Example sentences of "of [art] new settlement " in BNC.
Next page| No | Sentence |
|---|---|
| 1 | Policy H two and the matters which are outstanding from our discussion yesterday are those which relate to the criteria and also the question of whether the policy should include specific guidance on the location of the new settlement . |
| 2 | It 's perfectly clear , should the policy include specific guidance on the location of the new settlement . |
| 3 | Erm I must say I share Peter 's view here that the er location of the new settlement , whether in general terms or by district , has not been through the public consultation process . |
| 4 | And I it 's a difficult question and one I 'm not so sure has an answer er but I do n't feel that one can be in anyway specific about , the location of the new settlement certainly by district , cos the exercise has n't been done . |
| 5 | I was a little surprised to hear yesterday the views of Mr about the need for this plan to identify the location or the general location of the new settlement . |
| 6 | Fine as far as it went we would expect during this er proposal the nature of the new settlement to be specific particularly in relation to the transport of the structure . |
| 7 | So it seems to me if we can agree on what criteria might be appropriate to look at the location of the new settlement on a strategic level , the final version of H two will in fact probably be much shorter , more concise er than the policy H two that we have at the moment . |
| 8 | Whilst there is no great dis difference in the distance of any of the sites in terms of , in aggregate , all the journeys which would be attracted to Cambridge , bearing in mind the role of the new settlement in serving Cambridge 's development needs , would be substantially higher in money terms and in the use of energy than most of the alternative proposals . |
| 9 | Depending on the location of the new settlement , it it could have traffic consequences beyond North Yorkshire boundaries . |
| 10 | All I 'd say on five chairman is that this issue of infrastructure particularly sewerage , sewerage , foul water and water supply is a major issue in York and the location of the new settlement I think needs to be very closely assessed in terms of er of five . |
| 11 | And and the shortage of er sewerage as such is not as su as such a criteria to on which to judge the provision of the new settlement because that 's part and parcel of the infrastructure that would be provided . |
| 12 | Now that does not entirely rule out any possibility of the new settlement within the Selby area , as er Mr has implied . |
| 13 | Erm it is a the the impact of the new settlement upon the worki the workings of Selby coalfield are recognized by British Coal . |
| 14 | Erm I have one other criteria which I would suggest you 'd need to take into account when considering the general location of the new settlement around York and that is to the need to what I term in my er planning submission , to plan for success . |
| 15 | And their very clear view based on their long and practical experience of the Greater York development market , is that a location South South West of York is more likely to be a successful location particularly for the employment component of the new settlement , than any other sector of York . |
| 16 | The fourth point , Chairman , er is the new settlement issue , and while that 's due for discussion on policy H Two , that issue does shall I suggest invade policy H One , because an appropriate form of words has to be agreed in policy H One to reflect the new settlement issue and as you 'll be aware the County Council is about a step by step approach towards the finalization of the new settlement erm strategy for Greater York , and then finally , a specific issue that you mentioned is the distribution of developments between the Greater York districts er within Greater York , now as you 'll be aware Chairman , that has been done informally , following the original structure plan in nineteen eighty the County and the Districts got together and agreed the distribution of housing and employment land in Greater York . |
| 17 | The other concern in the City Council 's evidence on H One er is this issue of distribution , I note Mr Davis 's comments about the difficulties of subdividing the Greater York allocation between different districts , and I I do acknowledge the difficulty in relation to Harrogate , and particularly Hambledon which obviously has a very small proportion of Greater York , on the other hand both Ryedale and Selby do contain a substantial proportion of the Greater York population , er based on my calculations of their er proportion of the population of Greater York which admittedly is a somewhat crude way of of doing estimates , but in the absence of of any other projections that was really the only way to do it , my estimate is that the er compared with the nine seven target of County Council would take in the could potentially be seen to be taking a share of four thousand two hundred in Ryedale and seventeen hundred for Selby , if you base it on their existing population distribution on er part outside the city , now I 'm not saying necessarily that 's how the way you would do it , but I I think it 's an indication that the scale of development in those two districts is quite significant in Greater York , our concern is that the policy as it currently stands does not give any real guidance as to the way in which distribution of development outside the city , but in Greater York , erm can be er should be di divided up , and I think the problem really occurs from the introduction of the new settlement into H One , erm I do n't want to stray into the H Two debate Chair , but I think it 's the fact that H One does include a figure for the new settlement , that the new settlement is not located within any particular district , but that all the district totals do include in effect a figure which is undetermined at this stage , that that would be absorbed by the new settlement , as I understand the policy at the moment , and I think that really does introduce a problem , erm because clearly all of the emerging districts wide local plans could be in conformity with the structure plan and not include the new settlement , I think it 's er interesting to note that the the D O E's recently published a good practice guide , on development plans , did particularly highlight the situation in Greater York , as a problem , as a shortcoming of the existing plan , and if I can just quote it , it does say this , on page forty three , it would seem appropriate for broad locations of new development to be established by means of an alteration to the structure plan . |
| 18 | A second factor which I 'd like to raise , and please stop me , sir , if I 'm not playing your ground rules here , is to get back to the original point made by Mr Davis , as to how this figure is going to be split between the districts , I think it 's absolutely essential that this figure is split between the districts , and it may well be , if you decide , sir , to recommend in favour of the new settlement that you may have to leave that as a floating figure to go around the districts , at the moment it is not . |
| 19 | That proposition presupposes that if you make a reduction in the district figures , then you must have an idea what the district contribution towards the Greater York figure is , er and I find it difficult to see that you can have , if you have a new settlement , if you have a new settlement the C provision for the new settlement floating in this table , erm but can I just say before we adjourn for coffee , that I really would like to have some very firm answers to the questions which are posed under issue two , er and particularly about two D and that is specific guidance on the location of the new settlement . |
| 20 | There we are , sir , that 's erm er er a very brief history erm of erm er of the new settlement strategy , erm it 's one clear that the County Council thinks is the appropriate way erm er for the Greater York area er to proceed . |
| 21 | I noted , and we 've already had the flavour of it , in to some respect today , that initially you had almost unanimity of support from the District Councils er York City have changed their view erm and equally Hambledon are very luke warm , if I put it no more than that , er on the idea of a new settlement in the sense that they probably support the principle of the new settlement , but not in Hambledon . |
| 22 | The City Council , faced with the view that er there was two thousand shortfall in dwellings , that clearly two of our most important neighbours in terms of their land area were unhappy with that proposal , agreed to er proceed to pursue the issue of the new settlement . |
| 23 | Certainly we can not provide a fully one hundred percent sustainable community , you 'd be talking about some vast city to move towards that , erm the re the real world is that the the hierarchy of settlements , erm all settlements , have greater or lesser degree of facilities depending on their size , and there 'll be no difference er to the new settlement , and I think to run an argument on the basis of Mr Curtis er has run it is unfair to the concept of the new settlement . |
| 24 | First of all if one looks at the draft advice on the erm regional plan guidance prepared by the Yorkshire and Humberside local planning authorities , they in fact advocate new settlement as an appropriate circumstances , there is not a policy which says that they are not appropriate or are inconsistent with other policy objectives , and I note in that respect that the D O E as Mr Donson said , are mildly supportive of the new settlement in the Greater York area . |
| 25 | So my answer to the question A is , I am not against a new settlement , of the right scale in the right location , but it is not a panacea , it is not an answer to all the questions , now it 's being offered in terms of a balanced strategy , I say that balanced strategy as put forward does not work , certainly beyond two thousand and six , and may grind to a halt well before two thousand and six if rates of development proceed er as they have done in certain years in the past , so it 's very important to look at that , can we just revisit the public acceptance of the new settlement , of course the public have accepted it and welcomed it , it has certain attractions , I support those attractions , however it 's easy for the public to accept that when measured against certain sites specific proposals that were put to them when they did not know where the new settlement would be , and still do not know , when new settlement locations are put forward it will be quite a different scenario . |
| 26 | The question of er P P G thirteen and transportation I think is vitally important , York will come into the position that Chester er where I was just at a transportation enquiry recently , it 's a very similar sort of city , it 's not quite the same as Cambridge , where Cambridge is leaping ahead on quite , some would say draconian transportation measures , York in the forceable future will have to look at specialist transportation measures , that 's important in terms of the planning policy guidance that is out , it 's also in the white paper , it may be in draft P P G thirteen , it 's also in I think it 's P P G twenty two , renewable energy , that we should now be looking at developments which is closer to work , that links then to the question of sustainability and viability of a new settlement , I am not aware , and and I put it guardedly in those terms , of any significant employment existing or proposed in any of the new settlement proposals . |
| 27 | And I think that the alternative of the new settlement is by far the best solution , provided it is mixed with some peripheral development , one ca n't go into a position where there is all peripheral development or all new settlement , it has to be in perfect balance , because some needs can not of course be met by the new settlement . |
| 28 | I 'm sorry , I just wanted to make a couple of points in response to erm things that people have said in relation to my opening statement , erm Mr Brook er mentioned the fact that er none of the employe none of the new settlement proposals of which he was aware , erm included an employment element , erm I just wanted to place on record the fact that our suggested reworking of policy H two does provide for an explicit land er amount of land for employment purposes , erm as part of the new settlement location , I wanted to say that because I , I 'm not invited to appear on your employment day , and I do feel that this is an important component of the the H two strategy , and clearly that employment component will be drawn from the Greater York allocation , the second point , Mr Sexton erm I believe said that in his view you could not find a site for a larger new settlement er within the or outside the Greater York er greenbelt , erm which would not result in physical coalescence with the existing villages in the area , now I 'm not sure whether he was referring to any particular size of larger new settlement , but I invite you to look at the er land range at one to fifty thousand er map of the area , and you will see that the area outside the greenbelt is characterized by erm a very rural area with sporadic villages , and my believe is that there are erm sites available within that area which could accommodate a larger new settlement , the planning point is of course the larger the new settlement becomes , I think the less that that the reduced number of sites you will have available to accommodate erm that proposal , because of its scale , and the third aspect I want to comment on Mr Cunnane and Mr Thomas erm said that Barton Willmore had not made a need argument for the new settlement , well if I 'm not mistaken that 's what we spent most of this morning discussing under policy H one , and I do n't erm I do n't wish , and I do n't suppose that I 'd be invited to repeat the comments made by Mr Grigson this morning , I do n't think there 's any need for that , but that establishes in our mind very clearly there is a need for a new settlement in the range of two thousand to two thousand five hundred dwellings , erm in the period up to two thousand and six , and I wo n't say anything more on that . |
| 29 | I 'm sorry , I just wanted to make a couple of points in response to erm things that people have said in relation to my opening statement , erm Mr Brook er mentioned the fact that er none of the employe none of the new settlement proposals of which he was aware , erm included an employment element , erm I just wanted to place on record the fact that our suggested reworking of policy H two does provide for an explicit land er amount of land for employment purposes , erm as part of the new settlement location , I wanted to say that because I , I 'm not invited to appear on your employment day , and I do feel that this is an important component of the the H two strategy , and clearly that employment component will be drawn from the Greater York allocation , the second point , Mr Sexton erm I believe said that in his view you could not find a site for a larger new settlement er within the or outside the Greater York er greenbelt , erm which would not result in physical coalescence with the existing villages in the area , now I 'm not sure whether he was referring to any particular size of larger new settlement , but I invite you to look at the er land range at one to fifty thousand er map of the area , and you will see that the area outside the greenbelt is characterized by erm a very rural area with sporadic villages , and my believe is that there are erm sites available within that area which could accommodate a larger new settlement , the planning point is of course the larger the new settlement becomes , I think the less that that the reduced number of sites you will have available to accommodate erm that proposal , because of its scale , and the third aspect I want to comment on Mr Cunnane and Mr Thomas erm said that Barton Willmore had not made a need argument for the new settlement , well if I 'm not mistaken that 's what we spent most of this morning discussing under policy H one , and I do n't erm I do n't wish , and I do n't suppose that I 'd be invited to repeat the comments made by Mr Grigson this morning , I do n't think there 's any need for that , but that establishes in our mind very clearly there is a need for a new settlement in the range of two thousand to two thousand five hundred dwellings , erm in the period up to two thousand and six , and I wo n't say anything more on that . |
| 30 | That 's not how we see it , sir , we see the the issue of the location of the new settlement as very much a strategic issue which should be settled in the structure plan context , and not left to local plans to decide . |