North Yorkshire Council
Community Development Services
Selby and Ainsty Area Planning Committee
20th November 2025
2021/1176/FUL - Erection of a roadside service facility, including a petrol filling station (sui generis), car wash, 3 jet wash bays and associated infrastructure
Report of the Head of Development Management – Community Development Services
|
1.0 Purpose of the Report 1.1. To determine a full planning application for the erection of a roadside service facility, including a petrol filing station, car wash bays and associated infrastructure at the junction of the A19 and A163, York Road, Barlby, Selby, North Yorkshire. 1.2. This application is reported to Committee because the Head of Development Management considers this application to raise significant planning issues such that it is in the public interest for the application to be considered by Committee. 1.3. The application was also requested to go before the planning committee by Cllr Stephanie Duckett due to the number of community responses and concerns over highway safety. |
2.0 SUMMARY
RECOMMENDATION: That planning permission be GRANTED subject to conditions listed below.
2.1. The application is for a new roadside service facility, including a petrol filing station, 475m2 shop with toilets, car wash bays, EV charging, parking and associated infrastructure including a substation and landscaping. It is intended to provide direct access from the A19 to service fuel demand north of Selby.
2.2. The site consists of a rectangular piece of overgrown scrub land to the north of the Barlby running parallel with the A19 where it meets the junction of the A163. The site has residential dwellings to the south and west and open countryside to the north and east. The site would be accessed via a new 4th arm on the existing roundabout and delivered through a Section 278 highway agreement.
2.3. The site lies adjacent but beyond development limits and is therefore designated as open countryside. The application has been amended on several occasions to overcome primary issues concerning highway safety, drainage, landscaping and residential amenity. The application has received significant local objections and some letters of support.
2.4. The consideration of the application is governed by policies which seek to control development in the countryside i.e. Core Strategy Policy SP 2, which allows for well-designed new buildings of an appropriate scale which in this case would contribute towards and improve the local economy. Likewise, Policy S13C allows for new development in the rural economy. Policy T9 of the Selby Local Plan is specific for new roadside facilities and suggests these may be outside built-up areas and the need for such a facility must be proven.
2.5. Officers are satisfied that the need argument is reasonably demonstrated and that the ancillary retail function of the shop will provide a local resource for Barlby and not harm the vitality of nearby shopping centres.
2.6. The benefits of the application include the site being in a relatively sustainable location directly access from the A19, providing choice for road users, the building is well design with solar PV, has EV charging stations and additional amenities to the village of Barlby. The development will also create additional employment opportunities during construction and operation.
2.7. Neutral matters, which include the site is flood zone 1, drainage matters are controlled by condition, the site is of low ecological value and some boundary landscaping is retained, the site is not at risk from contamination and heritage matters have been accounted for during further site investigation. There would also be no harm to highway safety as a result of the new roundabout arm and access. In addition, despite the objections it has not been proven that significant harm to residential amenity would be affected and this can be mitigated by conditions.
2.8. Matters which count against the proposal are the level of opposition from local residents, the visual impact of the scheme being on the edge of the settlement in a prominent location and the landscape setting which cannot be mitigated by planting due to the size and position and narrowness of the site.
3.0 Preliminary Matters
3.1. Access to the case file on Public Access can be found here:-
Documents for reference 2021/1176/FUL: Public Access
3.2. There have been several changes to the proposal since its submission in 2021, including to the level of information provided.
3.3. Additional information has been received in respect of archaeology, ecology, noise, drainage, landscaping and most recently highway safety.
3.4. The HGV refuelling element has been omitted from the scheme following discussions with the Local Highway Authority and the layout of the scheme has been changed on several occasions.
3.5. There is no relevant site history given that it is undeveloped land.
4.0 Site and Surroundings
4.1. The application site is 0.51 hectares and is an undeveloped overgrown scrubland site lying to the west of the A19 where it meets the A163 (Market Weighton Road) to the north of Barlby. Barlby lies 2 miles north of Selby and the application site is at its northern edge. Beyond the application site the A19 carries on to Riccall, Escrick and York. The A19 is a major arterial route through the former district area and is heavily trafficked.
4.2. The site is currently partially fenced with open views from the A19 and the surrounding residential estate to the west. To the south is a small copse of trees and highway verge, leading to residential dwellings along York Road. To the immediate west is York Road running north south and beyond this a modern housing estate, comprising of Privet Drive, Weighton View Drive, Holt Drive and Pastures Close. These dwellings are set back from York Road behind landscaping but have pedestrian access onto York Road which is use by walkers and for recreational purposes.
4.3. To the north and east of the application site are agricultural fields.
4.4. The site is accessed off the existing 3-arm roundabout and the new access will create the 4th arm. The site is linear being approximately 30m wide by 170m in length. The site is within Flood zone 1.
5.0 Description of Proposal
5.1. This application seeks full permission for a 24-hour roadside petrol filling station, including a 475m2 shop, 8 fuel pumps under a canopy, on site parking, EV charging stations, a substation, 5 valet bays, car wash and landscaping. The proposal also includes two pedestrian accesses to the west of the site linking through Pastures Close and Weighton View Drive.
5.2. The shop/kiosk will provide convenience retail (313sqm) and food to go (47sqm), as well as public toilets and back of house area.
5.3. Access to the site will be via a new western arm created off the existing roundabout.
6.0 Planning Policy and Guidance
6.1. Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 requires that all planning authorities must determine each application under the Planning Acts in accordance with Development Plan so far as material to the application unless material considerations indicate otherwise.
Adopted Development Plan
6.2. The Adopted Development Plan for this site is:
- Selby District Core Strategy Local Plan (adopted 22nd October 2013)
- Those policies in the Selby District Local Plan (adopted on 8 February 2005) which were saved by the direction of the Secretary of State and which have not been superseded by the Core Strategy
- Minerals and Waste Joint Plan (adopted 16 February 2022)
Emerging Development Plan – Material Consideration
6.3. The emerging Development Plan for this site was the Selby Local Plan Revised Publication 2024 (Reg 19). Following reports to the Executive committee, and endorsement at Full Council on 26 February, work on the ELP has ceased.
6.4. Having regard to the above, there is no emerging local plan to consider, but some weight may be given to the evidence base.
6.5. The North Yorkshire Local Plan is the emerging development plan for this site however no weight can be applied in respect of this document at the current time as it is at an early stage of preparation. As the emerging Local Plan progresses through the various stages, it can attract increasing weight in decision making. At the point of adoption, it is a statutory document to which Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 can apply.
Guidance - Material Considerations
6.6. Relevant guidance for this application is:
- National Planning Policy Framework 2024
- National Planning Practice Guidance
- National Design Guide 2021
7.0 Consultation Responses
7.1. The following consultation responses have been received and have been summarised below.
7.2. Barlby and Osgodby Town Council: Object
Highways and Access
The access is inadequate. The A19/A163 roundabout is the minimum size for a roundabout on an A road leading to concerns that HGVs may struggle to access the site without obstructing the roundabout, leading to congestion on the A19. The Transport Assessment seems to be insufficient to predict actual vehicle numbers. The Road Safety Audit raises a number of issues requiring mitigation. There is also the potential for the Old York Road to be used as convenient parking for shop users – adding danger and nuisance to a lane without street lighting or pavements that is well used by young people cycling to Barlby High School (from Riccall and Barley Fields). Object on highway, road safety and traffic management grounds.
Scale Design and Character
The scale and layout of the proposed development is poorly designed, overly dense for a narrow site, has inadequate turning space and is out of character with the rural location. It is an intrusive development on a greenfield site outside defined development limits. The development will have an adverse impact on the landscape and adjacent housing and lead to increased noise from the A19 by removing the ‘sound barrier’ provided by the vegetation on the current natural area. Object to the scale, design and character of the proposal.
Environment and Ecology
The proposal will lead to light, noise and environmental pollution (and odour including exhaust fumes) which will be to the detriment of physical/mental health, especially for children and vulnerable persons. There is potential for spillage or seeping of hazardous substances into local watercourses. There are existing local drainage issues, and any pollutants will eventually coalesce in the Barlby Ponds site, which is a Site of Importance for Nature Conservation (NYCC accredited). The proposed development site has remained unused for many years and is a haven for wildlife. Mitigation measures including a green buffer would be essential to protect local housing. An Environmental/ Ecological Assessment is essential to assess the impact of the development in general and on local flora and fauna (the adjacent estate has bat boxes) before proceeding with this application. Object on grounds of impact on the landscape and environment.
Amenity
By operating 24 hours per day the development will have an unacceptable adverse impact on neighbouring properties and the wider area, through loss of amenity and privacy (including the continuous impact of site lighting, noise and vehicle headlights. Object on loss of amenity grounds.
Sustainability
This proposal to provide a predominantly fossil fuel facility is contrary to the Government’s green agenda and aim to convert to electric vehicles by 2030. There are also concerns about the impact of decommissioning such sites. Object on sustainability grounds and the use of a greenfield (not brownfield) site.
Health and Wellbeing
A shop providing fast food should not be in close proximity to a local High School (within
easy walking distance) and is therefore at odds with the National objective of improving
the diet/health of young people. Object on health and wellbeing grounds.
Crime and anti social behaviour
Statutory bodies have a duty to consider the impact of crime and disorder on all
developments. There is potential for late night activity associated with the operating
hours, remote location of the site, facilities and associated parking.
For the above reasons the Town Council considers that the development is contrary
to the following extant saved policies in the Selby District Local Plan 2005:
ENV 1 (Control of Development)
ENV 2 (Environmental Pollution and Contaminated Land)
ENV 3 (Light Pollution)
ENV 4 (Hazardous Substances)
T9 (Roadside Facilities and the Travelling Public)
In addition, it does not accord with Spatial Development Policy SP2 of the Selby
District Core Strategy 2013 – nor policies intended to promote sustainable
development (Policy SP15), to protect and enhance the environment (Policy SP18),
and to improve design and amenity (Policy SP19).
7.3. Riccall Parish Council – This application is not in Riccall Parish, however, the Council wanted to pass on their objection on the following grounds: it was felt that another fuelling station was unnecessary, and it was in an inappropriate location with bad entries in/out of the station. There was also potential for an increase in traffic and light/noise pollution.
7.4. Division Member(s): Cllr Stephanie Duckett requested the application be considered by planning committee due to the number of local objections and concern about safety of entry and exit on the roundabout.
7.5. Highways - No objections based on the amended details. Conditions were suggested covering the need for construction of the new access, visibility splays, the detailed engineering drawings and delivery of off site works, the need for a Stage 2 Road Safety Audit, provision for access, parking and turning area delivery, Construction Management Plan and lighting details.
7.6. HER Officer (Archaeology) – No objection. The application site is within a landscape of intensive later prehistoric and Roman activity. A scheme of trial trenching was required as opposed to a geophysical survey due to the types of archaeological remains expected. This was undertaken and a condition is required covering the need for a scheme of archaeological mitigation recording in response to the ground disturbing works.
7.7. Environmental Health – No objection, following 3 iterations of the Noise Assessment, subject to conditions covering mitigation measures identified in the noise report.
7.8. Yorkshire Water – No objection subject to condition to ensure the development is carried out in accordance with an agreed drainage scheme.
7.9. Ouse and Derwent Internal Drainage Board – No objection subject to a condition ensuring the development is constructed as per the approved drainage strategy.
7.10. LLFA – Further information required. The last response was 14.5.2024 which considered the revised layout drainage scheme, Saldanha Ref 2717 Rev 03 17.4.2024. The LLFA stated that since the attenuation tank volumes had changed, they require a new set of hydraulic calculations to ensure flooding to the surrounding area wouldn’t occur.
Officer note: the full package of drainage details is being resecured by condition so this can be covered in the condition discharge process.
7.11. The Environment Agency – No objection.
7.12. North Yorkshire Fire & Rescue Service– No objection.
7.13. Ecology – No objection. Initially required the applicant to submit a Preliminary Ecological appraisal. This demonstrated mainly scrub removal, but a DEFRA Biodiversity Metric 3.0 was required to demonstrate objectively the balance of biodiversity loss and gain. This resulted in a 83.8% net loss, which translates into 2.28 habitats units requiring to be purchased off site. This is to be controlled by condition and the need for Landscape Ecological Management Plan for the landscaping within the site.
7.14. Natural England – Natural England is not able to fully assess the potential impacts of this proposal on statutory nature conservation sites or protected landscapes or, provide detailed advice on the application.
7.15. National Grid – No objection as no electrical assets in this area.
7.16. Scientific Team (contamination) – no objection on contamination issues subject to conditions covering the need for a site investigation, remediation, verification and reporting of unexpected contamination.
Local Representations
7.17. The application was first publicised on the 26.10.2021 via site notices. The application was republicized on the 25.2.2025 adverting the amended plans and due to the significant time delay since the first publication.
7.18. 130 letters of objection were received and 14 letters of support.
7.19. The objections were as follows:
· The original justification no longer valid - The primary justification for the development was an alleged shortfall of HGV fuelling facilities in the area. The applicant used this to argue that the proposal would fill a critical infrastructure gap. However, the revised application has removed all provision for HGV refuelling, rendering this justification obsolete. Without this element, the proposal lacks demonstrable need and fails to meet the test for sustainable development under both national and local policy.
· Highways and Access Concerns Persist Despite removing HGV fuelling, the development will still receive: - Frequent fuel deliveries by large tankers. - Regular HGV deliveries to the convenience store. The site remains narrow, constrained, and poorly configured to safely accommodate large vehicle access and turning.
· The disproportionate scale of the retail unit only exacerbates access and traffic problems, particularly for long or turning vehicles.
· No benefit to the local community.
· Loss of countryside.
· Inadequate and Outdated Transport Data.
· The proposal no longer offers significant economic or infrastructure benefits.
· Will introduce an inappropriately scaled retail use with limited justification. The revised proposal conflicts with the Local Plan and fails to satisfy the principles of sustainable development under the NPPF.
· Significant insurmountable highway safety concerns.
· Negative impact on local amenity, through noise, disturbance, light spillage.
· Inappropriate scale/form of development.
· Poor quality of design.
· This will threaten other local businesses in Barlby and Riccall through competition.
· Loss to ecology, habitat loss for birds.
· The operations proposed are environmentally objectionable and in total reverse of Green Agenda of the Council and nationally.
· Safety from the delivery, storage and dispensing of volatile inflammable substances and risk of fire from charge of EVs must be paramount at any location.
· The existing land acts as a defensive soft barrier against traffic noise from the A19 and it should be retained as that amenity, not be used to create more disturbance by development as proposed.
· Concerns over air quality through increased use of vehicle activity.
· There is minimal chance this development would create sustainable local 'skilled' jobs and indeed will risk that the existing village shop and pharmacy facilities will suffer and their jobs be lost.
· It is noted that the Amended Plan does not now include staff parking- that is no doubt to be shifted onto York Road (not part of the Applicant's land)- that absence does not mean all staff must then be local, or able to use public transport or cycles.
· The shop (which will open into the night) is an unwelcome 'attraction' for anti-social activities and litter, and noise - nuisances that will affect amenity and personal safety.
· Petrol stations themselves are greatly at risk of crime due to operating at late hours, often handling large amounts of cash, with a lack of staffing and security meaning that they are prime targets for both opportunistic and organised criminals.
· Environmental Concerns: The site is near green space and potential drainage areas. Fuel runoff or spills could pose risks to local water quality and the surrounding environment.
· As will be seen from the number of objections, the common vision of the community is to maintain the status quo regarding the current infrastructure for the village/immediate vicinity, and there is very strong feeling that granting permission would be detrimental for the health of the community at large.
· Lack of Regard for Public and Local Opposition, despite widespread opposition from local residents, councillors and the Barlby & Osgodby Town Council, the scheme appears set to proceed with minimal revision. This raises serious concerns about whether the views of the community are being genuinely considered and whether the planning system is operating in a way that meaningfully reflects public input.
· The % of electric vehicles including light vans & hgvs is now at 23% of the market and rising exponentially. It is predicted that at the present rate of closures of filling stations they will be mostly extinct by 2035. If this application succeeds, and the station built by 2027, it will have at best a life of 8 years.
· The old A19 road to the rear being used by hgvs to park up directly opposite housing.
7.20. The support letters were as follows:
· Refuelling options are limited on the northern side of Selby when you aren't going to York.
· The wider selection of local amenities is welcomed.
· Would offer good service to Barlby and surrounding area. Much needed facilities.
· Only option at the moment is to drive into Selby to get petrol and the stations there are becoming increasingly busy. Having one closer to home will be very convenient.
8.0 Environment Impact Assessment (EIA)
9.0 Main Issues
9.1. The key considerations in the assessment of this application are:
- Principle of development, including the argument for need
- Access, Transport and Highway Safety
- Heritage Impacts of the Proposal
- Contamination and ground conditions
- Noise and residential amenity
- Flooding and Drainage
- Design and Effect upon the Character of the Area.
- Trees and Landscaping
- Ecology
- Minerals
- Other matters
10.0 ASSESSMENT
Principle of Development
10.1. The site lies adjacent but just beyond the development limits of Barlby and as such the land is designated as open countryside. The application therefore has both Core Strategy and Local Plan policies that are relevant to the determination.
10.2. Policy SP1 of the Core Strategy outlines that "when considering development proposals, the Council will take a positive approach that reflects the presumption in favour of sustainable development contained in the National Planning Policy Framework” and sets out how this will be undertaken.
10.3. Core Strategy policy SP2 sets out the spatial development strategy for the district and states that the majority of new development will be directed towards the town and more sustainable villages. Policy SP2 states that development in the open countryside will be limited to the replacement or extension of existing buildings, the re-use of buildings preferably for employment purposes, and well-designed new buildings of an appropriate scale which in this case would contribute towards and improve the local economy and enhance or maintain the vitality of rural communities, in accordance with policy SP13.
10.4. Policy SP13C states that in rural areas, sustainable development (on both greenfield and brownfield land) which brings sustainable economic growth through local employment opportunities, or the expansion of businesses and enterprise will be supported, including (inter alia) the development of well-designed new buildings. Crucially, in all cases development should be sustainable and be appropriate in scale and type to its location, not harm the character of the area and seek a good standard of amenity. Whilst this is are isn’t rural in its overall character, it is outside development limits and therefore is applicable.
10.5. Saved policy T9 of the SDLP provides guidance in relation to roadside facilities and the supporting text acknowledges that suitable sites will often only be available outside built-up areas. The policy requires that:
1. There is a demonstrable need for the facilities and the proposal would not result in a proliferation of facilities in the locality;
2. The proposal would not create conditions prejudicial to highway safety or which would have a significant effect on local amenity;
3. The nature and scale of the proposal would be appropriate to the locality and would not have a significant adverse effect on the character of the area; and
4. The proposal would achieve a high standard of design, materials and landscaping
10.6. The proposal includes a local convenience store element with a retail sales area of around 313 sq m. Retail development is a town centre use as defined by the NPPF and would not normally be located in the open countryside. However, the provision of local shopping facilities is supported in policy by paragraphs 96 and 98 of the NPPF. In particular, paragraph 98 of the NPPF requires that planning decisions plan positively for the provision of community facilities, such as local shops, in order to achieve healthy, inclusive and safe places.
10.7. CS policy SP14 states that the health and well-being of town centres and local shopping facilities and services will be maintained and enhanced by (inter alia) supporting local shops and services, including village shops to serve the day-to-day needs of existing communities.
10.8. Saved SDLP policy S4 relates specifically to retail proposals in the open countryside and states that outside development limits proposals for retail shops and cafes will only be permitted where:
1) The proposal is ancillary to an existing use; or
2) It would secure the preservation of a building of architectural or historic importance; or
3) There is a demonstrable need for the particular outlet in the locality
and provided that:
i. The scale of provision would be appropriate to the locality;
ii. The proposal would not create conditions prejudicial to highway safety or which would have a significant adverse effect on local amenity; and
iii. The proposal would not have a significant adverse effect on the character and appearance of the countryside.
10.9. These types of new modern roadside facilities with local shops are now commonplace throughout the UK. The applicants within their Planning Statement state that “the traditional purpose of roadside services has altered considerably. This traditional model was based primarily around the sale of fuel, with a very small ancillary kiosk that sold sweets, drinks, cigarettes and car related products. It is noticeable that few of these petrol stations now exist and have either been redeveloped for alternative uses, modern roadside services or are left vacant. Profitability relative to fuel sales alone is poor, and as a consequence petrol stations have had to diversify into the modern-day roadside facility that are now common place on the road networks in the UK.”
10.10. Modern roadside services are not now simply used as a means to refuel, they also provide invaluable respite for drivers. The Planning Statement directs the reader to Annex B of the DfT Circular 2/2013 (updated July 2022) which starts “The Strategic Road Network and the Delivery of Sustainable Development’ relates to Roadside Facilities and confirms their importance in terms of the safety and welfare of road users.” The Planning Statement details that modern service stations are designed to suit requirements of the DfT Circular as well as motorist expectation by providing a place to stop, rest and relax during the course of a journey. This includes having availability to food and drink as well as toilets, and in some instances shower facilities. Modern petrol filling stations now have an ancillary retail offer to provide basic top up items, encouraging linked trips between refuelling and more general retailing. This is not unique to the applicant and reflects current industry norm in response to the DfT Circular, as well as motorist expectations.
Demonstrable Need for Additional Facilities
10.11. The need for the facility has been questioned in the objection letters particularly given the location of other similar facilities along the A19 at Escrick and Selby. The Planning Statement addresses this issue and states “The sites location adjacent to the strategic road network (SRN) has been purposefully selected to take advantage of the high number of vehicular trips on the SRN when compared to the local road network (LRN). Visibility and prominence of the site to the SRN is key in order to raise awareness of the facility to passing motorists whom may be in need of refuelling, but also rest and relaxation on land distance journeys.”
10.12. The Planning Statement states that the “majority of trade will still be attracted from passing motorists. The proposed retail space will be ancillary to the main fuel sales function of the site, with linked trips for fuel and shopping being made. As such the kiosk will not operate as a stand-alone retail unit and would not be in direct competition with any other local shopping facility in Barlby. Ancillary retail floorspace of this size is a common feature within all modern service stations across the country, indeed the petrol station redevelopment schemes at Escrick, South Milford and Selby (Tesco Express petrol station) have comparable footprint sizes to the current proposal. The larger format kiosk enables a greater convenience retail offer, encouraging top up shopping to be undertaken on the commute home from work or lunch break, as well as a food to go offer (Subway) providing a welcome alternative to the pre-packed sandwich traditionally sold.”
10.13. The planning statement also looks at 6 other local roadside facilities and the facilities they provide.
To the North:
1. York Road Garage, Escrick, YO19 6EY - located approximately 5.31miles to the north of the application site.
To the East:
2. Double Six Service Station, Weighton Road, Selby, YO8 5LE – located approximately 1.2 miles east of the application on the A163.
To the West:
3. Southlands BP, Low Street, South Milford, LS25 5AT – located approximately 1m north of the A63.
Selby:
4. Abbeyside Filling Station, Bawtry Road, Selby, YO8 8NA– located approximately 1km north of the junction with the A63.
5. Tesco Express Petrol Station, (Brayton) Doncaster Rd, Selby, YO8 9EG – located approximately 900m north of the junction with the A63.
6. Millgate Service Station, Selby, YO8 3LL – located on B1223 to the north of Selby.
10.14. The applicants state that “the assessment of the sites identified above demonstrates that there is a considerable under provision of roadside services serving the SRN, with only one service station being directly accessible from the SRN itself (York Road Garage, Escrick). The assessment demonstrates that there are 4 other petrol stations located centrally within the urban areas of Selby and South Milford, given the distance from the SRN these sites are likely to be used by local residents as opposed to those travelling in a general sense along the SRN. Whilst local residents have available access to petrol stations located within the towns that they live, other motorists that use the SRN must divert away from the main road in order to access roadside services. This adds additional trip time for the motorist and the diversion encourages additional traffic movements within the residential area that would not normally be using the local road network. Unless local to the area, a lot of drivers that travel along the SRN will not be aware of these petrol stations as no signage of the facility exists on the SRN. The presence of just 1 service station on the A19/ A63 SRN demonstrates a lack of facilities directly available to the motorist.”
10.15. Officers have assessed this information and agree that many of the southern sites contained in the assessment are not directly comparable to this proposed facility and are smaller and not directly located on the SRN. However, the relatively new facility at York Road Garage at Esrick is directly comparable. This is 5 miles north so the need argument is finely balanced.
10.16. Also, since the application was made in 2021, there has been a new roadside facility just to the south of Selby where the A63 meets the A1041 Bawtry Road. This is known as the Esso Selby next to Lidl and is modern facility permitted under 2020/0976/FUL (11.3.2021). This is accessed directly from the strategic road network and hosts Morrisons Daily, Costa and Greggs and is similar to the facility proposed. This lies 3.6 miles south of the application site. The assessment didn’t take account of this presumably as it wasn’t constructed at the time of the planning statement being written, however is now a consideration in the argument for need.
10.17. In addition, the original need argument included the need for HGV refuelling, however this has since been removed from the scheme due to concerns over highway safety and the site not being wide enough to allow HGV’s to comfortably manoeuvre within the site. The layout of the scheme will control this; however, space exists on the western boundary of the site for a HGV delivery bay which could be used to manoeuvre if HGV’s inadvertently enter the site, however unlikely.
10.18. Regardless of the removal of HGV refuelling and absence of the Esso Bawtry Road roadside facility being assessed, officers do not consider a reason for refusal could be substantiated on a lack of need, as Policy T9 which requires a demonstration of need is 20 years old and this isn’t required by the NPPF. Officers are therefore satisfied with the arguments made in support of the scheme in accordance with Local Plan Policy T9. The proposed facility will be also used locally by residents of Barlby and is sustainably located close to a large residential housing estate.
10.19. The applicants also supplied a retail sequential test by PWA Planning (Dec 2021) as requested by officers. The applicants state that this has been provided in the spirit of cooperation, despite the fact that the floorspace falls significantly under para 94 NPPF 2,500m2 threshold guidance and that the small retail offering provided within the petrol filling station shop is ancillary.
10.20. Whilst the retail sequential test is now somewhat dated, it demonstrates that there is a distinct lack of sites within Selby Town Centre and the other defined local centres to accommodate a development of this size and nature. The sequential test reiterates that the applicant’s business model requires roadside sites that are located along major transport networks, which have a flow of vehicle movements and whereby there are no similar facilities within close proximity. The applicant’s research has identified that the proposed location, which lies adjacent to the A19 road and in proximity to the A163 road, as the ideal location for such facilities. The vast majority of properties available fall well below the required floorspace and the Applicant’s requirements, especially when considering the nature of the development, which requires site’s to be local in proximity to local highway networks. The defined centres are tightly developed areas with limited space for this type of development.
10.21. Officers have considered the sequential test and are satisfied that there are no suitable alternative sites in the town centre to accommodate the development and agree that this type of facility needs to be located upon strategic road networks to attract passing motorists, which many of the identified sites do not meet. Also, officers consider the proposed shop is considered to have a minor impact on the main retail centres, representing a development of an appropriate size and use for the locality. This therefore accords with Core Strategy Policy SP 14.
10.22. In terms of the wider policy framework, the development is well designed and of an appropriate scale and will directly improve the local economy, provide convenience and will employ up to 33 part time jobs. This accords with Core Strategy policies SP 2 and SP 13.
10.23. In terms of the wider environmental sustainability credentials, the report below demonstrates that the scheme will have no significant environmental impact respecting the character of the countryside that the site sits within. The development provides for renewable energy technologies including photovoltaics, electric vehicle charging, sustainable urban drainage, and seeks to conserve some ecological value through the retention of existing boundary landscape features. The scheme aims to minimise environmental pollution such as light and noise, and this is controlled by suitable planning conditions. The development promotes the use of alternative modes of transport through the enhancement of off site pedestrian routes, provision of cycle parking and electric vehicle charging.
10.24. In terms of the social benefits the close relationship of the site to adjacent housing means that the development is highly accessible to local residents and serve as a local shop and enhance the available of services for the Barlby village. In terms of the economic benefits, the facility draw trade from passing motorists and will not harm the vitality of any existing centres. The proposed development will create 33 part time jobs and create jobs in the construction of the facility.
10.25. Therefore, in accordance with Policy SP1 of the Local Plan, the Council should take a positive approach to this application, reflective of sustainable development as set out within the NPPF. The proposal therefore is complaint with Core Strategy Policy SP 2, SP 13, SP 14 and Local Plan Policies S4 and T9.
Access, transport and highway safety
10.26. Core Strategy Policy SP15 requires the proposal should minimise traffic growth by providing a range of sustainable travel options (including walking, cycling and public transport) through Travel Plans and Transport Assessments and facilitate advances in travel technology such as Electric Vehicle charging points; and make provision for cycle lanes and cycling facilities, safe pedestrian routes and improved public transport facilities.
10.27. Core Strategy Policy SP19 requires the proposal to be accessible to all users and easy to get to and move through; and create rights of way or improve them to make them more attractive to users, and facilitate sustainable access modes, including public transport, cycling and walking which minimise conflicts.
10.28. Local Plan Policy ENV1 requires account is taken on the relationship of the proposal to the highway network, the proposed means of access, the need for road/junction improvements in the vicinity of the site, and the arrangements to be made for car parking.
10.29. Local Plan Policy T1 states “Development proposals should be well related to the existing highways network and will only be permitted where existing roads have adequate capacity and can safely serve the development, unless appropriate off-site highway improvements are undertaken by the developer”.
10.30. NPPF paragraph 109 requires transport issues be considered from the earliest of development proposals so that impacts of development on transport networks can be addressed. Paragraph 116 states “Development should only be prevented or refused on highways grounds if there would be an unacceptable impact on highway safety, or the residual cumulative impacts on the road network would be severe, taking into account all reasonable future scenarios.”
10.31. The impact on the highway network is one of the key considerations of this application and is one of the reasons behind its delay in reaching Planning Committee, as the agent has had to continuously amend the plans over the last 4 years and provided additional information to satisfy the Highway Authority.
10.32. The application as originally submitted was not accompanied by any additional highway information. Soon after validation, a Stage 1 Road Safety Audit report by Meraki Alliance, Designers Response Form and a Transport Assessment by Dynamic Transport Planning dated Sept 2021 were submitted in Oct 2021. This prompted the first Local Highway Authority response in December 2021. This required a series of changes to the swept paths to include smaller vehicles, pedestrian footpaths to be shown, visibility splays needed to be marked on the plan, pedestrian provision needed enhancing by extending the footway to the south to meet Weighton View Drive. In addition, surfacing and white lining needed further detail, as did road lighting, drainage and parking provision. Additional information was also requested in respect of road signage and changes to the accuracy of the Transport Assessment. A Travel Plan was also request.
10.33. A drainage and lighting schedule were submitted, as was an addendum to the Transport Assessment dated Feb 22 and a Framework Travel Plan dated Feb 22. Further information was also supplied in respect of land levels and drainage. This prompted the 2nd substantive highway response dated 3.5.2023, which required widening of the access road and additional accessible spaces. The highway officer still had concerns over the content of the Transport Assessment and the accident data within the Road Safety Audit needed updating. A series of other general points were made regarding the layout, signage, surfacing, lighting and the Travel Plan.
10.34. The third substantive highway response was January 2024 and was in response to the additional information and technical note submitted. This still requested the carriageway be widened and the accident data reviewed, however it satisfied the other issues raised i.e. parking, traffic flow, traffic model validation. Some general points were also outstanding i.e. HGV parking, signage, drainage, surfacing and Travel Plan changes.
10.35. The highway response dated 10th December 2024 once again reviewed the highway position and required further changes to the technical data, site plan and off site highway works. Highway officers welcomed the improvements to pedestrian safety introduced along York Road. A suite of amendments and additional documents were submitted which resulted in the 5th highway response dated 5th March 2024. This still required changes to cycle parking, and a series of other layout changes and additional information, however the requirement for a travel plan was removed as the council’s requirement for one was removed due to the scale of the development. The highway officer commented on the 25th April 2024 as a result of changes to the layout and detailed landscaping proposals. Again, some elements were satisfied some remained outstanding.
10.36. A Stage 1 Road Safety Audit was completed by the applicants and the site plan was amended to version 4X which shows how many iterations it has had to pick up the changes required.
10.37. The final Highway response is dated 16th October 2025 and raises no objections. It details how the application has been amended to remove the initial HGV refuelling element of the proposal due to highway safety concerns. The response details how access to the site will be taken from a fourth arm onto the existing A19/A163 roundabout and how the Highway Authority has liaised with the applicants to secure a suitable access arrangement. The creation of the 4th arm will be secured and delivered by a S278 Highway Agreement. Junction modelling has been undertaken, and a Stage 1 Road safety Audit has been carried out on the access and highway improvements to York Road. The audit has identified 6 problems which the Design Organisation have provided recommendations on how to address these and Overseeing Organisation (NYC) has agreed to these approaches.
10.38. The level of parking on the proposed site is considered acceptable and further consideration will be required to address glare and the level and locations of street lighting. The applicant has provided further information relating to the boundary fencing near the pedestrian/cycle access onto York Road and the reasons behind the need for the fencing to remain at 1.8 metres, which is related to reducing noise and light from the site. Since the fencing is not located where the active travel accesses join the carriageway the Highway Authority accepts this reasoning.
10.39. The off site highway mitigation measures include:
• Creation of a fourth arm on the A19/A163 roundabout, along with associated
drainage, signing, lining and lighting works prior to construction.
• Creation of 2 active travel accesses and uncontrolled crossings onto York Road prior to occupation.
• Installation of north and southbound footway on York Road tying into existing footway and the provision of an uncontrolled crossing near Beech Croft prior to occupation.
10.40. Conditions were suggested covering the need for construction of the new access, visibility splays, the detailed engineering drawings and delivery of off site works, the need for a Stage 2 Road safety Audit, provision for access, parking and turning area delivery, construction management Plan and lighting details. This will ensure compliance with Selby District Local Plan Policies ENV1, T1, T2, and Core Strategy Polices SP15 and SP 19 section 9 of the NPPF.
Heritage impacts of the proposal
10.41. In determining applications regard should be had to the statutory duty of Section 66(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 to have special regard to the desirability of preserving listed buildings, or their setting, or any features of special architectural, or historic interest which they possess. NPPF paragraph 207 seeks to ensure in determining applications Local Planning Authorities should assess the significance of any heritage asset that may be affected by the proposal.
10.42. Whilst there are no designated assets on the site, non-designated assets also need consideration. NPPF paragraph 216 states “The effect of an application on the significance of a non-designated heritage asset should be taken into account in determining the application. In weighing applications that directly or indirectly affect non-designated heritage assets, a balanced judgement will be required having regard to the scale of any harm or loss and the significance of the heritage asset.”
10.43. In terms of archaeology, Policy ENV28 requires that where development proposals affect sites of known or possible archaeological interest, the District Council will require an archaeological assessment/evaluation to be submitted as part of the planning application. The relevant Local Plan policies include Core Strategy Policy SP 18 ‘Protecting and Enhancing the Environment’.
10.44. The application was not initially supported by any heritage information, as the site is not within or close to a conservation area, not near any listed buildings or scheduled ancient monuments. The Local Authority Heritage Officer noted the application site is within a landscape of intensive later prehistoric and Roman activity surrounded on all sides by known cropmarks consistent with settlement and agriculture from these periods. The recent housing site to the west identified that these cropmarks represented a complex sequence of high-status Roman activity including a military settlement with a bathhouse and ceramic evidence of an Emperor cult. Evidence also suggests that the site was previously bisected by a northwest-southeast aligned embankment that provided access to Turnhead Bridge (now demolished) carrying Market Weighton Road (A163) over the former railway line. The impact of the construction of this embankment on archaeological remains (should they be present) is not known, however if it was built up from the existing ground level then there need not have been a significant impact. The decommissioning of the embankment and bridge may in fact have caused greater disturbance than its construction.
10.45. Given the significance of the Roman remains excavated at the nearby housing site the Heritage officer requested a scheme of trail trenching be undertaken to identify and describe the nature and significance of any surviving archaeological remains. This was opposed to a geophysical survey which wouldn’t be productive as the former embankment is likely to have left a magnetic signature across the area that would mask the results. The trial trench was required pre determination.
10.46. The applicant commissioned Humber Field Archaeology to undertake a Written scheme of Investigation (WSI) and trial trenching and the results were submitted in November 2002. The trial trenching revealed a number of Roman features at the northern end of the site. These were sealed by approximately 1m of modern overburden. To the south the modern overburden was deeper to an extent that archaeological remains were not exposed within the safe limits of the excavation. It is possible that archaeological features are present in the southern two-thirds of the site, although sealed by at least 1.5m of modern overburden. The Roman remains at the site are important as they relate directly to a significant military settlement excavated to the immediate west and can help to shed light on its broader landscape context.
10.47. Depending on the amounts of ground reduction necessary it is possible that archaeological remains will in effect be sealed beneath the development. However, the detail for the fuel tanks show these at over 4m below ground and therefore deeper excavations will be necessary which may have an impact in the northern third of the site where there is less modern overburden. The trial trenching report makes recommendations for a set piece archaeological excavation in the northern third of the site with archaeological monitoring on any deeper excavations in the southern part of the site. The council’s heritage officer supports this recommendation and suggests a condition to cover to secure the archaeological recording. This is in order to ensure that a detailed record is made of any deposits/remains that will be disturbed. This will ensure compliance with Local Plan Policy ENV28, Core Strategy Policy SP 18 ‘Protecting and Enhancing the Environment and paragraph 216 of the NPPF.
Contaminated land and ground conditions
10.48. This proposal is a for a fuel station so the ground conditions for the use need to be appropriate and there is potential contamination risk from the storage of fuel on the site. The site is also close to housing as shown on the site location plan.
10.49. Policy ENV2 of the Local Plan states “Proposals for development which would give rise to, or would be affected by, unacceptable levels of noise, nuisance, contamination or other environmental pollution including groundwater pollution will not be permitted unless satisfactory remedial or preventative measures are incorporated as an integral element in the scheme.” Part B of the policy allows contaminated land conditions to be attached to permissions.
10.50. Core Strategy Policy SP18 seeks to protect the high quality of the natural and man-made environment by ensuring that new development protects soil, air and water quality from all types of pollution. This is reflected in Policy SP19 (k), which seeks to prevent development from contributing to, or being put an unacceptable risk from unacceptable levels of soil, or water pollution, or land instability.
10.51. NPPF paragraph 187(e) requires decisions should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by: preventing new and existing development from contributing to, being put at unacceptable risk from, or being adversely affected by, unacceptable levels of soil, air, water or noise pollution or land instability; and remediating and mitigating despoiled, degraded, derelict, contaminated and unstable land, where appropriate. Paragraph 198 requires decisions should also ensure that new development is appropriate for its location taking into account the likely effects (including cumulative effects) of pollution on health, living conditions and the natural environment, as well as the potential sensitivity of the site, or the wider area to impacts that could arise from the development.
10.52. The proposal does not involve an end use that would be particularly vulnerable to contamination. The application was also not accompanied by any desk-based risk assessment for contamination and no consultation with the contaminated land team originally occurred. The land isn’t thought to be of high risk for contamination given its undeveloped nature, and it has been recently agreed with the Scientific Team to add conditions to ensure an assessment is undertaken prior to development commencing and that a remediation strategy is produced and implemented if anything is found. It is therefore considered appropriate to deal with this by condition. The proposals are acceptable with respect to contamination at this stage in accordance with Policy ENV2 of the Local Plan and Policy SP19 of the Core Strategy.
10.53. In light of the above it is considered that the proposal would not breach Convention rights contained in the Human Rights Act 1998 in terms of the right to health and right to private and family life.
Noise and residential amenity
10.54. The policies referred to in the contaminated land section above are relevant. In addition, policy ENV1 (1) of the Selby District Local Plan aims to ensure that a good standard of amenity is achieved. Policy ENV 3 is relevant which seeks to only allow lighting schemes, where the minimum is required for security and operational purposes, designed to minimise glare and spillage, does not create conditions prejudicial to highway safety and would not have a significant adverse effect on local amenity or significant detract from the character of a rural area. Policy T9 also ensures roadside facilities do not have a significant effect on local amenity.
10.55. The introduction of a 24-hour fuel station along the busy A19 being close to residential dwellings to the south and west has the potential to create conflict. This is acutely expressed by the strong opposition to the application. The site is currently vacant scrub land and the dwellings to the west are set approximately 70m back from the A19. The introduction of this commercial use will have the potential for noise and disturbance from all the activities associated with a 24-roadside facility, i.e. vehicle movements, car washing, illumination, general noise from car doors shutting and servicing. The agents do point out that many 24-hour roadside facilities coexist alongside residential dwellings throughout the UK.
10.56. The applicants Planning Statement points out that “the site has been designed to minimise impact to neighbours, ensuring a development that harmonises with its neighbours. The red edge of the application site stops short of the existing grass verge, tree and hedgerow landscaping that is present on York Road. The retention of this landscaping provides for a mature soft planted barrier between the proposal and housing that will act to soften the visual appearance of development. A separation of some 25m at its closest point will ensure that a good degree of distance exists to houses, acting to reduce noise disturbance from the proposal. In addition to this, ambient noise levels in the locality will be greater given the high number of vehicles using the SRN and associated road noise.”
10.57. In addition, the Planning Statement indicates that the external lighting on the site has been sensitively designed so as to minimise light intrusion. The forecourt canopies use motion sensitive lighting which react to the presence of vehicles and will maintain lighting at a lower level at night when the forecourt is not in use by vehicles. These shouldn’t flicker on and off and are commonly used in more rural roadside facilities to minimise light pollution.
10.58. In terms of direct impact on privacy, outlook and loss of light, the proposal represents no significant concern due to the size and scale of the buildings and structures within the site and the distance to nearby receptors.
10.59. The Environmental Health Officer (EHO) assessed the application first in October 2021 and raised some concerns relating to the impact of noise from the site on the residential properties to the west of the site. The EHO indicated that a noise assessment should consider impact from construction phases of the development and impact once operational, including vehicle movements and deliveries. It was also recommended that the external lighting is subject to a pre-commencement condition to protect the residential properties in the area from a loss of amenity. As a result, the applicants produced a lighting scheme by Bever Innovations V2. This detailed the lighting for the EV bays, forecourt north and south, the HGV canopy, jet wash and petrol canopy together with spill plots.
10.60. The EHO responded in November 2021 and raised no objection with the lighting information (V2) provided subject to a condition requiring compliance with the approved details. The EHO also stated that proposed development is near existing residential premises and is of a relatively large scale and as such will entail an extended construction phase. This phase of the development may negatively impact upon nearby residential amenity during construction due to the potential for generation of dust, noise & vibration. The Control of Pollution Act 1974 and The Environmental Protection 1990 allows for certain noise control measures and the abatement of statutory nuisances in relation to noise, dust and vibration. Conditions were suggested covering the need for Construction Environmental Management Plan, a working hours condition and piling. The EHO still required a noise assessment as a pre commencement condition.
10.61. The applicants submitted a Noise Report produced by ADC Acoustics 30th Nov 2021. The report summary states “This concluded that the proposed development is located in an area which is dominated by traffic on the nearby main roads, particularly the A19 and A163. It is busy during the daytime and evening but quiet at night. Overall modelled levels are based on fairly extreme worst cases. The busiest 1-hour period of a weekday or weekend is assumed to persist throughout the entire day. Early/mid evening activity levels are assumed to persist up to 23:00. Night time activity is based on the 23:00 to 00:00 activity assumed to persist throughout the night. Predicted levels are well levels which would rate under BS 4142 as “low Impact depending on the context”. The context is that most of the activity is essentially traffic noise and likely to be aurally indistinguishable from the existing noise. The PFS activity will inevitably vary is close proportion to the general traffic on the roads.”
10.62. The report was assessed by the Environmental Health Officer who noted that it acknowledges BS4142:2014 noise assessment methodology but dismisses its relevance in this context on the basis of unchanged noise character once operational. The EHO disagreed with this on the basis that the noise sources associated with petrol filling stations are not explicitly aligned to that of the adjacent highway infrastructure. Specifically, manoeuvring HGVs, engine idling, loading/unloading, bulkhead mounted refrigeration units, reversing alarms, forecourt PA systems and fixed plant installations, all of which have the potential for tonality, impulsivity and intermittency when compared with monotonous road traffic noise. The EHO states that “An indicative BS4142 assessment is presented and concludes low impact, yet the noise sources are not fully incorporated and there is little regard for noise character.”
10.63. The noise report considers noise from deliveries to be insignificant and is consequently scoped out of the report. However, the EHO states that this fails to acknowledge the potential for noise impact from manoeuvring HGVs, engine idling, loading/unloading, bulkhead mounted refrigeration units and reversing alarms. This is particularly true considering unspecified delivery numbers/hours, distance from the forecourt to noise sensitive receptors and absence of noise mitigation measures in relation to the HGV delivery areas.
10.64. The car and jet washes are identified as noise sources, and the data is based on measurements from other sites. The EHO asked for transparency in relation to the acoustic data used. Furthermore, it is stated that the car or jet washes would unlikely be acceptable during the late evening and night-time and these would need to be conditioned. Details of the mechanical equipment were also required to inform an assessment. The proposed 2.7m high acoustic fencing proposed to mitigate noise was also considered short sighted by the EHO.
10.65. The Noise Assessment was revised in the 13.11.2023 version (ref: ARR/C/3415.01 Rev A) and this was assessed by Environment Health with response dated 5th December 2023. The EHO noted that in terms of mitigation, the key revisions/clarifications are that:
• Only one jet wash (down from three) and the car wash pushed back to the east slightly. The proposed operating hours associated with these elements will be restricted to between 8am and 10pm,
• Extending the acoustic screening to the entire western boundary to reduce noise from across the wider site, whilst retaining the 2.7m screening to the car wash,
• Deliveries to be restricted to between 8am and 4pm,
• Fixed plant installations are best dealt with as a planning condition given uncertainty regarding the associated acoustic specification,
• The overall BS4142 assessment is updated and predicts low impact during daytime hours (a rating level between -4 and -8dB below background),
• The overall BS4142 assessment is updated and predicts adverse impact during night-time hours (a rating level of +5dB above background). Consequently, a context case is put forward centred around absolute noise levels being very low (30dB LAeq,T) and that the impact occurs at the receptor façade and unlikely perceptible inside habitable rooms. In the context of a service station adjoining the A19 highway infrastructure, the EHO concurs with the context case in this instance that absolute noise levels will result in unlikely significant effects.
10.66. The plans were then amended another time with elements of the scheme changing position, and more jet wash bays reintroduced which meant the Noise Report was amended to Rev B (29th Nov 2024) which led to the final response from the EHO officer dated 10th March 2025. The EHO reaffirmed that the predicted noise levels for daytime and evening are well within the limits that would be rated as "low impact depending on the context" under a BS 4142 initial estimate. Night-time predicted levels, under significant worst-case assumptions, are above the "low impact depending on the context" threshold but below the "adverse impact depending on the context" threshold.
10.67. Most of the activity noise is essentially traffic noise, likely to be aurally indistinguishable from existing noise. The Petrol Filling Station (PFS) activity will vary in close proportion to general traffic on the roads. Night-time levels are very low in absolute terms and unlikely to be audible inside bedrooms. The NIA suggests some mitigation measures to prevent adverse effect on nearby residents:
· Simple fencing alongside the car wash.
· A silencer for the toilet extract fan, assuming it is located on the SE wall.
· Submission of details for mechanical equipment as they are not yet set.
· Car wash and jet washes are unlikely to be acceptable in the late evening.
10.68. Conditions were suggested covering the need for details of all fixed plant noise levels to be agreed, deliveries to be restricted to 8am and 4pm, the use of jet wash limited to 8am and 10pm in addition to the working hours mentioned above. The jet wash hours were further reduced to 8am-8pm daily to align with the times permitted on the Esso roadside facility mentioned above. This will also give residents some extra respite from car washing giving that 5 jet wash bays and a car wash are proposed.
10.69. The proposal is therefore acceptable with respect to noise and vibration in accordance with Policy ENV2, ENV 3 and T9 of the Local Plan, Policy SP19 of the Core Strategy and section 15 of the NPPF.
Flooding and Drainage
10.70. Relevant policies in respect of flood risk, drainage and climate change include Policy ENV1(3) of the Selby District Local Plan and Policies SP15 “Sustainable Development and Climate Change”, SP16 “improving Resource Efficiency” and SP19 “Design Quality” of the Core Strategy. NPPF paragraph 170 requires “Inappropriate development in areas at risk of flooding should be avoided by directing development away from areas at highest risk (whether existing or future). Where development is necessary in such areas, the development should be made safe for its lifetime without increasing flood risk elsewhere.” Policy SP 15 encourages the use of SUDS that promote groundwater recharge.
10.71. The application site is within Flood Zone 1 (low probability of flooding) for sea and river flooding. The proposed development is classified as “Less Vulnerable” in accordance with Annex 3 of the NPPF.
10.72. Given the application site area and the flood zone 1 status, no flood risk, sequential test or exception test was necessary. The site is also not prone to surface or ground water flooding. The planning application was however accompanied by a Flood Risk Assessment and Drainage Strategy. This demonstrates the site will have separate foul and surface water systems. The Planning statement indicates foul discharge from the site will be to the existing public sewers in the new housing estate to the west of the site. The Planning Statement also suggests the SuDS hierarchy will be used for the surface water drainage system design following site investigation of the ground conditions.
10.73. This was assessed by the IDB who noted that the applicant is proposing to use the mains sewer for the disposal of foul sewage. The IDB wasn’t aware of any sewer in close vicinity and therefore suggested a condition to provide full details of foul and surface water. The applicants have since supplied a Drainage Strategy Report dated 5th December 2024 which demonstrates that the ground is capable of accommodating a soakaway system which accommodates a 1:100 year storm event plus 30% for climate change. The foul water is also shown to go to the public sewer in York Road.
10.74. Yorkshire Water initially objected to the scheme due to the presence of a water main crossing the site. Its position was correctly established by the applicants following site investigation just to the north of the petrol canopy. The proposal was amended to remove any development from this area and provide a 6m easement as shown on the site plan. Yorkshire Water raised no objection to the proposed drainage systems i.e foul to the public sewer and surface water to soakaways. A condition was suggested to cover the development being carried out in accordance with the detailed drainage design.
10.75. The Environment Agency raised no objection. The LLFA initially requested a series of information to be submitted in their July 2022 response. These were supplied and the LLFA Officer considered the site layout drainage scheme and considered a new set of hydraulic calculations were necessary (14.5.2025). No further response was received from the LLFA however officers have chased this response in advance of the meeting and any update will presented to the planning committee. Officers do however retain full control over drainage matters by the proposed drainage condition within the recommendation. This will also cover the ambiguity regarding the accuracy of plans suggested by both Yorkshire Water and the IDB in suggested conditions. The proposed condition will require a full final drainage design to be agreed prior to development commencing.
10.76. Therefore, the above has shown the site can be suitably drained and has shown to be safe from flooding and therefore complies with Policies SP15 and SP19 of the Selby District Core Strategy and the NPPF, the proposal is acceptable in respect of flood risk and drainage.
Design and Effect upon the Character of the Area.
10.77. SDLP Policy ENV1 requires the effect of new development on the character of the area and the standard of design in relation to the site and its surroundings to be taken into account when considering proposals for new development. Similarly, CS Policy SP19 expects new development to have regard to the local character, identity and context of its surroundings. Core Strategy Policy SP 13 C requires buildings are well designed and SP 13 D ensures that in all cases development should be sustainable and appropriate in scale and type to its location. SP 2 (c) requires that development in the countryside is well designed and of an appropriate scale. Local Plan Policy T9 requires roadside facilities to be of an appropriate nature and scale to the locality and would not have a significant adverse impact on the character of the area. Paragraph 135 of the NPPF states that planning decisions should ensure that developments; will function well and add to the overall quality of the area; are visually attractive as a result of layout and landscaping; sympathetic to local character, while not preventing change; establish a sense of place and are safe and promote health and wellbeing.
10.78. The site lies immediately adjacent to the development limits and sandwiched between residential development to the north west which equally goes beyond development limits and significant highway infrastructure to the east. This gives the site an edge of settlement feel and not an isolated part of the open countryside.
10.79. When approaching from the south the proposed road facility would signal the end of the built form. When approaching from the A163 to the east you would see the backdrop of residential dwellings. Albeit these are partially screened and set back from the A19. When approaching from the north heading south you would see the built form of Barlby and the larger industrial structures in the background like Drax power station.
10.80. Having said this the development of this site will significantly change the character of the land from green overgrown scrub land to an engineered, busy service station with a constant flow of traffic in and out of the site. The proposal will introduce of colour from the building signage and surfacing, built form from the shop, canopies, substation and car wash as well as signage, lighting and onsite parking and charging. The site will also be an intensively used with flows of traffic in an out of the site, which will inevitably change its character. The applicants have tried to soften this visual impact through some ground level landscaping within the site and the retention of trees to the south western boundary, however limited opportunity exists on the frontage as its highway verge and lies outside the application site where it meets the A19. It is also noted that the landscape officer has raised some concerns over the wider landscape visual impact and the lack of overall screening.
10.81. The applicants point out in the Planning Statement that “Whilst the site lies within designated countryside, it is important to note that it is not an isolated location and has a close association with the settlement boundary of Barlby. A new housing development located immediately west of the application site has acted to extend the defined settlement boundary of Barlby. The A19 runs in a north/ south direction and forms a hard edge definition that the settlement boundary has been drawn to. In a similar fashion, the A19 would form a similar boundary to the application site providing a defined edge for the development to abut.”
10.82. The Planning Statement continues this discussion and states “In essence, the site relates better to the urban form of the village than it does to the countryside given that it is surrounded by development on 3 sides. It is tantamount to an infill site that represents a natural rounding off of the settlement form, it is therefore appropriate to the locality and a highly sustainable location. This close association reduces the visual impact of development considerably, and there would be a negligible effect on the character of the area for this reason.”
10.83. Officers do somewhat agree with this approach in that its location is more akin to the Barlby settlement due to the housing that’s surrounds it and it being adjacent to the strategic road network. This is briefly touched upon above in the examination of Policy SP 13© and creates some tension between policies that are applicable to the countryside and those applicable to sites within development limits. The development limits at this end of Barlby are considered out of date.
10.84. In terms of the actual design of the main kiosk building, this is a modern well-designed building. The walls are to be largely brickwork to match local properties, with open jointed vertical timber cladding wrapped around the upper section of the building. Dark grey glazing frames, fascias and roofing will give it a modern feel. The roof will be flat with a parapet to accommodate and screen Solar panels. This will reduce the carbon consumption by approximately 50% (claim from the Planning Statement). The building will be substantially naturally lit, high levels windows wrapping round the whole building, creating an attractive internal environment and a pleasant customer experience as well as helping to reduce energy consumption and carbon emissions. The new petrol canopy is to be built to the industry standard height of 5.6m. The buildings are therefore small in scale and will not visually dominate the site.
10.85. Finally, some of the representations raised concerns over the increased risk of crime buy building such a facility. Whilst the Crime Prevention officer was not consulted, a condition is added to ensure a scheme of crime prevention measures are submitted prior to the use becoming operational. This will consider CCTV, lighting and fencing.
10.86. The proposal would be acceptable in terms of the overall design in relation to the character of the local area and complaint with Policies ENV1 (1) and T9 of the Selby District Local Plan and Policies SP2, SP 13 and SP19 of the Selby District Core Strategy Local Plan (2013) and the NPPF in terms of design.
Trees and landscaping
10.87. Selby District Local Plan Policy ENV1(4) requires development to consider approaches on landscaping within the site and taking account of its surroundings. Policy SP19(e) requires that proposals look to incorporate new landscaping as an integral part of the scheme. Policy SP13 states that in all cases economic growth should be sustainable and appropriate in scale and type to its location, not harm the character of the area and seek a good standard of amenity. Local Plan Policy T9 states roadside facilities will only be permitted provided the nature and scale of the proposal would be appropriate to the locality and would not have a significant adverse effect on the character of the area and the proposal would achieve a high standard of design, materials and landscaping.
10.88. The National Planning Policy Framework states that planning policies and decisions should “contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment” by “protecting and enhancing valued landscapes, sites of biodiversity or geological value and soils (in a manner commensurate with their statutory status or identified quality in the development plan)” (paragraph 187.a); and “recognising the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside, and the wider benefits from natural capital and ecosystem services – including the economic and other benefits of the best and most versatile agricultural land, and of trees and woodland” (paragraph 187.b).
10.89. The impact on the landscape is particularly important for this proposal, given it will introduce a new commercial facility in the countryside at the edge of Barlby settlement. The application wasn’t accompanied by any landscape visual assessment due to its scale, however during the processing of the application additional landscaping and tree protection proposals were submitted to retain existing trees within the site and boundaries and soften the mostly hard surfaced appearance of the site.
10.90. The Council’s Landscape Officer assessed the proposal and noted the site is in a visible and prominent location to the east side of the A19 junction with the A163 located at the edge of Barlby settlement. York Road and existing residential housing is within 30 – 40m to the west side of the site. The site currently a grassed area with remnant boundary hedgerow. The Landscape Officer noted that the nature of this type of development means that it has the potential to adversely affect the character of the area and noted the initial proposal has very little onsite landscaping, which was insufficient to demonstrate good design, to protect local character and setting and to provide screening of the development from nearby residential properties.
10.91. The Landscape Officer stated that a higher standard of landscape screening and general enhancement would typically be required, however insufficient space exists within the site for this. A scheme such as this would typically expect at least 5-10m depth of tree and shrub planting in order to provide sufficient height and year-round screening along sensitive boundaries using locally occurring native species. Light spillage is also a concern to the landscape officer.
10.92. The applicant has provided a tree survey which indicates a small number of deciduous trees around the site. These are mainly in the south western corner and are to be retain, as is an oak tree T12 on the northern boundary. The landscape proposal has been improved and the extent of the development within the site reduced to allow more planting within the site.
10.93. The response from the Landscape Officer dated 10th March recognises the amendments and the enhanced planting and the retention of the oak tree on the northern boundary. The shop has been pulled away from the trees along the western boundary, which reduces the risk of harm to those. These trees provide some visual buffering of the development from York Road and the housing opposite. The proposed tree and hedge planting is concentrated around the northern half of the site. This still leaves the central area exposed to York Road. The proposed close-boarded fencing would provide some screening of the development and car headlights. The officer concluded by saying the revised layout and planting is improved, but the visual impact for the dwellings opposite, on Weighton View Drive and Pastures Close, and the amenity along York Road (NCN 65), is still a concern, in particular with reference to the mid-section. Landscape mitigation could be improved, depending on the extent and location of fencing. The proposed planting type is appropriate.
10.94. The landscape impact is an important consideration given the requirement of Policy T9 and the position of the site. The site is narrow, relatively constrained and seeks to accommodate a significant amount of development on the site. Officers accept that little more can be done to improve this visually. Officers agree with the comments of the Landscape Officer response in that the impact on the landscape setting does somewhat count against the proposal and this will have to be assessed in the planning balance.
Ecology
10.95. Local Plan Policy ENV1 requires account is taken of the potential loss, or adverse effect upon, significant wildlife habitats. Core Strategy Policy SP2 seeks to protect and enhancement of biodiversity and natural resources. Policy SP18 requires the high quality and local distinctiveness of the natural and man-made environment will be sustained by promoting effective stewardship of the District’s wildlife by a) safeguarding international, national and locally protected sites for nature conservation, including SINCs, from inappropriate development. b) Ensuring developments retain, protect and enhance features of biological and geological interest and provide appropriate management of these features and that unavoidable impacts are appropriately mitigated and compensated for, on or off-site. c) Ensuring development seeks to produce a net gain in biodiversity by designing-in wildlife and retaining the natural interest of a site where appropriate.
10.96. NPPF paragraph 187 requires decisions should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by protecting and enhancing sites of biodiversity value in a manner commensurate with their statutory status or identified quality in the development plan; minimising impacts on and providing net gains for biodiversity, including by establishing coherent ecological networks that are more resilient to current and future pressures.
10.97. The application as submitted was not initially accompanied by any ecological information and there are no statutory and non-statutory designated sites within the immediate vicinity of the site. The council’s ecologist indicated that the site doesn’t appear to support any priority habitats, however the habitats that are present on site have the potential to support species present within the local area. Given that the site is likely to be of local ecological value the applicant was required to submit a Preliminary Ecological Appraisal (PEA) which is reasonable and proportionate to the scale of the development and the potential impacts.
10.98. An extended Phase 1 habitat survey produced by Rachel Hacking Ecology was submitted. This shows that the site supports a mosaic of scrub and coarse grassland, with a few trees within the site and closer to the boundary along York Road. According to the survey report, there are few risks to protected species, but site clearance should be timed to avoid nesting birds. The ecological report states that “no specific habitat mitigation is considered necessary”. The council’s ecologist disagreed with this claim. Although habitat loss is not quantified in the report, roughly 0.37 hectares of scrub would be lost along with a smaller area of coarse grassland. These are not rare habitats but in the context of the predominantly arable surrounding landscape, this is likely to be a locally-important resource for birds, mammals and invertebrates.
10.99. Paragraph 187(d) of the NPPF stipulates that planning decisions should minimise impacts on and provide net gains for biodiversity. Paragraph 193(a) requires that significant harm to biodiversity must be adequately mitigated or compensated for. The council’s ecologist considered the proposal would result in the net loss of biodiversity due to the scrub removal which is unlikely to be offset by on-site landscaping.
10.100. It was recommended to the applicants that the DEFRA Biodiversity Metric 3.0 is used to demonstrate objectively the balance of biodiversity loss and gain which would result from the proposals. A revised ecology report should then demonstrate how the proposed development would achieve net gains for nature in line with the NPPF.
10.101. In addition, the ecology report needs to consider potential impacts of light pollution and show how this would be mitigated, preferably retaining a dark corridor for nocturnal wildlife along the tree line adjoining York Road.
10.102. The Council’s Ecologist also indicated that officers would need to be confident that the proposed development would not increase risk of water pollution to the River Ouse or local ditch networks. This will require review of proposed drainage arrangements by an appropriate specialist.
10.103. Given the location of the proposed development, the Council’s Ecologist said it is unlikely that there would be significant effects on Skipwith Common Special Area of Conservation (SAC) and we note that Natural England did not raise concerns in its response. In light of this, no further screening under the Conservation of Habitats & Species Regulations 2017 is necessary.
10.104. A Biodiversity Impact Assessment was submitted November 2024, which showed the baseline habitat units to be 2.33 which would be lost. The proposed landscaping provides 0.38 units showing a net loss of 1.95 habitat units which results in 83.81% biodiversity loss, and the provision of 0.38 hedgerow units resulting a 100% net gain.
10.105. The Council Ecologist noted the development would result in the loss of unmanaged grassland and 0.4 ha of scrub, habitats which are categorised as being of ‘medium distinctiveness’. On-site landscaping would include modified (‘amenity’) grassland and tree and hedge planting. The application pre-dates mandatory BNG procedures but previous ‘BNG in principle’ policy is secured by SP18 from the Selby Core Strategy. This required the delivery of a net gain for biodiversity but not necessarily a 10% uplift. The accompanying BNG Assessment concludes that “The units required to meet the trading rules and provide 10% net gain are 2.28 habitat units of a medium distinctiveness habitat”. This has been discussed with the agent and they plan to provide a 1% uplift as opposed to 10% by purchasing units from a third-party habitat bank. This can be controlled by a condition which requires the applicant to provide evidence of the purchase of off site units, which will be sufficient to discharge the condition. A legal agreement to cover this is regarded as excessive, especially given the low nature value of the site and limited net gain proposed. The proposed on-site habitats can also be established and controlled by a Landscape Ecological Management Plan condition (LEMP) for 30 years setting out establishment and maintenance requirements should be submitted for approval prior to commencement. A condition is also suggested to cover site clearance outside bird nesting season.
10.106. The Ecologist also remained concerned with the potential impacts of light pollution and show how this would be mitigated, preferably retaining a dark corridor for nocturnal wildlife along the tree line adjoining York Road. The agents explained that the updated design development and updated lighting scheme, has done everything possible to illuminate the development only, with no over spill. A dark corridor all the way along York Road is not possible due to the new pedestrian crossings, which were requested by the Local Highway Authority. North of the footpath crossings, the site has been left in as much darkness as possible. Officers are satisfied that the proposal has done all that is reasonably to contain lighting within the site and no further measures are required.
10.107. The Ecologist also suggested the Council “will need to be confident that the proposed development would not increase risk of water pollution to the River Ouse or local ditch networks. This will require review of proposed drainage arrangements by an appropriate specialist”. This is suggested as a condition within the recommendation.
10.108. The proposal is therefore acceptable in terms of its impact on nature conservation and compliant with Policy ENV1 of the Selby District Local Plan, Policies SP2 and SP18 of the Core Strategy, NPPF paragraph 187 and the standing advice of Natural England.
Minerals and Waste
10.110. Policy S01 and S02 of the MWJP requires proposals in safeguarding areas include a minerals resource assessment to justify why minerals extraction would not be appropriate in the location of the development. S02 includes 6 points which in which developments in safeguarding areas can be deemed acceptable. The approach is now to request a minerals assessment from the applicant to justify why a site may not be policy complaint.
10.111. Policy S07 of the plan details a lists of exemptions criteria where certain application types are regarded as exempt development in safeguarded areas. The closest applicable category for this application is ‘infilling in an otherwise built-up frontage within a settlement.’ This site isn’t however within the settlement.
10.112. Therefore, whilst some policy conflict exists here against maintaining safeguarded land, officers consider that given the size of the site and its proximity to residential dwellings this wouldn’t be appropriate for mineral extraction. This satisfies the Policy S02 of the MWJP. The mineral policy team have also been recently consulted and agree with this approach.
10.113. The site is identified on the Coal Authority interactive map as lying within a low-risk area for which the standing advice is to impose an informative to draw this risk to the developer’s attention.
Other matters
Section 149 of The Equality Act 2010
10.114. Under Section 149 of The Equality Act 2010 Local Planning Authorities must have due regard to the following when making decisions: (i) eliminating discrimination, harassment and victimisation; (ii) advancing equality of opportunity between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it; and (iii) fostering good relations between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it. The protected characteristics are: age (normally young or older people), disability, gender reassignment, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex, sexual orientation.
10.115. The proposed development of the site would not result in a negative effect on any persons or on persons with The Equality Act 2010 protected characteristics.
11.0 PLANNING BALANCE AND CONCLUSION
11.1. The spatial development hierarchy outlined in Core Strategy (CS) Policy SP2 seeks to deliver sustainable development across the former District, directing new development towards the most sustainable settlements. This proposal lies just beyond the development limits of Barlby and is within land designated as open countryside. Policy SP2 allows for well-designed new buildings of an appropriate scale which in this case would contribute towards and improve the local economy and enhance or maintain the vitality of rural communities, in accordance with Policy SP13. Whilst this site is beyond development limits and technical in a rural area, its character is more akin to the built up settlement. Any economic benefits will also enhance the designated service village of Barlby as opposed to a rural community.
11.2. CS Policy SP13C states that in rural areas, sustainable development (on both greenfield and brownfield land) which brings sustainable economic growth through local employment opportunities, will be supported, including (inter alia) the development of well-designed new buildings. Crucially, in all cases development should be sustainable and be appropriate in scale and type to its location, not harm the character of the area and seek a good standard of amenity.
11.3. Saved Policy T9 of the SDLP provides guidance in relation to new roadside facilities and the supporting text acknowledges that suitable sites will often only be available outside built-up areas. The policy requires that need is proven, highway safety is maintained, the proposal would not create conditions prejudicial to highway safety or which would have a significant effect on local amenity; and the nature and scale of the proposal would be appropriate to the locality and would not have a significant adverse effect on the character of the area; and the proposal would achieve a high standard of design, materials and landscaping.
11.4. The proposal presents a well-considered case for the need for the facility in that it will provide further consumer choice directly accessed from the strategic road network and enhanced customer facilities. This need argument has changed throughout the processing of the application as the HGV refuelling element has been omitted. Also there has also been the Esso modern roadside facility constructed since the application was made to the south of Selby which the need assessment didn’t take account of. Nevertheless, the scheme will provide direct extra capacity to the A19 and a local resource for Barlby. The proposed shop is considered to have a minor impact on the main retail centres, representing a development of an appropriate size and use for the locality. The above is afforded moderate weight.
11.5. In favour of the scheme the applicants present that the proposal will provide extra retail and fuel choice, and the letters of support welcome this facility just to the north of Selby. The building is well designed, incorporates EV charging points, roadside parking and uses solar PV on the roof of the building leading to carbon reductions. The scheme will provide economic benefits both during the construction phase and some employment opportunities once occupied. These benefits are afforded moderate weight.
11.6. The scheme has satisfactorily demonstrated no harm to highway safety which has a neutral impact on the proposal. Likewise, the scheme has no significant impact on ecology, contamination, flooding or drainage which are afforded limited weight.
11.7. The development will undoubtedly have some visual impact on the areas character and landscape setting as described in detail above. This tension with the landscape policies and policy T9 counts against the proposal and are afforded moderate weight.
11.8. The application has received a significant level of objection. The proposal is not considered to cause any loss of privacy, loss of outlook or visual dominance however has the potential to create noise and disturbance to nearby residents. The detailed assessments and suggested conditions ensure this can be mitigated and therefore it is considered that a reason for refusal cannot be substantiated on these grounds. This carries moderate weight.
11.9. In conclusion, whilst the proposal is finely balanced based on the matters described above, when assessing it against the Development Plan and taking into account the National Planning Policy Framework, the application is considered to be acceptable in planning terms as it delivers sustainable development, and the adverse impacts of granting permission would not significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits. The development is therefore recommended for approval.
12.0 RECOMMENDATION
12.1 That planning permission be GRANTED subject to the conditions set out below
Time
1. The development for which permission is hereby granted shall be begun within a period of three years from the date of this permission.
Reason:
In order to comply with the provisions of Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.
Plans List
2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the plans/drawings and assessments listed below:
Plans
1762-1 Site Location
1762-10 Existing Site Layout
1762-4x Planning Site Layout
1762-5c Building Plans and Elevations
1762-6a Petrol Canopy and Wash Bays
1762-7 Car Wash Elevations
1762-8c Site Elevations
1762-9 Substation Details
1762-11 Tank Detail
1762-12 Tank Detail
1762-14 EV Charger Details
Blue Hill Landscape and Tree Survey
5083-1A-dlp-28oct24-A1-250
5083-tss-aia-28oct24
5083-tss-tip-28oct24
5083-tss-tr-10oct24
Bever Lighting
ADS Design – A19 Tankstation Barlby – External – V1 – JDB20241223
Lighting Scheme Notes 250114
ADS Acoustics
3415 02 Report 13 11 23 Rev B
Wash Tec noise report (Ergebnicbericht_SM10_ST10_GB_Rev_2)
PV Provision
Ref 3115 – Barlby Array Layout 241205
DTP RSA Documents
RSA 1 Rev 0 FINAL
3705721-RSA DR 2025
DTP-3705721-RSAB-1-A
DTP-3705721-TA-2-WithApps
DTP-3705721-SK004-D
DTP-3705721-SK003-D
DTP-3705721-SK002-D
DTP-3705721-SK001-D
DTP-3705721-ATR001-H
Reason:
For the avoidance of doubt.
Materials
3. No development shall commence above slab level until details and samples of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces, i.e. external walls, roof, boundaries, surface treatment of the development hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.
Reason:
To ensure the materials are appropriate for the area in accordance with Local Plan Policy ENV1 and Core Strategy Policy SP19.
External Lighting
4. Details of any external lighting of the site shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of the development. This information shall include:
a) A contour map showing illumination spill beyond the site boundary measured in lux in the horizontal plane.
b) The main beam angle of each light source.
c) The uniformity ratio in respect of the lighting.
d) The level of illuminance measured in lux, in the vertical plane at the windows of the nearest residential properties facing the site.
e) The height of the lighting stanchions.
f) Luminaire intensity at the receptors.
The lighting shall be installed, maintained and operated in accordance with the approved details unless the Local Planning Authority gives its written consent to the variation.
Reason:
To protect the appearance of the area, the environment and local residents from light pollution in accordance with Local plan Policies ENV 1 and ENV 2.
Archaeology
5. A) No demolition/development shall commence until a Written Scheme of Investigation has been submitted to and approved by the local planning authority in writing. The scheme shall include an assessment of significance and research questions; and:
1. The programme and methodology of site investigation and recording
2. Community involvement and/or outreach proposals
3. The programme for post investigation assessment
4. Provision to be made for analysis of the site investigation and recording
5. Provision to be made for publication and dissemination of the analysis and records of the site investigation
6. Provision to be made for archive deposition of the analysis and records of the site investigation
7. Nomination of a competent person or persons/organisation to undertake the works set out within the Written Scheme of Investigation.
B) No demolition/development shall take place other than in accordance with the Written Scheme of Investigation approved under condition (A).
C) The development shall not be occupied until the site investigation and post investigation
assessment has been completed in accordance with the programme set out in the Written Scheme of Investigation approved under condition (A) and the provision made for analysis, publication and dissemination of results and archive deposition has been secured.
Reason:
This condition is imposed in accordance with Local Plan policy ENV28 and Core Strategy Policy SP 18 and section 16 of the NPPF as the site is of archaeological significance.
Off site BNG
6. No development shall take place (excluding site clearance and investigation works) until satisfactory written evidence of the purchase of Registered Offsite Biodiversity Units resulting in a 1% uplift of net gain secured for 30 years shall be submitted in writing to the LPA for approval.
Reason:
In the interests of securing no net loss of biodiversity net gain in accordance with Core Strategy Policy SP18 and the NPPF.
LEMP
7. Prior to commencement of development, a 30 year Landscape and Ecological Management Plan (LEMP) shall be submitted to and be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Once approved, the LEMP shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details for the lifetime of the development.
The LEMP must include, but not be limited, to arrangements for the following:
· description and evaluation of features to be managed;
· ecological trends and constraints on site that might influence management;
· aims and objectives of management;
· appropriate management options for achieving aims and objectives;
· prescriptions for management actions;
· preparation of a work schedule (including an annual work plan capable of being rolled forward over a five-year period);
· details of the body or organization responsible for implementation of the plan;
· ongoing monitoring and remedial measures;
· details of the legal and funding mechanism(s) by which the long-term implementation of the plan will be secured by the developer with the management body responsible for its delivery;
· how contingencies and/or remedial action will be identified, agreed and implemented so that the development delivers the fully functioning biodiversity objectives of the approved scheme (where the results from monitoring show that conservation aims and objectives of the Plan are not being met).
Reason:
In the interests of ecology and in order to comply with saved Policy ENV1 (5) of the Selby District Local Plan, Policy SP18 of the Core Strategy and national planning policy contained within the NPPF.
Breeding bird site clearance.
8. The site is likely to support nesting birds, so site clearance should be timed outside the breeding season (March to August inclusive for most species). If this is not possible, a suitably experienced ecologist should first confirm that no active nests are present; any occupied nests would need to be left undisturbed.
Reason:
To ensure compliance with the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 and to comply with saved Policy ENV1 (5) of the Selby District Local Plan, Policy SP18 of the Core Strategy and national planning policy contained within the NPPF.
New and altered Private Access or Verge Crossing at Land at Junction
of A19 And A163, York Road, Barlby
9. The development must not be brought into use until the access to the site at Land at Junction of A19 And A163, York Road, Barlby has been set out and constructed in accordance with the ‘Specification for Housing and Industrial Estate Roads and Private Street Works” published by the Local Highway Authority and the following requirements:
The crossing of the highway verge and/or footway must be constructed in accordance with
the approved details and/or Standard Detail number A2 and the following requirements.
• Any gates or barriers must be erected a minimum distance of 18 metres back from
the carriageway of the existing highway and must not be able to swing over the
existing or proposed highway.
• Details of provisions to prevent surface water from the site/plot discharging onto the
existing or proposed highway must be provided and maintained thereafter to prevent
such discharges.
The final surfacing of any private access within 18 metres of the public highway must
not contain any loose material that is capable of being drawn on to the existing or
proposed public highway.
• Measures to enable vehicles to enter and leave the site in a forward gear.
All works must accord with the approved details.
Reason:
To ensure a satisfactory means of access to the site from the public highway in the interests of highway safety and the convenience of all highway users in accordance with Selby Local Plan Policies ENV 1, T1 and T2, Core Strategy Policy SP19.
Visibility Splays and land at Junction A19 and A163, York Road, Barlby.
10. There must be no access or egress by any vehicles between the highway and the application site at Land at Junction of A19 And A163, York Road, Barlby until splays are provided giving clear visibility of 215 metres measured along both channel lines of the major road from a point measured 4.5metres down the centre line of the access road. In measuring the splays, the eye height must be 1.05 metres and the object height must be 0.6 metres. Once created, these visibility splays must be maintained clear of any obstruction and retained for their intended purpose at all times.
Reason:
To ensure visibility spays are achieved in the interests of highway safety and in accordance with Selby Local Plan Policies ENV 1, T1 and T2, Core Strategy Policy SP19.
Delivery of off site works
11. The following schemes of off-site highway mitigation measures must be completed through Section 278 as indicated below:
• Creation of a fourth arm on the A19/A163 roundabout, along with associated
drainage, signing, lining and lighting works prior to construction.
• Creation of 2 active travel accesses and uncontrolled crossings onto York Road prior
to occupation.
• Installation of north and southbound footway on York Road tying into existing footway
and the provision of an uncontrolled crossing near Beech Croft prior to occupation.
For each scheme of off-site highway mitigation, except for investigative works, no excavation or other groundworks or the depositing of material on site in connection with the construction of any scheme of off-site highway mitigation or any structure or apparatus which will lie beneath that scheme must take place, until full detailed engineering drawings of all aspects of that scheme including any structures which affect or form part of the scheme have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
An independent Stage 2 Road Safety Audit carried out in accordance with GG119 - Road
Safety Audits or any superseding regulations must be included in the submission and the
design proposals must be amended in accordance with the recommendations of the
submitted Safety Audit prior to the commencement of works on site.
A programme for the delivery of that scheme and its interaction with delivery of the other
identified schemes must be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning
Authority prior to construction works commencing on site.
Each item of the off-site highway works must be completed in accordance with the approved engineering details and programme.
Reason:
To ensure that the design is appropriate in the interests of the safety and convenience of
highway users in accordance with Selby Local Plan Policies ENV 1, T1 and T2, Core Strategy Policy SP19.
Provision of Approved Access, Turning and Parking Areas
12. No part of the development must be brought into use until the access, parking, manoeuvring
and turning areas for all users at Land at Junction of A19 And A163, York Road, Barlby have been constructed in accordance with the details approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Once created these areas must be maintained clear of any obstruction and retained for their intended purpose at all times.
Reason:
To provide for appropriate on-site vehicle facilities in the interests of highway safety and the
general amenity of the development in accordance with Selby Local Plan Policies ENV 1, T1 and T2, Core Strategy Policy SP19.
Construction Management Plan.
13. No development for any phase of the development must commence until a Construction Management Plan for that phase has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Construction of the permitted development must be undertaken in accordance with the approved Construction Management Plan.
The Plan must include, but not be limited, to arrangements for the following in respect of each phase of the works:
1. details of any temporary construction access to the site including measures for removal
following completion of construction works;
2. restriction on the use of access for construction purposes;
3. wheel and chassis underside washing facilities on site to ensure that mud and debris is
not spread onto the adjacent public highway;
4. the parking of contractors’ site operatives and visitor’s vehicles;
5. areas for storage of plant and materials used in constructing the development clear of the highway;
6. measures to manage the delivery of materials and plant to the site including routing and
timing of deliveries and loading and unloading areas;
7. details of the routes to be used by HGV construction traffic and highway condition surveys on these routes;
8. protection of carriageway and footway users at all times during demolition and
construction;
9. protection of contractors working adjacent to the highway;
10. details of site working hours;
11. erection and maintenance of hoardings including decorative displays, security fencing
and scaffolding on/over the footway & carriageway and facilities for public viewing where
appropriate;
12. means of minimising dust emissions arising from construction activities on the site,
including details of all dust suppression measures and the methods to monitor emissions of
dust arising from the development;
13. measures to control and monitor construction noise;
14. an undertaking that there must be no burning of materials on site at any time during
construction;
15. removal of materials from site including a scheme for recycling/disposing of waste
resulting from demolition and construction works;
16. details of the measures to be taken for the protection of trees;
17. details of external lighting equipment;
18. details of ditches to be piped during the construction phases;
19. a detailed method statement and programme for the building works; and
20. contact details for the responsible person (site manager/office) who can be contacted in
the event of any issue.
Reason:
In the interests of public safety and amenity in accordance with Selby Local Plan Policies ENV 1, T1 and T2, Core Strategy Policy SP19.
Glare from site lighting
14. Prior to the installation of external lighting equipment details shall be submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority (in consultation with the Highway Authority) to minimise glare. Once agreed the lighting shall be installed in accordance with the agreed details and thereafter be so retained.
Reason:
In accordance with Policies ENV1, ENV 3 and T2 of the Local Plan and Core Strategy policy SP 19 to ensure that lighting does not spill out from the application site and cause harm to residential amenity and highway safety.
Contamination
15. Prior to development (excluding demolition), a site investigation and risk assessment must be undertaken to assess the nature, scale and extent of any land contamination and the potential risks to human health, groundwater, surface water and other receptors. A written report of the findings must be produced and is subject to approval in writing by the Local Planning Authority. It is strongly recommended that the report is prepared by a suitably qualified and competent person.
Reason:
To ensure that the site is suitable for its proposed use taking account of ground conditions and any risks arising from land contamination and to accord with Local Plan Policy ENV 2 and Core Strategy Policy SP 18.
Remediation
16. Where remediation works are shown to be necessary, development (excluding demolition) shall not commence until a detailed remediation strategy has been be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The remediation strategy must demonstrate how the site will be made suitable for its intended use and must include proposals for the verification of the remediation works. It is strongly recommended that the report is prepared by a suitably qualified and competent person.
Reason:
To ensure that the site is suitable for its proposed use taking account of ground conditions and any risks arising from land contamination and to accord with Local Plan Policy ENV 2 and Core Strategy Policy SP 18.
Verification
17. Prior to first occupation or use, remediation works should be carried out in accordance with the approved remediation strategy. On completion of those works, a verification report (which demonstrates the effectiveness of the remediation carried out) must be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. It is strongly recommended that the report is prepared by a suitably qualified and competent person.
Reason:
To ensure that the agreed remediation works are fully implemented and to demonstrate that the site is suitable for its proposed use with respect to land contamination. After remediation, as a minimum, land should not be capable of being determined as contaminated land under Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990. This will also ensure compliance with Local Plan Policy ENV 2 and Core Strategy Policy SP 18.
Unexpected contamination
18. In the event that unexpected land contamination is found at any time when carrying out the approved development, it must be reported in writing immediately to the Local Planning Authority. An investigation and risk assessment must be undertaken and, if remediation is necessary, a remediation strategy must be prepared, which is subject to approval in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Following completion of measures identified in the approved remediation strategy, a verification report must be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. It is strongly recommended that all reports are prepared by a suitably qualified and competent person.
Reason:
To ensure that the site is suitable for its proposed use taking account of ground conditions and any risks arising from land contamination and to accord with Local Plan Policy ENV 2 and Core Strategy Policy SP 18.
CEMP
19. The commencement of the Development shall not take place until there has been submitted to, approved in writing by, and deposited with the Local Planning Authority a Construction Environmental Management Plan. The Plan shall include details of how noise, dust and other airborne pollutants, vibration, smoke, and odour from construction work will be controlled and mitigated. The plan shall also include monitoring, recording and reporting requirements. The construction of the Development shall be completed in accordance with the approved Plan unless any variation has been approved in writing by Local Planning Authority.
Measures may include, but would not be restricted to, on site wheel washing,
restrictions on use of unmade roads, agreement on the routes to be used by
construction traffic, restriction of stockpile size (also covering or spraying them
to reduce possible dust), targeting sweeping of roads, minimisation of evaporative emissions and prompt clean up of liquid spills, prohibition of intentional on-site fires and avoidance of accidental ones, control of construction equipment emissions and proactive monitoring of dust. The plan should also provide detail on the management and control processes.
Reason:
To protect the residential amenity of the locality during construction and to comply with the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), the Noise Policy Statement for England (NPSE) and Core Strategy Policy SP19 and ENV2 of the Local Plan.
Working Hours
20. No work relating to the development hereby approved, including works of demolition or preparation prior to building operations, shall take place other than between the hours of 08:00 hours and 18:00 hours Mondays to Fridays and 08:00 hours to 13:00 hours on Saturdays and at no time on Sundays or Bank or National Holidays.
Reason:
To protect the residential amenity of the locality during construction and to comply with the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), the Noise Policy Statement for England (NPSE) and Core Strategy Policy SP19 and ENV2 of the Local Plan.
Piling
21. Should any of the proposed foundations be piled, no development shall commence until a schedule of works to identify those plots affected, and setting out mitigation measures to protect residents from noise, dust and vibration has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The proposals shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved schedule.
Reason:
To protect the residential amenity of the locality during construction and to comply with the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), the Noise Policy Statement for England (NPSE) and Core Strategy Policy SP19 and ENV2 of the Local Plan.
Details of Fixed Plant Noise
22. All noise emissions resulting from fixed plant installations shall be treated to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority. Details of noise attenuation and/or extract systems shall be submitted to and agreed in writing before the use of the buildings commence. The agreed scheme shall be maintained throughout the life of the development.
The cumulative level of sound, when determined externally under free-field conditions, shall not exceed the representative background sound level at nearby sensitive receptors. All noise measurement/predictions and assessments made to determine compliance shall be made in accordance with British Standard 4142:2014: Methods for rating and assessing industrial and commercial sound, and/or its subsequent amendments.
Reason:
To protect the residential amenity of the locality during the operation of the facility and to comply with the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), the Noise Policy Statement for England (NPSE) and Core Strategy Policy SP19 and ENV2 of the Local Plan.
Delivery Hours
23. The delivery period shall be limited to 08:00 to 16:00 Monday to Sundays.
Reason:
To protect the residential amenity of the locality during the operation of the facility and to comply with the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), the Noise Policy Statement for England (NPSE) and Core Strategy Policy SP19 and ENV2 of the Local Plan.
Use of Jet Washes
24. Use of the jet washes and car wash facilities shall be limited to between 8am and 8pm.
Reason:
To protect the residential amenity of the locality during the operation of the facility and to comply with the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), the Noise Policy Statement for England (NPSE) and Core Strategy Policy SP19 and ENV2 of the Local Plan.
Acoustic Barrier
25 Prior to the development coming into use, a barrier, located as outlined in the Noise Impact Assessment prepared by ADC Acoustics, reference ARR/C/3415.01 Rev B, dated 29th November 2024 shall be erected to provide effective acoustic screening to surrounding residential properties and be constructed of either timber and or concrete to a height of 2m above the surrounding ground level. The panels shall have a surface mass of not less than 17kgm2 and shall be free from gaps and cracks. All joins to post to be effectively sealed as shall the joint between the lower edge of the panels and the soil. The barrier shall be maintained throughout the lifetime of the development.
Reason:
To protect residential amenity of existing/prospective residents and to comply with the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), the Noise Policy Statement for England (NPSE) and North Yorkshire Council’s Policy’s SP19 and ENV2.
Drainage
26. No development shall take place until details of the proposed means of disposal of foul and surface water drainage for the whole site, including details of any balancing works, off-site works and phasing of the necessary infrastructure, have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. Furthermore, unless otherwise approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, no buildings shall be occupied or brought into use prior to completion of the approved foul drainage works.
Reason:
To ensure the development is provided with satisfactory means of drainage and to reduce the risk of flooding. This will ensure compliance with Policy ENV1(3) of the Selby District Local Plan, Policy SP15 of the Core Strategy and chapter 14 of the NPPF.
Ecology/Drainage
27. Prior to development commencing the agreed drainage scheme referred to in condition 26 shall be assessed by a suitably qualified ecologist to demonstrate that the proposed development would not increase risk of water pollution to the River Ouse or local ditch networks.
Reason:
To ensure compliance with the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 and to comply with saved Policy ENV1 (5) of the Selby District Local Plan, Policy SP18 of the Core Strategy and national planning policy contained within the NPPF.
Crime Prevention measures
28. Prior to the use becoming operational commencement of any aboveground construction work a scheme of crime prevention measures shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason:
To promote safe communities and to satisfy paragraphs 96 and 135 of the NPPF and Core Strategy Policy SP19.
Case Officer: Gareth Stent
Appendix A – Site Plan Rev X
Appendix A
