhere in the City. The contribution will be calculated on a pro rate basis per bedroom using the following formula:
Average York Property price – Average York Fixed RP Price x 2.5% = OSFC per student bedroom
The contribution will be required only from the number of units creating a net gain. For mixed-use developments of student accommodation with general housing a pro-rata approach will be used to determine whether a contribution is required, and how much this should be. Contributions towards affordable housing provision from new student accommodation will not be sought where the student accommodation site which at the date of adoption of the Plan is owned by a university and which will continue to be owned by a university to meet the accommodation needs of its students. Where a developer considers the contribution cannot be fully met they should justify the level of provision proposed through an open book appraisal to demonstrate to the Council’s satisfaction that the development would not otherwise be viable.
Developers may not circumvent this policy by artificially subdividing sites, and are expected to make efficient use of land.
Conditions will be used to ensure the proper management of the
accommodation in the interests of the amenity of adjacent
properties and that any development remains occupied by students in
perpetuity, unless and until an alternative use is approved by the
Council.
To aid effectiveness and clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012, making clear the policy relates to off campus provision only.
Approach to securing affordable housing contributions introduced in order to support the Plan’s overall contribution to meeting affordable housing needs (in accordance with NPPF 2012 and evidence at EX/CYC/107-3)
MM5.18 Policy H7 Explanation – paragraph 5.47
…
· the likely future supply of accommodation based on extant planning permissions and estate strategies of the relevant education provider.
The assessment should form the basis of a formal agreement between a developer and an education provider, confirming the number of bedspaces and accommodation type required.
To provide clarity on the policy requirement in the context of changes included at MM5.5.
MM5.19 Policy H9: Older Persons Specialist Housing
…
Residential development proposals on Strategic sites
(over 5ha) should
incorporate the
an appropriate provision of
accommodation types for older persons in accordance with Policy H3
within their site
masterplanning. For sheltered/extra care accommodations
a mix of tenures will be supported.
Where development falls within Use Class C3, affordable housing provision will be required in line with the requirements set out in policy H10.
To aid effectiveness and clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012.
MM5.20 Policy H9 explanation – paragraph 5.59
Where specialist
accommodation is provided, it will be important to ensure that it
enables residents to live independently as far as possible by
ensuring it is located close to facilities and services or that
they are accessible by public transport. Residential development on
Sstrategic
sites (of over 5ha)
should incorporate a wider range of accommodation suitable for
older people
To aid effectiveness and clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012.
MM5.21 Policy H10: Affordable Housing
Policy H10: Affordable Housing
To
help maximise the planning
system’s contribution to meeting affordable needs and to
support the Council’s target to deliver 3,265 affordable
dwellings, affordability across the housing market, the
Council will support residential schemes for
2 5 or more dwellings
will be permitted where the
following criteria are satisfied which:
i.
reflect the relative viability
of development land types in York by providing
affordable housing is
provided percentage
levels for site thresholds as set out in accordance with Table 5.4
as a minimum. Higher rates of
provision will be sought where development viability is not
compromised.
Table 5.4: Affordable Housing Site Thresholds
Threshold |
Target |
Brownfield sites
|
20% |
Greenfield sites
|
30% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notes to Table 1. This is the target percentage to be used in the off-site financial contribution calculation following sub-clause (iii) below 2. For sites that have a maximum combined gross floorspace of more than 1,000sqm (excluding outbuildings) |
ii on sites of 15 homes and above on-site provision will be expected, unless off-site provision or a financial contribution of equivalent value can be robustly justified.
iii.
on sites of 2–15 5-14 homes an off site
financial contribution (OSFC) is required in accordance with the
approved formula set out below:
Average York
Property price – Average York Fixed RP Price x
10% Target =
OSFC per dwelling
iv.
make provision
which reflects tenure
split in terms of social renting and intermediate housing, as set
out in the most up to date SHMALHNA or other best available
evidence.
v.
fully integrate the
affordable housing is fully
integrated by pepper potting throughout the development
with no more than two affordable
dwellings placed next to each other. The size and type of homes should be a pro rata
mix of the total homes provided on site, taking into account
current assessments of local need where on-site provision is
required. The affordable
housing should be and
is visually indistinguishable from the open market
dwellings.
…
This policy will apply if a development proposal below thresholds in table 5.4 is followed by an obviously linked proposal at any point where the original permission remains extant or up to 5 years following completion of the first scheme, and the combined total of dwellings (or floorspace) is 5 or more dwellings (or 1,000sqm or more floorspace).
Simplification of policy (justified by HS/P3/M1/AHP/1a) to aid effectiveness and clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012.
MM5.22 Policy H10 explanation
5.60 NPPF (2012) requires Councils to set policies for meeting identified affordable housing need, and that those policies should be sufficiently flexible to take account of changing market conditions.
5.61
Given the conclusions reached in
the City of York Affordable Housing Viability Study (2010) and
Annex 1 (2011) (AHVS) and the City of York Local Plan and CIL
Viability Assessment (2017), Based on viability evidence prepared in
support of the Local Plan, developments within York
are expected
should be able to
provide the target
minimum levels of
affordable homes set out in
Policy H10 approved
for development management purposes. Therefore no
individual site assessment will be required where submissions proposals achieve these
policy requirements
targets and this is to be
encouraged in order to reduce time on further analysis and
negotiation.
…
5.63
Affordable housing in York
includes social rented and intermediate housing provided to
specified eligible households whose needs are not being met by the
open housing market, and who cannot afford to enter that market.
The definition specifically
excludes low cost market housing.
5.64
The City of York Council SHMA
and Addendum (2016) recommends an 80% social and affordable rented
and 20% intermediate split.
5.65
A full range of property sizes and types tenures are needed to satisfy the
affordable housing needs of the city and providing small or poor
quality accommodation will not be seen as satisfying the policy. In
order to help build mixed and sustainable communities the
mix and tenure of
affordable homes provided on
sites should have regard to the latest LHNA (or other available
evidence) need to be pro-rata of the market
homes, integrated
within the site and indistinguishable from the market housing on
site.
5.66
The affordable homes should be visually indistinguishable from the
open market dwellings and need to be fully integrated within
the development by pepper potting throughout with no more than two affordable dwellings
placed next to each other. The exception to this is
apartment blocks if
they are to be transferred freehold to Registered Providers. These
affordable apartment homes should be provided in an apartment block
rather than pepper potted throughout the development.
The size and type of homes
should be a pro rata mix of the total homes provided on site,
taking into account current assessments of local need where on-site
provision is required. The affordable housing should be visually
indistinguishable from the open market
dwellings.
5.67
The Council will make public any updates to the evidence on housing
mix and tenure split that is currently provided in the
SHMALHNA. Developers should consult the
Council’s web site prior to making any planning application
to confirm the then
current position on this matter. Information related to the average York
property price and fixed RP price will also be provided on the
Council’s website.
5.68
In accordance with national
guidance affordable housing provision for sites of 15 homes and
above will normally be expected to be provided on site. Following
the change to national planning guidance, the council can no longer
seek financial contributions towards affordable housing on rural
schemes of 1 to 10 units with a gross area of no more than
1,000sqm. Planning obligations on affordable housing and other
matters can only be applied to schemes of 11 new homes or more or 1
to 10 new homes with a total gross floorspace of more than
1,000sqm.
5.69
The commuted sum is calculated
using the following formula and will be updated
annually:
Average York Property price – Average York Fixed RP Price x %
Target =
OSFC per dwelling
Table 5.5: Commuted Payment Calculation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.70 Any other off site provision or commuted payment in lieu of on-site provision for affordable housing will only be acceptable if it is robustly justified. The commuted payment will be calculated as the difference between the transfer price and the market value of the specific home(s) on that site.
Artificial Subdivision
5.71
Artificial subdivision where it
is proposed to phase development, sub-divide sites or when there is
a reasonable prospect of adjoining land being developed for
residential purposes in tandem or the future, the Council, will
consider the whole site for the purpose of determining whether the
scheme falls above or below the thresholds
…
For clarification and to support interpretation of the modifications at MM5.9.
5. SECTION 6: HEALTH AND WELLBEING
Section 6: Health and Wellbeing |
||
Modification Reference |
Proposed Modification |
Reason for change |
MM6.1 Policy HW1: Protecting Existing Facilities |
Development proposals which involve the loss of existing community
facilities, or facilities last used for community purposes, will
i.
facilities of equivalent or greater capacity and quality (in terms
of function, accessibility, adaptability and variety of use) are
provided elsewhere on the site;
ii.
if site constraints do not allow on-site re-provision,
facilities of equivalent or greater capacity and quality (as
defined above) are re-provided
iii.
robust evidence is submitted to demonstrate that
the facilities no longer serve a community function and
demonstrably cannot be adapted to meet other community needs
or are surplus to requirements. iv. in the case of commercial facilities, evidence is provided that demonstrates the facilities are no longer financially viable with no market interest
Developers must consult with the local community about the value of
the asset and the impact that a loss of facilities may have.
|
To enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012.
|
MM6.2 Policy HW1 explanation – paragraph 9.5 |
For the purpose of the policies within this section, community facilities should be taken to mean the buildings, facilities, and services that meet the day-to-day-needs of communities. This may include libraries, post offices, public houses and community meeting places, such as youth groups, places of worship, and parish and village halls. |
To make clear that public houses fall within the remit of Policy HW1. |
MM6.3 Policy HW1 explanation – paragraph 6.9 |
A
loss of |
To add clarity on the planning application requirements. |
MM6.4 Policy HW1 explanation – paragraph 6.10 |
The
Local Plan has an important role to play in ensuring that community
facilities are provided in the most effective and accessible way.
Existing services must be protected as much as possible, however,
it is also important to ensure that existing facilities are
‘fit for purpose’. Changes in the economic climate may
mean that some commercial facilities
(such as public
houses) are no longer financially viable. Only in such
circumstances, and when no alternative community use is possible, a
loss of commercial
facilities will be permitted. Evidence that the facilities have
been appropriately marketed for a minimum
of a two years
|
To enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012. Making clear the marketing evidence and requirements in the case of loss of commercial facilities.
|
MM6.5 Policy HW2: New Community Facilities |
Applications for strategic residential developments must be
accompanied by an audit of existing community facilities and their
current capacity, prepared by the applicant. Developments that
place additional demands on existing services will be required to
provide proportionate new or expanded community facilities, to meet
the needs of existing and future occupiers. These should be
provided on site or,
where on site provision is not possible due to site constraints, or
where the council agrees provision could better meet needs
elsewhere,
developer contributions will be sought to provide new or expanded facilities.
The Council will support applications for new or expanded community facilities
when an existing deficit or future need has been identified.
|
To enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012.
The second paragraph of the policy has been moved to supporting text. |
MM6.6 Paragraph 6.12a |
As the population grows and demographics change over the plan period, new facilities will be required. The Council will work with communities and other partners to help address deficits in community facilities. |
To enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012.
The second paragraph of Policy HW2 has been moved to supporting text. |
MM6.7 Policy HW3: Built Sport Facilities |
…
For strategic sites facilities should be provided on-site, where
possible.
The loss of built sports facilities (either currently or last used for sports activities) will only be permitted in exceptional circumstances where:
· a needs assessment provided by developers, and in accordance with the most up to date Built Sports Facilities Strategy(or subsequent replacement strategy), identifies an over-provision in the area; or
·
the development only affects part of the site and does
not
· the proposal is for alternative built sports facilities where the need outweighs the loss of the existing facility.
Development for new or expanded built sports facilities will be strongly supported where a deficiency in or future provision has been identified, and when it is well located, accessible to all in terms of age and ability, subject to the specific sports uses proposed, and when suitable infrastructure exists or can be created to manage and maintain the facility. Development of new sports facilities should be co-located with other health and community facilities and schools, where possible, to encourage participation in exercise. Any future demand should, in the first instance, be met through extensions and expansion of existing high-quality sustainable sites. |
To enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012.
Reference to management arrangements has been deleted and incorporated into the supporting text - shown in the modification below:
|
MM6.8 Policy HW3 explanation – Paragraph 6.20 |
6.20 New development must not compromise current or future residents’ health and wellbeing and the Council will work to safeguard existing sports facilities. Where new facilities are required to address need arising from a new development, suitable management arrangements and/or an appropriate operator would be required to be secured as part of the obligations. York’s built sports facilities will be protected unless it can be demonstrated that the use is no longer viable, is surplus to need, or that high-quality alternative provision can be made that maintains a service in the existing area of benefit. |
Reference to management arrangements has been deleted from the policy text and incorporated into the supporting text.
|
MM6.9 Policy HW4: Childcare provision |
The Council will support development proposals for new or expanded childcare provision where that helps meet the city’s need for childcare provision
Proposals which
Applications for new childcare provision should be accompanied by
an assessment that demonstrates the need for additional childcare
provision in the locality.
Any proposed new or replacement childcare facilities should be sited in accessible locations within or near to the areas of identified need, they should be well-served by public transport, and be easily accessible by walking and by bike. |
To enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012.
|
MM6.10 Policy HW5: Healthcare services |
Primary and Secondary Care
The Council will support the provision of new or enhanced primary and secondarycare services when there is an identified need.
Improved, enlarged or additional primary or secondaryhealthcare facilities
Developer contributions will be required to support the increase in provision. An assessment of the accessibility and capacity of existing primary and secondarycare services will be required at the application stage for all residential strategic sites.
Development
Any new primary or secondary care facilities must be easily accessible by public transport, walking, and cycling.
|
To aid effectiveness and enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012.
The first paragraph is moved to the explanatory text.
Primary and secondary care have been combined into one for clarity and consistency and to avoid repetition. |
MM6.11 Policy HW5: Healthcare services |
York Teaching Hospital NHS Foundation Trust
The Council will support the redevelopment of York Teaching
Hospital NHS Foundation Trust (as identified on the
The Council will support the redevelopment of the staff car park on
the existing York Teaching Hospital NHS Foundation Trust site to
meet its immediate need for increased capacity in Accident and
Emergency.
A Travel
Plan will form part of any
detailed planning application to ensure that the loss of
car parking facilities will be appropriately managed to
ensure
To enable the Trust to expand existing clinical facilities the
Council will support the development of the extension to York NHS
Hospital Trust site (as shown on the
Tees, Esk and Wear Valley NHS Foundation Trust
…
as shown on the |
To enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012
The final line is moved to the explanatory text.
|
MM6.12 Policy HW5 explanation – Paragraph 6.36 |
6.36 Healthcare services must be responsive to the current and projected needs of local communities. The assessment submitted to support planning applications should reflect the catchment for each kind of healthcare facility, reflecting that primary and secondary care facilities provide very different services and their catchment areas reflect that. This is contingent upon having appropriately located sites, which are able to cope with local demand and provide a sustainable and effective service. The Council will help protect existing healthcare facilities and support the relevant bodies to expand their premises, or seek alternative, more suitable sites, where appropriate. |
To enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012.
|
MM6.13 Policy HW6: Emergency Services |
|
To aid effectiveness and enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012
The modifications reflect the latest discussions with the Yorkshire Ambulance Service. |
MM6.14 Policy HW7: Healthy Places |
Proposals for major residential developments must provide a statement as part of any detailed planning application, proportionate to the size of the development, showing how the following design principles have been adequately considered and incorporated into plans for development:
· well-designed streetscapes that encourage residents to spend time outdoors; · the provision of safe, easy to navigate and attractive public footpaths and cycle paths between dwellings, to encourage physical activity; · the incorporation of formal and informal play spaces and outdoor gyms to encourage physical activity for all age groups and abilities; · good connections to neighbouring communities and green spaces, in the form of footpaths and cycle routes, including the extension and protection of public rights of way, where appropriate;
·
·
· considerations for how the design may impact on crime or perception of safety, including lighting strategies for public spaces; and · buildings that are adaptable to the changing needs of residents.
Details of how these principles have been considered should be
All new strategic sites must
complete a Health Impact Assessment (HIA) |
To aid effectiveness and enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012
|
Section 7: Education |
||
Modification Reference |
Proposed Modification |
Reason for change |
MM7.1 Policy ED1; University of York |
New policy text, wholly replacing submission policy.
To enable the continuing development of the University of York, the following range of higher education and related uses will be permitted on the University’s existing campuses as identified in Figure 7.1: · academic, teaching, research and continuing professional development uses · housing for staff and students · arts, cultural, sports and social facilities ancillary to higher education uses · conference facilities · research/knowledge-based businesses, including University-led collaboration projects with industry · other uses ancillary to the university, including support services for the uses identified above.
The University of York must address the need for any additional student housing which arises because of its future expansion of student numbers taking account of on site provision and the capacity of independent providers. Provision will be expected to be made on campus in the first instance where this can be accommodated, or off-campus, in line with considered under Policy H7.
Policies ED2 campus west and ED3 campus east address specific matters concerning those parts of the University Campus but the following requirements apply to all development on the University campuses and ST27 (the expansion site):
Facilities for sport, and essential operations to support this, and for landscaping, adjacent to campus west, campus east and ST27 may be located within the Green Belt if they are appropriate development, preserve the openness of the Green Belt, and meet the above criteria. |
To aid effectiveness and enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012.
This policy relates to university development as a whole and modifications are intended to clarify the overarching approach removing repetition with ED2 and ED3. Modifications also clarify the relationship with Policy H7 related to student housing and Green Belt matters related to the development of the University Heslington Campus.
|
MM7.2 Policy ED1 explanation - paragraphs 7.1a (new) to 7.2 |
The University of York has an important role in the City (as well
as nationally and internationally). It can help:
The Heslington campus
comprises Campus West, the original campus laid out in the 1960s
and Campus East, open since 2009. Site allocation ST27 provides for
the further expansion of Campus East.
To ensure that the
Heslington Campus can |
Changes to the supporting text reflect modifications to policy wording. A clearer statement of the University of York’s role in the city and the form of Heslington Campus is included for clarity Linked to this, the map at 7.1 is replaced to show the correct extent of University of York’s Heslington Campus.
|
MM7.3 Policy ED1 explanation - paragraphs 7.2a, 7.2b, 7.2c, 7.2d and 7.2e |
7.2a Campus West (shown in Figure 7.1) contains a number of listed buildings and features and much of the campus is listed as Registered Park and Garden. It is an important asset to the city. It was designed as a park campus with buildings; it is a ‘set piece’. In that respect the ratio of open space to buildings is fundamental to the original design concept. This has shifted over time but it is important to ensure that in any future development that there is not harm to the composition. The built footprint at Campus West is approximately 23%; However, it was the quality of the initial design ambition and visionary approach to landscape vision that has resulted in the success of the campus, not just the application of built footprint principles. It is this quality of design and innovative landscaping approach which is sought to be met through the policy. 7.2b Development at Campus East has been established in an outline planning permission and approved design brief. Further development and the proposed ST27 extension (shown on Figure 7.1) will need to maintain the parkland setting, established at Campus West to create a cohesive campus, and the high design quality established there. The location near the A64 has an important role in maintaining the setting and compact nature of the city. A high visual quality and good design, whilst also enhancing public amenity in terms of access to the countryside and wildlife interest, is therefore essential. This includes preservation and, where possible, enhancement of the views that can be seen from the site. This should support the realisation of a similarly ambitious and committed approach to Campus West, which must be developed, controlled and implemented through a masterplanned approach. 7.2c This masterplanned approach to development at the Heslington campuses will be formalised in a Development Brief prepared by the University in consultation with Historic England. This should also involve appropriate engagement with surrounding communities. It is important that this Development Brief optimises the use of the existing estate, making the most efficient use of land and buildings across Campus East and West. To enable this, the Development Brief will be informed by the University’s 5 to 10-year estates strategy (or integrated infrastructure plan or equivalent). Such a strategy is likely to address plans for student growth, for research activity and for business collaboration in the context of the University’s funding and resource constraints (and wider government policy) and set out capital investment plans and programmes. The Development Brief should reflect evidence in the estate strategy which ensures, and provides evidence to show, that current space and land is efficiently used within accepted constraints having regard to the performance and fitness of the existing estate. The University and the Council will continue to engage closely and maintain regular dialogue on the definition and evolution of any strategy. 7.2d An annual student housing survey should also be submitted to the Council. If in any year an annual survey demonstrates that there is unmet student housing demand on the site in excess of 50 bedspaces, the university must undertake to bring forward and implement plans to provide additional accommodation on site as a priority or offsite in line with Policy H7. 7.2eThe University was established in the city centre in 1962 at Kings Manor, Campus West following in 1964 and Campus East in 2009. A business start-up hub facilitated by the University has been established in offices at the Guildhall. The Council will work with the University to accommodate research/ knowledge business uses in the City Centre and elsewhere consistently with other policies in this Plan.
|
Changes to the supporting text reflect modifications to policy wording. |
MM7.4 Policy ED2: Campus West
|
New policy text, wholly replacing submission policy
Policy ED2: Campus West
Proposals for new development on University of York Campus West (including the extension and redevelopment of existing buildings) will be permitted having regard to the following requirements together with those in ED1:
|
To aid effectiveness and enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012. Modifications reduce duplication with the overarching Policy ED1 as modified. Modifications delete the 23% built footprint restriction and better articulate the importance and relevance of the parkland setting and landscape requirements.
|
MM7.5 Policy ED2 explanation – paragraphs 7.4, 7.4b and 7.5 |
7.4
7.4b Car parking is restricted at this site, which is well served by buses. Car travel should be minimised with a focus on walking and cycling both to and across the campus and priority should be given to sustainable modes of travel.
|
Changes reflect the amended policy wording (MM7.4). More detailed explanatory text is included in light of the protected historic assets accommodated on Campus West, justifying and explaining the policy approach.
|
MM7.6 Figure 7.1 |
Delete Figure 7.1
Replace with
|
Figure replaced with clearer map showing the correct extent of University of York’s Heslington Campus. |
MM7.7 Policy ED3: Campus East |
New policy text, wholly replacing submission policy
Policy ED3: University of York Campus East
The expansion of facilities on Campus East will be permitted having regard to the following requirements together with those in ED1:
|
To aid effectiveness and enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012. Modifications to this policy are made to reduce duplication with the overarching Policy. As with Policy ED2, modifications are also proposed to delete the 23% built footprint restriction and to better articulate the importance and relevance of the parkland setting and landscape requirements.
|
MM7.8 Policy ED3 explanation – paragraphs 7.6 to 7.12
|
7.6 Campus East and the ST27 extension (shown on Figure 7.1) provides the potential for a cluster of knowledge-based companies to locate, to the benefit of city and University. This aspiration will be reflected in the Development Brief for the site which will address the design parameters set out in Policy SS22 where they relate to ST27 expansion site. 7.6a Campus East was designed to be car free. Car parking should continue to be minimised, across the campus a focus will be on walking and cycling and bus travel over private car travel in line with Policy ED1 and reflected in Policy SS22. Paragraphs 7.6 to 7.12 deleted |
To reflect the policy modification MM7.7. Text that repeats parts of what a planning permission at Campus East states has been deleted as the content of this is unnecessary for inclusion as it neither justifies nor explains the policy content. |
MM7.9 Policy ED5: York St. John University Further Expansion |
Policy ED5: York St. John University Further Expansion
To
support the continued success of York St. John University the
following sites, as shown on the
Land at Northfield, Haxby Road The following range of sports and related uses will be permitted on land at Northfield where proposals are consistent with GI5 and relevant Green Belt policies: · outdoor sports facilities, together with associated car and cycle parking; · appropriate indoor sports facilities; and · other outdoor recreational activity.
SH1: Land at Heworth Croft. Proposals for new student housing on land at Heworth Croft will be permitted having regard to the following requirements, together with those in other policies in the plan including H7, ENV4 and GI6: · A sequential approach to the site’s layout to ensure residential uses are developed on areas at the lowest risk of flooding and the new open space is brought forward on land within the functional floodplain; and, · The impact of development’s scale and massing on the setting of the Heworth Green/ East Parade Conservation Area. |
To aid effectiveness and provide clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012. Text in explanation related to Northfield is moved to policy and development considerations included to support SH1 to align with the capacity in Policy H1. |
MM7.10 Policy ED5 explanation – paragraph 7.16 |
|
Deleted as text moved to policy. |
MM7.11 Policy ED5 explanation – paragraph 7.18a |
As identified in Policy H1, it is considered that an indicative capacity of 400 bedspaces could be accommodated. However, realising this density of development is contingent on appropriate mitigation of flood risk and ensuring the scale and massing is appropriate to the context, and in particular the impact on the setting of the Heworth Green/ East Parade Conservation Area. |
To support modification to policy. |
7. SECTION 8: PLACEMAKING, HERITAGE, DESIGN AND CULTURE
Section 8: Placemaking, Heritage, Design and Culture |
||
Modification Reference |
Proposed Modification |
Reason for change |
MM8.1 Policy D1: Placemaking |
…
Development proposals will be supported where they improve poor
existing urban and natural environments, enhance York’s
special qualities and better reveal the significances of the
historic environment.
Development proposals that:
·
fail to take account of York’s special qualities · fail to make a positive design contribution to the city, and/or · cause damage to the character and quality of an area will be refused.
Where appropriate,
|
To enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012 |
MM8.2 Policy D1: Placemaking |
…
ii. Density and Massing
·
demonstrate that the
·
demonstrate that the combined effect of development does not
dominate its wider setting,
including other buildings and spaces, paying particular
attention to those of historic
significance.
…
iv. Building Heights and Views
·
respect York’s skyline by ensuring that development does not
detract from
· respect and enhance views of landmark buildings and important vistas. …
iv. Character and Design Standards … · maximise sustainability potential. · ensure design considers residential amenity so that residents living nearby are not unduly affected by noise, disturbance, overlooking or overshadowing. |
To ensure consistency with the NPPF and to enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012 |
MM8.3 Policy D2; Landscape Setting |
… Development proposals will be encouraged and supported where they: …
ii. iii. demonstrate a comprehensive understanding of the interrelationship between good landscape design, bio-diversity enhancement and water sensitive design; iv. create or utilise opportunities to enhance the public use and enjoyment of existing and proposed streets and open spaces;
v. recognise the significance of landscape
features such as mature trees, hedges, …
viii. create a comfortable association between the built and
natural environment and attain an appropriate relationship of scale
between building and adjacent open space, garden or street. In this
respect consideration will … |
To ensure consistency with the NPPF and to enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012. |
MM8.4 Policy D3: Cultural Provision |
…
i. Development proposals will be supported where they:
· enable and promote the delivery of new cultural facilities and/or activities and services such as permanent and temporary public arts; · provide facilities, opportunities, and/or resources for cultural programmes and activities, during and/or after the development period; … |
To enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012 |
MM8.5 Policy D4: Conservation Areas |
Development proposals within or affecting the setting of a conservation area will be supported where they:
i.
are designed to preserve or enhance those elements which contribute
to the character or appearance of the Conservation Area;
ii. would enhance or better reveal its significance or would help secure a sustainable future for a building; and
Harm to buildings, plot
form, open spaces, trees, views or other elements which
make a positive contribution to a Conservation Area will be
permitted only where this is outweighed by the public benefits of
the proposal. Substantial harm or total loss to the significance of
a Conservation Area will be permitted only where it can be
demonstrated that the harm or
loss is necessary to achieve
Changes of use will be supported when it has been demonstrated that
the beneficial
current
Applications should be |
To ensure consistency with the NPPF and the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, and to enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012 |
MM8.6 Policy D4 Explanation – new paragraph 8.26a |
8.26a When considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be given to the asset’s conservation. The more important the asset, the greater the weight should be. Significance can be harmed or lost through alteration or destruction of the heritage asset or development within its setting. As heritage assets are irreplaceable, any harm or loss should require clear and convincing justification. Substantial harm to or loss of a grade II listed building, park or garden should be exceptional. Substantial harm to or loss of designated heritage assets of the highest significance, notably scheduled monuments, protected wreck sites, battlefields, grade I and II* listed buildings, grade I and II* registered parks and gardens, and World Heritage Sites, should be wholly exceptional. |
New paragraph added, to ensure consistency with the NPPF. |
MM8.7 Policy D5: Listed Buildings |
Proposals affecting a Listed Building or its setting will be
supported where they
Changes of use will be supported where it has been demonstrated
that
Harm or substantial
harm to ● the nature of the heritage asset prevents all reasonable uses of the site; and ● no viable use of the heritage asset itself can be found in the medium term through appropriate marketing that will enable its conservation; and ● conservation by grant-funding or some form of charitable or public ownership is demonstrably not possible; and ● the harm or loss is outweighed by the benefit of bringing the site back into use.
Applications should be accompanied
by an appropriate, evidence based heritage statement,
|
To ensure consistency with the NPPF and the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, and to enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012 |
MM8.8 Policy D5 Explanation – new paragraphs |
…
8.30a Where a development will comprise works to a heritage asset then building recording will be required. Building recording may comprise detailed archaeological survey or a photographic record, depending upon the significance of the heritage asset and the nature of the works proposed. The survey must be undertaken by a suitably experienced professional in accordance with a Written Scheme of Investigation approved by the Local Planning Authority and to the relevant Historic England and Chartered Institute for Archaeologists Standard and Guidance. The results of the building recording will be deposited with the City of York Historic Environment Record. Significant findings will also be formally published in order to make the information publicly accessible and to advance understanding
8.30b When considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be given to the asset’s conservation. The more important the asset, the greater the weight should be. Significance can be harmed or lost through alteration or destruction of the heritage asset or development within its setting. As heritage assets are irreplaceable, any harm or loss should require clear and convincing justification. Substantial harm to or loss of a grade II listed building, park or garden should be exceptional. Substantial harm to or loss of designated heritage assets of the highest significance, notably scheduled monuments, protected wreck sites, battlefields, grade I and II* listed buildings, grade I and II* registered parks and gardens, and World Heritage Sites, should be wholly exceptional. |
New paragraphs added, to ensure consistency with the NPPF and provide clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012 |
MM8.9 Policy D6: Archaeology |
ii. they will not result in harm to
an element which contributes to
the significance or setting of a Scheduled Monument or other
nationally important remains, unless that harm is outweighed by the
public benefits of the proposal. Substantial harm or total
loss of a Scheduled Monument or other nationally important remains
will be permitted only where it can be demonstrated that the
substantial harm or loss is necessary to achieve substantial public
benefits that outweigh that harm or loss;
…
iv. the impact
of the proposal is acceptable in principle and
|
To ensure consistency with the NPPF and enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012 |
MM8.10 Policy D6 Explanation |
8.31 …Within the historic core, substantial harm
is defined as greater than 5% disturbance to the most significant buried
archaeological deposits through foundation design and
infrastructure development as described in the York Development and
Archaeology Study (1990). Within the historic core, substantial
harm to nationally-important remains will be permitted only where
8.31a Harm to archaeological features and deposits of less than national importance will be considered against the benefits of the proposal and the significance of the archaeology.
8.31b Should a proposal include an area which has already been subject to piling and/or has been partially excavated every option to preserve the remaining archaeological resources in-situ should be explored. This should include the consideration of re-use of existing foundations where possible, including piles. …
8.34a When considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be given to the asset’s conservation. The more important the asset, the greater the weight should be. Significance can be harmed or lost through alteration or destruction of the heritage asset or development within its setting. As heritage assets are irreplaceable, any harm or loss should require clear and convincing justification. Substantial harm to or loss of a grade II listed building, park or garden should be exceptional. Substantial harm to or loss of designated heritage assets of the highest significance, notably scheduled monuments, protected wreck sites, battlefields, grade I and II* listed buildings, grade I and II* registered parks and gardens, and World Heritage Sites, should be wholly exceptional. |
To ensure consistency with the NPPF and enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012 |
MM8.11 Policy D7: The Significance of Non-Designated heritage Assets |
Policy D7:
|
To ensure consistency with the NPPF and enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012 |
MM8.12 Policy D7 Explanation – paragraphs 8.35 to 8.37
|
8.35
The National Planning Policy Framework (2012) encourages Local
Authorities to consider the significance of non-designated
8.36
Where a development will comprise works to a
8.37 City of York Council worked |
|
Harm to an element which |
To ensure consistency with the NPPF and enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012. |
|
MM8.14 Policy D8 Explanation – new paragraph |
8.41a When considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be given to the asset’s conservation. The more important the asset, the greater the weight should be. Significance can be harmed or lost through alteration or destruction of the heritage asset or development within its setting. As heritage assets are irreplaceable, any harm or loss should require clear and convincing justification. Substantial harm to or loss of a grade II listed building, park or garden should be exceptional. Substantial harm to or loss of designated heritage assets of the highest significance, notably scheduled monuments, protected wreck sites, battlefields, grade I and II* listed buildings, grade I and II* registered parks and gardens, and World Heritage Sites, should be wholly exceptional. |
To ensure consistency with the NPPF and enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012 |
MM8.15 Policy D10: York City Walls and St Marys Abbey Walls (York Walls) |
Development proposals within the areas of York Walls designated as
Scheduled
Harm to the significance of York Walls will be permitted only where this is demonstrably outweighed by the public benefits of the proposal.
Development proposals
i.
they are accompanied by a Heritage Statement that clearly assesses
the impact
ii.
they are designed to preserve
the special character of the city walls
iii.
they do not cause harm to those elements which contribute to the
significance, including the
setting, iv. they are of the highest design quality which, where possible, enhances or better reveals the significance of York Walls; and, v any harm to the significance of the setting is demonstrably outweighed by the public benefits of the proposal. |
To ensure consistency with the NPPF and enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012 |
MM8.16 Policy D13: Advertisements |
…
In addition, within conservation areas and on buildings identified
as heritage assets, illumination will only be supported where the
fittings, wiring and level of illumination are |
To enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012 |
8. SECTION 9: GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE
Section 9: Green Infrastructure |
||
Modification Reference |
Proposed Modification |
Reason for change |
MM9.1 Policy GI1 Green Infrastructure |
…
i.
the delivery of the aspirations of partner strategy documents and
action plans, including the Leeds City Region Green Infrastructure
Strategy (201 …
Where appropriate,
d |
To update with latest evidence and provide clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012. |
MM9.2 Policy GI2: Biodiversity and Access to Nature |
i. assess potential effects on International Sites in accordance with the statutory protection which is afforded to the site. Proposals will be determined in accordance with statute ii. demonstrate that proposals will not have an adverse effect on a National Site (alone or in combination). Where adverse impacts occur, development will not normally be permitted, except where the benefits of development in that location clearly outweigh both the impact on the site and any broader impacts on the wider network of National Sites. iii. demonstrate that where loss or harm to a National site cannot be prevented or adequately mitigated, as a last resort, provide compensation for the loss/harm. Development will be refused if loss or significant harm cannot be prevented, adequately mitigated against or compensated for. iv. avoid loss or significant harm to Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINCs) and Local Nature Reserves (LNRs), whether directly or indirectly. Where it can be demonstrated that there is a need for the development in that location and the benefit outweighs the loss or harm the impacts must be adequately mitigated against, or compensated for as a last resort; |
Ensures appropriate distinctions are made between different levels in a hierarchy of nature sites in accordance with paragraph 113 of the NPPF (2012). Consistent with Natural England’s July 2019 response to the Regulation 19 consultation. |
MM9.3 Policy GI2: Biodiversity and Access to Nature |
v. Retain irreplaceable habitats, including ancient woodland and veteran trees. Development resulting in the loss, deterioration and/or fragmentation of irreplaceable habitats will not be supported unless there are wholly exceptional reasons and a suitable compensation plan exists.
viii.
|
New criterion to reference ancient woodland and veteran trees, bringing into the Development Plan the NPPF requirement.
|
MM9.4 Policy GI2 explanation – paragraph 9.5 |
The extent of that buffer could vary depending on the site, the type and value of the habitat present and the proposed change. In addition, whilst recognising the benefits to people provided from access to nature, where appropriate developments will be required to fully assess and mitigate for the impact of recreational disturbance on SSSIs, SACs and SPAs |
To provide additional clarity and acknowledge the circumstances where a need to consider recreational disturbance is required. |
MM9.5 Policy GI2 explanation – paragraph 9.6 |
The Environment Act sets out a mandatory requirement for development to deliver at least a 10% biodiversity net gain. The provisions of the Act are subject to secondary legislation and development will need to comply with the regulations once it comes into force (expected November 2023). Net gains in biodiversity can be delivered by almost all development, by following the principles of the mitigation hierarchy and understanding the ecological constraints and opportunities from the early stages of design. Net gain should deliver genuine additional improvements for biodiversity by creating or enhancing habitats in association with development. Improvements should go beyond any required mitigation and/or compensation measures following the application of the mitigation hierarchy |
To support the modification to criterion viii. |
MM9.6 Policy GI2a: Strensall Common Special Area of Conservation (SAC) |
GI2a: Strensall Common Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
Development not directly connected with or necessary to the management of the SAC will only be permitted where it will not adversely affect the integrity of the Strensall Common SAC, either alone or in combination with other plans or projects. Proposals will be determined in accordance with the following principles: a) There is an ‘exclusion zone’ set at 400m linear distance from the SAC boundary. Permission will not be granted for development that results in a net increase in residential units within this zone. Proposals for non-residential development within this zone must undertake Habitats Regulation Assessment to demonstrate that they will not harm the integrity of the SAC. b) There is a ‘zone of influence’ between 400m and 5.5km linear distance from the SAC boundary. i. Where new residential development is proposed within the zone of influence on allocated housing sites SS9/ST7, SS10/ST8, SS11/ST9 and SS12/ST14, provision of open space must include or secure access to areas of suitable natural greenspace secured by way of mitigation prior to any occupation of new dwellings and secured in perpetuity. ii. Proposals for other housing development which are not within plan allocations will not be permitted unless it can be demonstrated that they will have no adverse effects on the integrity of the SAC, either alone or in combination with other plans or projects. Any necessary mitigation measures may be sought through planning contributions and must be secured prior to the occupation of any new dwellings and secured in perpetuity. Open space provision must also satisfy policy GI6.
Explanation
9.8a Strensall Common is designated as a Special Area for Conservation (SAC) and Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI). It also has biodiversity value above its listed features in the SSSI/SAC designations that will need to be fully considered.
9.8b At over 570ha, it supports one of the largest areas of lowland heath in northern England. Extensive areas of both wet and dry heath occur and form a complex habitat mosaic with grassland, woodlands/scrub and ponds. Grazing, by sheep and cattle is the key management tool with stock typically present during summer and autumn. The heathland supports a diverse flora and fauna including such characteristic (and vulnerable) species such as nightjar, woodlark, marsh gentian, pillwort, pond mud snail and dark bordered beauty moth, with Strensall Common representing the only site for this species in England.
9.8c Strensall Common is managed by the Yorkshire Wildlife Trust and Ministry of Defence (MOD) who operate an extensive training facility and firing range within and adjacent to the European site.
9.8d The heath is subject to considerable recreational pressure from visitors, especially those with dogs. Although an established network of paths and periodic closures of part of the heath by the MOD (to facilitate training activities) can influence visitor behaviour. However, both the dry and wet heath habitats are particularly vulnerable to trampling, erosion and vandalism such as fire, fly-tipping, pollution and other activities associated with visitor pressure. Although the common is already under intense recreational pressure, there are birds of conservation concern amongst other species and habitats which could be harmed by the intensification of disturbance.
9.8e In 2021, all of Strensall Common SSSI was considered by Natural England to be in favourable condition. However, the corresponding Site Improvement Plan identifies a number of threats including, inter alia, public pressure and air pollution. Natural England’s Supplementary Advice (2019) highlights the threat posed to the maintenance of the grazing regime by the worrying and subsequent disturbance of livestock by dogs brought by visitors.
9.8f In addition, the heathland habitat is vulnerable to changes in the hydrological regime and air quality, which will need to be considered and assessed in detail for any proposed development.
9.8g Queen Elizabeth Barracks in Strensall, currently occupied by the Defence Infrastructure Organisation, is largely within the 400m zone identified in the policy. The Defence Infrastructure Organisation plan to vacate Queen Elizabeth Barracks. The site currently includes single living accommodation and transit accommodation rather than conventional housing, but it is acknowledged that part of the site sits beyond the 400m zone where a net increase in residential uses may be acceptable in line with the policy. The Council will work proactively with any future developers of the site to enable development that address the policy and ensures adverse impacts on the SAC are avoided.
9.8h The Habitat Regulation Assessment (2020) has established that adverse effects on the integrity of the common cannot be ruled out without mitigation. The HRA suggests that residential development allocations (in Policy H1) within 5.5km of the common are likely to lead to an increase in recreational pressure which will require mitigation in the form of suitable natural greenspace and such other measures as may be considered necessary to prevent an adverse effect on the integrity of the SAC. Relevant policies/sites include strategic sites SS9(ST7), SS10 (ST8), SS11(ST9), SS12(ST14), SS15(ST17) and Policy H1 (allocation H46). The delivery of appropriate recreational open space on these sites will also need to be considered in line with policy GI6. The HRA also anticipates that unallocated windfall development may come forward, although it is not possible at this stage to predict precisely where it will be proposed. To ensure that it does not cause any adverse effect on the integrity of the SAC, the HRA recommends the following policy controls: (1) no net additional dwellings will be permitted within 400m of the SAC, as it is not considered possible to prevent adverse effects from development in such close proximity to the SA; (2) where windfall development is proposed between 400m and 5.5km from the SAC, permission will not be granted unless it can be demonstrated that the proposals will not have an adverse effect on the integrity of the SAC, both in respect of the proposals themselves and in combination with other development; (3) any necessary measures which avoid or reduce such effects must be provided before first occupation and established in perpetuity. The Council will have to consider whether planning obligations will be required, including financial contributions to secure such measures. Proposals must also comply with Policy GI6 which requires that all residential proposals contribute to the provision of open space, in particular helping to address deficiencies in the area surrounding a proposed development.
Applicable 400m development exclusion zone
|
To ensure adverse effects as a result of development are avoided and mitigated in accordance with the findings of the HRA (2020). |
MM9.7 Policy GI4: Trees and Hedgerows |
Development
will be …
iv.
does not create conflict between existing trees to be retained and
new buildings, their uses and occupants, whether the trees or
buildings be within or adjacent to the site; v. supplements the city’s tree stock with new tree planting where an integrated landscape scheme is required; and,
vi. Provides suitable replacement planting where the loss of trees or hedgerows worthy of retention is justified. |
New criterion for effectiveness, bringing into the policy the approach referenced in paragraph 9.13 to replacement planting in the case of loss, making clear the need for justification. |
MM9.8 Policy GI5: Protection of Open Space and Playing Fields |
Development
proposals will not be permitted which would harm the character of,
or lead to the loss of, open space of …
·
|
For consistency with the Plan’s glossary definition of Open Space (which reflects the NPPF) and focuses on recreational rather than environmental importance. |
MM9.9 Policy GI5 explanation – paragraph 9.17 |
Proposals involving the loss
and/or replacement
of open space
|
To provide clarity on the application of Policy GI5. |
MM9.10 Policy GI6: New Open Space provision |
|
To clarify the application of local open space standards with reference to latest evidence. Deletion of superfluous text. |
MM9.11 Policy GI6: New Open Space provision |
The Council will
i. if the proposed development site
ii.
iii. On
allocated strategic
sites, it may be appropriate
for |
To make explicit the preference for on-site provision.
Modifications to criterion ii and iii to enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012. |
MM9.12 Policy GI6: New Open Space provision |
New open space is identified on the
Indicative new significant areas of open space have been identified
in connection with the following strategic sites, as shown on the
…
The precise delineation and extent of the new open space will be
set through detailed masterplanning and the planning process.
|
To correct policy map references.
Deletion of open space associated with allocation ST35, which is removed following the Habitat Regulations Assessment (Feb 2019), which cannot rule out adverse effects on the integrity of Strensall Common Special Area of Conservation (SAC) |
9. SECTION 10: MANAGING DEVELOPMENT IN THE GREEN BELT
Section 10: Managing Development in the Green Belt |
||
Modification Reference |
Proposed Modification |
Reason for change |
MM10.1 Policy GB1: Development in the Green Belt |
New policy text, wholly replacing submission policy
Inappropriate development will not be approved except in very special circumstances. Very special circumstances will not exist unless the potential harm to the Green Belt by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm, is clearly outweighed by other considerations.
The construction of new buildings is inappropriate development. Exceptions to this are:
a) buildings for agriculture and forestry;
b) the provision of appropriate facilities (in connection with the existing use of land or a change of use) for outdoor sport, outdoor recreation, cemeteries and burial grounds and allotments; as long as the facilities preserve the openness of the Green Belt and do not conflict with the purposes of including land within it;
c) the extension or alteration of a building provided that it does not result in disproportionate additions over and above the size of the original building;
d) the replacement of a building, provided the new building is in the same use and not materially larger than the one it replaces;
e) limited infilling in villages;
f) limited affordable housing for local community needs under policy GB2; and
g) limited infilling or the partial or complete redevelopment of previously developed land, whether redundant or in continuing use (excluding temporary buildings), which would: ‒ not have a greater impact on the openness of the Green Belt than the existing development; or ‒ not cause substantial harm to the openness of the Green Belt, where the development would re-use previously developed land and contribute to meeting an identified affordable housing need within the Council area.
The following forms of development are also not inappropriate in the Green Belt provided they preserve its openness and do not conflict with the purposes of including land within it:
a) mineral extraction;
b) engineering operations;
c) local transport infrastructure which can demonstrate a requirement for a Green Belt location;
d) the re-use of buildings provided that the buildings are of permanent and substantial construction;
e) material changes in the use of land (such as changes of use for outdoor sport or recreation, or for cemeteries and burial grounds); and
f) development, including buildings, brought forward under a Community Right to Build Order or Neighbourhood Development Order.
Proposals for development that is not inappropriate development will be subject to other policies in this Plan. |
To ensure consistency with Green Belt policy contained within the NPPF. |
MM10.2 Policy GB1 Explanation – paragraph 10.8 |
The open countryside around York includes a significant number of
buildings outside existing settlements. The extension or alteration
of these buildings will be |
To provide clarity. |
MM10.3 Policy GB1 Explanation – new paragraph |
10.17 Whilst infilling (defined as the filling of a small gap in an otherwise built up frontage) is often perceived as acceptable in some locations, this ignores the fact that part of the character of many settlements is made up of gardens, paddocks and other breaks between buildings. It is important to protect those infill spaces, which contribute to the character of smaller settlements lying within the Green Belt. Infill development may also not be desirable if it would consolidate groups of houses, which are isolated from the main body of a village, or consolidate a ribbon of development extending into the open countryside. Infilling is location dependent, therefore in some settlements little or no infill development may be appropriate; in others a limited amount of infill on selected sites may be acceptable. |
To support the modifications at MM10.1. |
MM10.4 Policy GB2: Development in Settlements within the Green Belt |
Policy and explanation text deleted |
Deleted to avoid repetition of detail provided in policy GB1. |
MM10.5 Policy GB3: Reuse of Buildings |
Policy and explanation text deleted |
To avoid repetition of detail provided in policy GB1. |
MM10.6 Policy GB4:’Exception’ Sites for Affordable Housing in the Green Belt |
Policy GB
Exception sites seek to address the needs of the local community by accommodating households who are either current residents or have an existing family or employment connection. Supporting evidence for this need will be required with any future planning application.
The development of limited affordable housing on exception sites in the Green Belt is not inappropriate development and will be considered where:
i. the development contributes to meeting identified local affordable housing need as illustrated by an up to date local housing needs assessment; ii. the affordable housing is retained at an affordable price for future eligible households in perpetuity;
iii.
the
development …
|
To provide clarity and to ensure consistency with the NPPF.
Additional detail provided to indicate that the policy is intended to provide for limited affordable housing on rural exception sites.
Renumbering of policy to reflect deletion of previous GB2 and GB3.
Removal of restriction in iii), as sustainability issues covered by other policies in the Plan. |
MM10.7 Policy GB4 |
10. |
To support policy modifications at MM.4. |
10. SECTION 11: CLIMATE CHANGE
Section 11: Climate Change |
||
Modification Reference |
Proposed Modification |
Reason for change |
MM11.1 Policy CC1: Renewable and Low Carbon Energy Generation Storage |
|
To remove requirement for new buildings to achieve carbon emissions reduction through renewables energy generation as matters dealt with in Policy CC2 (as modified) |
MM11.2 Policy CC1: Renewable and Low Carbon Energy Generation Storage |
Renewable
and low carbon energy generation developments will be encouraged
and supported in York.
…
vi.
the road network,
capacity and highway safety …
Applications will also be determined in accordance with any further considerations that apply to specific technologies for renewable energy or low carbon technologies that are set out in national planning policy or practice guidance.
Proposals
for renewable and low carbon energy storage developments will be
supported and encouraged |
To aid effectiveness and enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012.
Introduction to criteria enhanced, recognising paragraph 97 of NPPF 2012 and requirement for policies to ensure adverse impacts are addressed satisfactorily, including cumulative landscape and visual impacts.
[new text] In recognition that many of the technologies identified in the NPPF glossary definition are subject to specific national policy and/or guidance. The PPG includes particular considerations for hydropower, active solar technology, solar farms and wind turbines (Paragraph: 010 Reference ID: 5-010- 20140306). These considerations are not repeated, but modifications make clear developments will be determined in accordance with national policy and guidance.
Reference to the potentially suitable areas for renewable energy identified in the Renewable Energy Study deleted because the explanatory text makes clear that it does not provide a basis for identifying the only appropriate locations for renewable energy developments.
Strategic site considerations deleted as issues are dealt with in Policy CC2
Additional text to make clear storage developments will be assessed against the same assessment criteria. |
MM11.3 Policy CC1 explanation – paragraph 11.8 – 11.11 |
Paragraphs deleted |
Text superfluous and does not support the application and implementation of Policy CC1 |
MM11.4 Policy CC2: Sustainable Design and Construction of New Development |
Developments
· energy and carbon dioxide savings in accordance with the energy hierarchy;
·
·
Planning applications for development covered by this policy are required to include a Sustainability and Energy Statement to demonstrate how the requirements will be met and how development appropriately follows the energy hierarchy. |
To aid effectiveness and enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012
Additional wording introduces the energy hierarchy within the policy, linking it to the requirement for a sustainability and energy statement. |
MM11.5 Policy CC2: Sustainable Design and Construction of New Development |
A.
All
new residential
i.
ii. a water consumption rate of 110 litres per person per day (calculated as per Part G of the Building Regulations).
Pending anticipated changes to Building Regulations, developments should further aim to achieve up to a 75% reduction in carbon emissions over and above the requirements of Building Regulations Part L (2013) unless it is demonstrated that such reductions would not be feasible or viable.
Any higher level of reductions required through Building Regulations or other legislation will supersede the above requirements. |
To enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012.
Modifications to carbon emission reductions respond to changes to Building Regulations since submission of the Local Plan and require a fabric first approach in accordance with the principles of the energy hierarchy.
A target to achieve a 75% reduction in carbon emissions anticipates the expected introduction of the Future Homes Standard and is consistent with the Council’s zero carbon ambition.
|
MM11.6 Policy CC2: Sustainable Design and Construction of New Development |
B. Non-residential development
All
new non-residential i. a 28% reduction in carbon emissions over and above the requirements of Building Regulations (2013) unless it is demonstrated that such reductions would not be feasible or viable; and, ii. BREEAM ‘Excellent’ (or equivalent), where feasible and viable and where development proposals are for 1,000m2 or more.
|
The 28% reduction originally included in Policy CC1 moved into Policy CC2 as the Future Building Standard does not set a performance improvement threshold akin to the Future Homes Standard.
In recognition that it would otherwise be disproportionate to require smaller developments to achieve the BREEAM standard, a 1000m2 threshold is introduced.
Strategic site and energy statement requirements relocated within the policy. |
MM11.7 Policy CC2: Sustainable Design and Construction of New Development
|
C. Conversion of Existing Buildings and Change of Use
|
To aid effectiveness and enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012
|
MM11.8 Policy CC2: Sustainable Design and Construction of New Development |
D. Strategic Sites Development proposals on strategic sites should undertake a BREEAM Communities Assessment (or equivalent).
|
Strategic site requirement relocated within the policy.
Consequential improvements deleted as it is unclear how a decision maker would assess compliance with this part of the policy and would be a disproportionate burden on applicants. |
MM11.9 Policy CC2 explanation – paragraph 11.15 |
Paragraph deleted |
Text superfluous and out of date. |
MM11.10 Policy CC2 Explanation |
11.12a The Council will assess compliance with this policy based on the Sustainability and Energy Statement and/or the BREEAM report. BREEAM is used widely in local planning policy in the UK to demonstrate high standards of sustainable design and construction. Proposals affecting heritage assets will also need to draw together relevant evidence on significance and associated impacts in a manner that is proportionate to the scale of the proposal.
11.12b The Sustainability and Energy Statement should be completed by a suitably qualified individual and demonstrate how the emissions reduction will be achieved in line with the widely recognised energy hierarchy to: · Be Lean: use less energy · Be Clean: supply energy efficiently · Be Green: use low and zero carbon technologies · Be Seen: providing monitoring data to measure effectiveness |
New explanatory text to support the application and interpretation of the policy modifications. |
MM11.11 Policy CC2 Explanation |
11.13a Latest Building Regulations (June, 2022) requires a 31% reduction in carbon emissions from residential buildings. There is flexibility on how the emissions reduction is achieved (whether through fabric improvements or renewables). To ensure that each individual dwelling meets a minimum performance threshold and follows the energy hierarchy, a minimum 19% emissions reduction through energy efficiency measures has been applied.
11.13b Further changes to energy efficiency standards for new homes with a new ‘Future Homes Standard’ are expected to be introduced by 2024. These will ensure new homes built from 2025 will produce 75-80% lower carbon emissions than homes delivered under current regulations. Policy CC2 therefore requires developers to design homes to meet this level of efficiency in advance of anticipated legislative changes. The Future Homes Standard is also expected to put much greater emphasis on ‘fabric first’ improvements and the Council aligns the policy to this.
11.13c Any proposed reduction of at least 28% in carbon emissions in non-residential buildings can be achieved through either enhanced energy efficiency measures, use of renewable and low carbon sources, or a mix of both where appropriate
Paragraphs 11.14 to 11.15 deleted |
New explanatory text to support the application and interpretation of the policy modifications.
Superfluous and out of date text deleted. |
MM11.12 Policy CC2 explanation – paragraph 11.18 – 11.23 |
Paragraphs deleted |
Superfluous and out of date text deleted. BREEAM included in new paragraph 11.12a |
MM11.13 Policy CC3: District Heating and Combined Heat and Power Networks |
A. The Council strongly supports the development of decentralised energy, including both combined cooling, heating and power (CCHP) and combined heating and power (CHP) distribution networks where the power source of such a network is non-fossil fuel based.
B. All major developments are required to assess the feasibility and viability of connecting to an existing decentralised energy network, or, where this is not possible, identified future network opportunities. Where neither option is feasible or viable, developments should evaluate the feasibility and viability of developing a site-wide network. Developments will be required to adopt a solution according to this order unless it is demonstrated that they would be neither feasible nor viable. This evidence should be included in the Sustainability and Energy Statement.
i.
ii.
iii.
iv.
v.
vi.
vii.
C.
All
(C)CHP systems are required to be scaled and operated in order to
maximise the potential for carbon reduction.
D.
|
For consistency with the Council’s net zero aspiration the modification recognises that combined cooling, heating and power (CCHP) and combined heating and power (CHP) distribution networks should be supported where the power source is non-fossil fuel based.
Requirement for all major development (not only strategic sites or sites in heat priority areas) to consider feasible options for decentralised energy networks against preferential order of approaches to aid effectiveness and enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012.
The modification recognises the Leeds City Region Strategic Heat Programme Heat Network Opportunity Mapping Report (2014) provides evidence that York has heating demand concentrations capable of supporting decentralised networks, but that this work has not been updated. For clarity and effectiveness references to this work are deleted. |
MM11.14 Policy CC3 explanation – paragraph11.28 – 11.34 |
11.28 The Council will strongly support the use of decentralised energy in new developments, and therefore requires all new major developments to assess the feasibility of connecting to an existing decentralised energy network, or where this is not possible establishing a new network. Applicants should consider the options below, in the order listed, to ensure that energy from an efficient source is used where possible:
1. Connect immediately: where feasible and viable, development will be required to connect immediately to existing networks that are likely to be operational in the long term, and do not require the network as a whole to increase its fossil fuel consumption (i.e. it should be demonstrated that the network either has spare and wasted capacity, or demonstrate that the energy in the decentralised network is sourced from renewable sources).
2. Connect in immediate future: where networks do not currently exist, developments will be required to assess the feasibility of connecting to identified future decentralised energy network opportunities in the vicinity of the site, having regard to best available evidence such as area specific feasibility studies and any other relevant energy plans. Where shown to be feasible and viable, development proposals must provide on-site infrastructure for connection and agree a timescale for connection where possible;
3. Provide a site wide low carbon network: where connection to an existing or planned network is not feasible, developments should evaluate the feasibility and viability of a site wide network using low carbon energy sources
Paragraphs 11.29 – 11.34 (including figure 11.1 and table 11.1) deleted |
New explanatory text to support the application and interpretation of the policy modifications.
Superfluous and out of date text deleted. |
11. SECTION 12: ENVIRONMENT QUALITY AND FLOOD RISK
Section 12: Environment Quality and flood risk |
||
Modification Reference |
Proposed Modification |
Reason for change |
MM12.1 Policy ENV1: Air Quality |
New policy text, wholly replacing submission policy
Development will only be permitted if the impact on air quality is acceptable, including the provision of mechanisms which appropriately mitigate adverse impacts and further exposure to poor air quality
All applications which are:
* major planning applications; or * within Air Quality Management Areas (AQMA’s); or * with potential to generate significant air quality impacts; or * include air quality sensitive uses (including schools, hospitals, care homes)
must submit a detailed Air Quality Assessment. This should quantitively identify emissions arising from the proposal, air quality impacts and exposure to pollution as a result of the proposal and demonstrate how these will be minimised and mitigated against as part of the development.
Where an Air Quality Assessment identifies there is potential for new occupants to be exposed to unacceptable levels of air pollutants, an exposure mitigation strategy will be required. |
To aid effectiveness and enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012. |
MM12.2 Policy ENV1 Explanation |
12.6
In order to reduce emissions to air and improve air quality the
impact of development on air quality must be acceptable. The
significance of the air quality impacts will depend on the context
of the development. Air quality is likely to be a high
priority consideration where the development leads to a breach, or
significant worsening of a breach of an air quality objective, in
an AQMA for example, or indeed where the development introduces new
exposure into an exceedence area.
12.7
Applicants must use ‘best endeavours’ to minimise total
emissions from their sites, during both construction and operational
phases, including minimising transport to and from
them. This
…
12.8
A
·
· give rise to significant change in traffic volumes i.e. +/- 5% change in annual average daily traffic (AADT) or peak hour flows within AQMAs or +/- 10% outside AQMAs; · give rise to significant change in vehicle speeds i.e. more than +/- 10 kilometres per hour on a road with more than 10,000 AADT (or 5,000 AADT where it is narrow and congested); · significantly alter the traffic composition on local roads, for example, increase the number of heavy duty vehicles by 200 movements or more per day; · include significant new car parking, which may be taken to be more than 100 spaces outside an AQMA or 50 spaces inside an AQMA. This also includes proposals for new coach or lorry parks; · introduce new exposure close to existing sources of air pollutants, including road traffic, industrial operations, agricultural operations; · include biomass boilers or biomass fuelled Combined Heat and Power (CHP) plant (considerations should also be given to the impacts of centralised boilers or CHP plant burning other fuels within or close to an AQMA); · could give rise to potentially significant impacts during construction for nearby sensitive locations (e.g. hospitals, schools, care homes, residential areas, areas with parked cars and commercial operations that may be sensitive to dust); · will result in large, long-term construction sites that would generate large HGV flows (>200 movements per day) over a period of a year or more; and/or · requires an Environmental Impact Assessment.
12.9a The Council will produce further guidance as necessary and will review the significance of the air quality impacts in line with local and national guidance. |
|
MM12.3 Policy ENV2: Managing Environmental Quality |
Development
will
Where proposals are acceptable in principle, planning permission may be granted subject to conditions.
|
To aid effectiveness and enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012. |
MM12.4 Policy ENV3: Land Contamination |
Where there is evidence that a site may be affected by contamination or the proposed use would be particularly vulnerable to the presence of contamination (e.g. housing with gardens), planning applications must be accompanied by an appropriate contamination risk assessment.
Development
of a site known to be or which
has the potential to be affected by contamination will be
permitted … |
To aid effectiveness and enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012. |
MM12.5 Policy ENV4: Flood Risk |
…
Development proposed in areas of flood risk must be informed by an acceptable site-specific flood risk assessment, following the Sequential Test and, if required, the Exception Test.
Proposals located in areas known to be at risk from any form of flooding must demonstrate that: i. there is no direct or cumulative increase in flood risk locally or elsewhere in the catchment arising from the development; and, ii. The development will be safe during its lifetime with arrangements for the adoption, maintenance and management of any mitigation measures identified in a management and maintenance plan
A site specific flood risk assessment that takes account of future climate change must be submitted with any planning application related to sites:
i. in Flood Zone 1 larger than 1ha; ii. in Flood Zone 1 where development could be affected by flooding from sources other than rivers and the sea; iii. in Flood Zones 2 and 3; and iv. where development or change of use to a more vulnerable use may be subject to other sources of flooding
|
For consistency with national planning policy and to aid effectiveness and enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012. |
12. SECTION 14: TRANSPORT AND COMMUNICATIONS
Section 14: Transport and Communications |
||
Modification Reference |
Proposed Modification |
Reason for change |
MM14.1 Section 14 Introduction – paragraphs 14.2-14.3 |
14.2 Transport policies have an important role to play contributing to this and also contributing to wider sustainability, environmental (including heritage) and health objectives. The transport system needs to be balanced in favour of sustainable transport modes, giving people a real choice about how they travel and enabling development in a way which reduces its environmental impact.
…
14.3a A new Local Transport Strategy is being prepared and, informed by the Local Plan, it will set out the Council’s approach to maximising sustainable transport use in York. It will inform a new Local Transport Plan which will be developed using the emerging Department for Transport guidance and will be submitted to government. This will set out York’s transport priorities and act as a bidding document to government for further Transport Funding.
14.3b The Local Transport Strategy will be supported by a number of implementation documents which will set out detailed plans for individual modes of transport or aspects of the transport system. One of the implementation documents will be York’s Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plan which will set out in detail how the York cycle and walk networks will be developed to provide effective walk/ cycle facilities to support the proposed development pattern. A further implementation document will be the Bus Service Improvement Plan, which will set out how the bus service in York will be developed. |
To aid effectiveness and enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012
New statement introduced to support sustainable modes and to reflect preparation of a new York Local Transport Strategy/ Plan. |
MM14.2 Policy T1: Sustainable Access
|
Development
will be permitted
This will be achieved by: a. ensuring developments that can be reasonably expected to generate significant traffic movements are supported by frequent high quality public transport linking them to York’s City Centre and other key destinations, as appropriate; and b. requiring development proposals to demonstrate i. There is safe and appropriate access to the adjacent adopted highway for motor vehicles but also for pedestrians and cyclists. …
…For
all development, public transport services should be within
reasonable safe walking
|
To enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012
Reference to cycling deleted to reflect much longer cycle distances.
Deleted text moved from Policy T1 to explanatory text. |
MM14.3 Policy T1 explanation – paragraph 14.4 |
… The layout and design of development will need to balance safety, convenience and attractiveness whilst addressing potential conflict between the different modes of transport. In applying this policy it is recognised that, in some circumstances, developments will not be feasible (for example, in the heart of footstreets area), so they can, subject to sufficient justification of effective accessibility, be applied more flexibly. |
To provide additional clarity. |
MM14.4 Policy T2: Strategic Public Transport Improvements |
The
Plan will support the delivery of general and specific junction,
highway or public transport infrastructure enhancements as set out
in the Local Transport Plan 3
· Expanded and improved bus services across the City, potentially including elements of Bus Rapid Transit services, to connect Site Allocations ST15 and ST14 to York city centre and adjacent development. · Expansion and improvements to the Park and Ride network to serve inter-urban bus services and reduce pressure on the strategic road network · Highways enhancements and traffic restraint measures in the city centre to improve public transport reliability · Rail and accessibility improvements including improvements to public transport interchange at York Station and development of a new Station at Haxby.
The Council has identified specific projects as part of its Infrastructure Delivery Plan, highlighting timescale for delivery (whether short, medium and longer term) and associated funding and delivery bodies. This will be regularly reviewed and updated over the life of the Plan to support delivery.
|
To aid effectiveness and enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012
Text updated to refer to Infrastructure Delivery Plan and Bus Service Improvement Plan
Original scheme list deleted. |
MM14.5 Policy T2 Explanation – paragraphs 14.15 to 14.23 |
14.15
14.16
To help mitigate this, the implementation of strategic public
transport infrastructure, in association with service improvements
seeks to encourage modal shift away from private motor vehicle use
to more use of public transport. This offers enhanced access for all members of
the community to jobs, services and leisure opportunities and
reduce reliance on private motorised transport for travel and hence
minimise the increase in traffic levels arising from new
development.
This will be enabled through strategic projects led by the Council
and where required to mitigate development impacts, through
developer contributions associated strategic site allocations as
identified in Section 3 of this Plan and from other developments in
line with Policy DM1.
14.17
Policy T2 identifies the
approach of developing York’s bus network in the short term
through interventions through York’s Bus Service Improvement
programme, individual schemes with funding committed (such as
rebuilding York Station frontage). In the longer term the
focus will be on developing a Bus Rapid Transit system on the
principal routes in York, including new settlements at Land West of
Elvington Lane (ST15) and Land West of Wigginton Road (ST14).
14.18 The development of new and improved public transport services and facilities will still need to satisfy policies throughout the plan in terms of protecting the built and natural environment and replacing amenities that may be otherwise removed by development.
14.20 Improvements or new major public transport facilities should include sufficient car parking for persons with disabilities, cycle parking and facilities for buses, taxis and where appropriate, coaches. Provision of car parking (other than for people with disabilities) should be determined through a transport assessment and travel plan. New or improved facilities should also incorporate suitable signage and traffic management measures to reduce potential conflicts.
14.21
14.22 The strategic public transport improvements in the longer-term are vital to widen the transport choices available to people who live in, work in or visit York as the larger residential and employment sites come on-stream. Improvements to the rail network will also reduce pressure on the strategic road network.
14.23 More detail pertaining to how strategic public transport infrastructure is to be funded and delivered is contained in the Infrastructure Delivery Plan which will be updated to ensure it reflects data on transport demand and the projects planned to address this. |
To provide clarity on the implementation and application of Policy T2 to development proposals |
MM14.6 Policy T3: York Railway Station and Associated Operational Facilities |
Development will be supported that:
i. conserves and, where appropriate, enhances those elements that contribute to the significance of the Listed Grade II* station;
ii.
improves the setting of and approaches to the station and the
experience of those using it, to meet the demands of
iii.
increases the railway capacity at York Station (as identified on
the … vi. improves pedestrian and cyclist access to within and through the station, including, but not limited to
·
links to improved interchange with further links from
the station
…
vii. facilitates the continued use of essential operational rail lines and facilities or the establishment of new essential operational rail lines or facilities until such time, as determined by the rail regulator, that land required for York Central (Policy SS4) is no longer to remain in rail use. |
Text rephrased to improve clarity. |
MM14.7 Policy T4: Strategic Highway Network Capacity Improvements
|
The Plan will support the delivery of general and specific junction or other highway enhancements as set out in the Local Transport Plan 2011-2031 (LTP3) and subsequent associated (or complementary) investment programmes that improve journey time reliability on sections of the road network that experience high volumes of traffic or delay.
The Council will enable and, where appropriate, require development to contribute to:
Short-term (2017/18 – 2023 …
Long-term (2027/28 – 2032/33) vii New access off A64, including grade separated junction, to serve the Land West of Elvington Lane site (ST15)
viii.
Upgrading the A1237 to dual-carriageway standard between the A64 Askham Bryan junction
and A19 Shipton Road
junction Ix. Improvements to the A64 to mitigate trip growth on this route
…
The Council has identified specific projects as part of its Infrastructure Delivery Plan, highlighting timescale for delivery (whether short, medium and longer term) and associated funding and delivery bodies. This will be regularly reviewed and updated over the life of the Plan to support delivery. |
To enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012
Scheme delivery timescales updated to reflect progress on the ground.
Viii amended to reflect funding award for dualling between A19N and Hopgrove.
ix added to reflect forecast congestion on A64.
Link to Infrastructure Delivery Plan added. |
MM14.8 Policy T5: Strategic Cycle and Pedestrian Network Links and Improvements |
The Plan will support the delivery of general and specific schemes as set out in the Local Transport Plan 2011-2031 (LTP3) and subsequent associated (or complementary) investment programmes to provide a comprehensive cycling and pedestrian network and improve the environment for walking and cycling, including in York’s Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plan (LCWIP), which is in development.
The Council will enable and where appropriate require development to contribute to:
· Improvement and expansion to the strategic cycle network across the City Of York Council
· Improvements to the pedestrian network, including public realm enhancements and where feasible widening of the pavement
· New pedestrian / cycle bridges across waterways including the River Foss
The Plan will also support proposals that improve access to and
around new development, particularly strategic sites, and proposals
that improve other cycle and pedestrian routes that are neither
strategic network links nor routes included in the
|
To aid effectiveness and enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012
General amendments made to reflect new environment for cycling schemes - particularly LTN1/20 and the need for local transport authorities to produce Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plans. This replaces the former walking/ cycling scheme prioritisation. |
MM14.9 Policy T6: Development at or Near Public Transport Corridors, Interchanges and Facilities
|
Development will be supported in locations close to existing or
proposed public transport interchanges or
·
lead to a loss of access to the
interchange or facility/route · have a detrimental impact on the operation of the interchange or facility/ route; or
·
have a detrimental impact on the interchange or facility/route
·
prejudice the existing or future expansion of the interchange or
facility to accommodate more services or modes (
·
·
·
To prevent the loss or reuse
(for a different purpose) of disused public transport
corridors (former rail line
formations) or public transport facilities that could
otherwise be reused, new development will
· reopening of the transport corridor or facility for either heavy rail or light rail (e.g. tram-train) operation, or other form of ‘guided’ public rapid transport service; or
·
·
· the continued use or future use of the transport corridor as a walking or cycling route or as a route for horse-riding; or
·
·
Where development is sited close to or is likely to have an impact
on existing operational or
disused railway lines |
To aid effectiveness and enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012
|
MM14.10 Policy T7 Explanation – paragraph 14.49 |
14.49
The coverage and content of a |
For clarity on the planning application requirements. |
MM14.11 Policy T8: Demand Management
|
To improve the overall flow of traffic in and around York City
Centre, improve road safety, provide an environment more conducive
to walking and cycling, and contribute to overall environmental
quality development should
comply with the Council latest parking standards guidance,
incorporate appropriate demand management measures that reduce
congestion, improve public transport journeys, ease pedestrian and
cycle access to, within and through the development and improve the
streetscape.
Development that increases the number of long-stay (i.e. more than 4 hours parking) car parking spaces in and around the city centre will not be permitted.
|
To aid effectiveness and enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012
|
MM14.12 Policy C1: Communications Infrastructure |
|
To aid effectiveness and enhance clarity for decision making purposes in line with paragraph 154 of NPPF 2012
|
13. SECTION 15: DELIVERY AND MONITORING
Section 15: Delivery and Monitoring |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Modification Reference |
Proposed Modification |
Reason for change |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM15.1 Policy DM1: Infrastructure and Developer Contributions |
…The Council will seek contributions from developers to ensure that the necessary infrastructure is in place to support future development in York. Contributions will be sought to fund strategic infrastructure that helps to deliver the Vision, Spatial Strategy and Objectives of the Local Plan, as well as specific infrastructure that is necessary to deliver an individual site.
Where developers demonstrate that there are exceptional circumstances which justify the need for a viability assessment at the application stage, the Council will consider the assessment. If the development is demonstrably unviable, consideration will be given to modifying the phasing of obligations and may extend to including a review mechanism in any legal agreement.
… |
For effectiveness and to clarify that where a development is unviable as demonstrated by a viability assessment, CYC will consider modifying the phasing of obligations and may extend to including a review mechanism in any legal agreement. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM15.2 Policy DM1 explanation – paragraph 15.13 |
Planning
obligations (including contributions) and any levy will be sought in
accordance with legislation
and Government policy. |
Text deleted where it relates to CIL regulation changes. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM15.3 Policy DM1 explanation – paragraph 15.15 and Table 15.1 |
For
the sustainable transport component within the ‘Ensure
Efficient and Affordable Transport Links’ element of the
Plan’s Vision and Outcomes, preliminary transport modelling
predicts that the volume of traffic on the highway network overall
could increase by approximately
Replace Table 15. 1 with:
Table 15. 1: Comparison of Future Year Modelled Travel Times with Baseline Year Travel Times (2019)
|
Updates to incorporate recent transport modelling work. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MM15.4 Policy DM1 explanation – paragraph 15.21 |
…Normal development costs and the costs of high quality materials and urban design considerations are universally applicable and will not be allowed for in negotiations to reduce contributions. Review mechanisms may be secured as part of a legal agreement requiring a ‘re-run’ of the viability appraisal post-permission. Either actual or updated predictions of sales values and build costs of a development will be compared against the assumptions made in the application viability assessment to see whether the scheme’s viability has improved in the time that has passed to allow policy compliant contributions to be secured. |
To clarify the approach in relation to MM15.1 |