North Yorkshire Council
Community Development Services
Selby and Ainsty Area Planning Committee
20th November 2025
2018/0934/FULM - Proposed construction of 24 assisted care apartments with associated car parking and landscaped gardens at osborne house, union lane, selby, yo8 4au
Report of the Assistant Director - Planning – Community Development Services
|
1.0 Purpose of the Report 1.1. To determine a full major planning application for the erection of 24 assisted care apartments with associated car parking and landscaping on land to the east of the existing care home known as Osbourne House. 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. |
2.0 SUMMARY
RECOMMENDATION: That planning permission be GRANTED subject to conditions listed below and prior completion of a Section 106 agreement to secure the matters detailed in table 1.
2.1. The site consists of a piece of overgrown vacant land to the east of an existing 74 bed care home known as Osborne House. It is accessed via Union Lane and through the car park to the existing residential care facility.
2.2. The site within the development limits for Selby and is surrounded on all sides by existing built development. To the north are the residential dwellings on Portholme Drive. To the east is the newly constructed L&G development, with a terrace row of 8 dwellings being 31-45 Mill Way. This estate was approved and built after this application was submitted. To the south is the railway line.
2.3. The application was first applied for in 2018 and was stalled due to issues with the accuracy of the land boundary. The design of the building has also reduced in scale in recent years to improve the relationship with the dwellings to the east.
2.4. The proposed C3 extra care home consists of 24 2-bed apartments over 3 storeys. The application site is 0.27 hectares. A legal agreement accompanies the application in order to control occupancy.
2.5. The application has received no adverse responses from consultees on matters which cannot be controlled by condition. The application has received objections, more recently from the new dwellings to the east who bought their dwellings with an unrestricted view west.
2.6. The benefits of the application include the site being in a very sustainable location in the town centre; the site is acceptable in principle in accordance with Policies in the Core Strategy and the proposal makes a contribution to C3 housing. The construction will provide economic benefits both during the construction phase and employment opportunities once the facility is operational.
2.7. Neutral matters, which include the site specific flood risk implications are acceptable and suitable drainage can be controlled by condition; there would be no harm arising from highway access; highway implications can be mitigated, there would be no harm to protected species; the site can be made safe from contamination; residential amenity would not be harmed beyond accepted standards; there is no harm to heritage; noise and air pollution matters can be mitigated by conditions.
3.0 Preliminary Matters
3.1. Access to the case file on Public Access can be found here:-
Documents for reference 2018/0934/FULM: Public Access
3.2. The application was submitted in 2018, following a refusal of outline permission for 25 units in 2015. The application has taken several years to resolve due to land ownership issues with the eastern boundary and amendments to the elevations and the repositioning of the building. The most recent changes have changed the design of part of the building to flat roof and reduced the massing on the eastern elevation to address overlooking and outlook concerns. The Flood Risk Assessment was also updated, including the inclusion of a Sequential Test, a Preliminary Ecological Appraisal was submitted, and the plans amended to reduce the number of apartments to 24.
3.3. The design and access statement explains how this is an assisted care facility, which plans to have an age restriction of 55 years and over on all occupiers of the apartments and there is a requirement to sign up to a minimum level of care of 2 hours a week for the person over 55 years or over. The assisted care apartments and existing home are intended to form a continuing care retirement community including assisted care facilities.
3.4. A legal agreement accompanies the application in order to control occupancy and overcome the previous 2015 reason for refusal No.1. concerning a lack of an affordable housing contribution.
3.5. The site was formerly occupied by Roose House and this has lots of detailed history. This isn’t included as its now demolished. The most relevant is as follows:
3.6. 2006/0676/OUT - Outline application for residential development. Roose House, Union Lane, Selby, North Yorkshire, YO8 4AU, Permitted 20-OCT-06.
3.7. 2008/1165/FUL- Erection of a 74-bed care home. Permitted 21-DEC-10.
3.8. 2012/0578/DPC - Discharge of conditions 2 (external materials); 4 (landscaping design); 5-9 (drainage); 10 (site access design); 13 (site investigation); 14 (on-site parking and storage); 17 (external lighting) and 18 (energy from renewable's) of 2008/1165/FUL (8/19/571V/PA) for the erection of a 74-bed care home. Permitted 21-SEP-12.
3.9. 2015/0125/OUT - Description: Outline application including access, appearance, layout and scale for a 25-unit independent living / sheltered housing facility with car parking, Address: Osborne House, Union Lane, Selby, YO8 4AU. Refused 26-OCT-17.
Reasons for refusal:
1. The proposed development is for Class C3 dwelling units and fails to provide any Affordable Housing provision. The development therefore fails to accord with Policy SP9 of the SDCSLP and the adopted SPD on Affordable Housing 2014.
2. The proposed development fails to provide an adequate and useable amount of recreation open space resulting in a poor quality design and environment for the occupants. The proposal therefore fails to comply with Policy RT2 and ENV1 of the LP, SP19 of the CS and with the NPPF.
3. The proposed development would adversely the living conditions of the occupants of residents on Portholme Drive, in particular Nos 31,33 and 35 due to the scale and mass of the three storey building proposed which due to its close proximity would result in overshadowing of private garden space and an overbearing effect on the outlook from the dwellings. The proposal would therefore conflict with Policies ENV1 of the LP and with the NPPF.
4.0 Site and Surroundings
4.1. The site within the development limits for Selby and lies southwest of the town centre. The application site is accessed via Union Lane and through the car park to the existing residential care facility known as Osborne House. Osbourne House is a 74-bed care home that was permitted in 2008 and is within the same ownership of the applicants.
4.2. Prior to this the whole site was known as Roose House, which was a disused double-glazing factory and storage yard. Satellite imagery suggests the site was in use as storage yard on 2002 images, then vacated in 2007 images after which the buildings on the site and wider site to the west were demolished. This was to make way for the Osbourne House application in 2008 which later opened in 2013.
4.3. The current site is the left-over undeveloped part of the of the wider Osbourne House development. The land was fenced for security purposes in 2013 when the Care Home opened and became overgrown in recent years with self-set trees. Officers are satisfied that the land can be considered previously developed as it previously accommodated a building in the north eastern corner and the remainder of the land was fixed surface infrastructure. Satellite images suggest this is still visible in the centre of the site and the land cannot therefore be regarded as having ‘blended into the landscape’ as per the definition of previously development land in the NPPF glossary definition. The landscape is also of an urban setting.
4.4. To the north are the residential dwellings on Portholme Drive. To the east is the newly constructed L&G development, with a terrace row of 8 dwellings being 31-45 Mill Way. This newly constructed estate was approved and built after this application was submitted. To the south is the railway line and to the west is Osbourne House.
4.5. The red line application is set in from the boundary to the east where it meets the fencing of the dwellings on Mill Way due to previous uncertainly over the extent of the site ownership. It is also set to the south of the ditch on the northern boundary where it meets the rear gardens of Portholme Drive.
5.0 Description of Proposal
5.1. The major application is for the erection of a class C3 (b) assisted care apartments, consisting of 24 2-bed apartments over 3 storeys. The building is to provide assisted living and has other ancillary rooms within the building consisting of a manager’s office, hobby lounge and dining room at ground floor and 2 relative sleep over rooms. Parking is shown to the west of the building and an area for the creation of a landscaped garden to the north and east of the building. The application site is 0.27 hectares.
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 committees and finally to North Yorkshire Council’s 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. Selby Town Council: The Town Council object to this planning application on the following grounds:
Overdevelopment of the site, lack of sufficient car parking, potential increase in traffic congestion due to on street parking along Union Lane, the proximity of the 25 units to properties on Portholme Drive and Union Lane, the proposed development would be too close to the rear of Tesco Store with noisy deliveries day and night and possible flood risk concerns.
7.3. Division Member(s): No responses received.
7.4. Highways No objections. Initially requested the car parking layout be amended to allow 6m be made available behind parked cars. This was amended and conditions covering details of access parking and turning and on-site storage of construction traffic were recommended.
7.5. HER Officer (archaeology) – No objection.
7.6. Contaminated Land – No objection subject to conditions covering the investigation of land contamination prior to development commencing, submission of a remediation scheme, verification of remedial works and the reporting of unexpected contamination.
7.7. Environmental Health – No formal objection but concerns over noise from railway. Conditions are suggested relating to working hours and a scheme to control noise, vibration and dust and piling if necessary.
7.8. Yorkshire Water – No objection subject to condition. The FRA states that surface water will discharge to culverted watercourse via the private drainage in the neighbouring site to the west.
7.9. Selby Area Internal Drainage Board– No objection subject to conditions covering surface water discharge at 1.4 litres per second.
7.10. LLFA - No objection subject to condition covering the need for run off rates, storage and maintenance to be agreed.
7.11. The Environment Agency – No objection. The site is located entirely in flood zone 2 our standing advice should be followed.
7.12. North Yorkshire Fire & Rescue Service– No objection.
7.13. Ecology – No objection. The submitted Preliminary Ecological Appraisal. There are no statutory or non-statutory designations within or close to the site boundary. The survey found no habitats of principal importance or evidence of protected species on site, though suitable habitat exists for bats, hedgehogs, reptiles, and breeding birds.
Conditions suggested covering the need for a Construction Ecological Management Plan (CEcMP), Species Enhancement Plan, Sensitive lighting strategy and a detailed landscape planting plan which preferences native species over ornamental specimens.
7.14. Public Rights of Way Officer – No response received. (No PROW crosses the site)
7.15. Designing Out Crime Officer – No objection to the design and layout.
7.16. Network Rail – No objection in principle but provided a list of matters they required to be conditioned i.e. drainage, boundary fencing, Armco barriers, method statements, sound proofing, lighting and landscaping and a series of technical matters that are added as general informatives.
Local Representations
7.17. The application was first publicised on the 29.8.2018 via a site notice and appeared in the Selby Times 6.9.2018. The residents on Portholme Drive and Union Lane were directly written to. This publicity received 4 objections from residents on Portholme Drive that back onto the site.
7.18. Due to the passage of time and due to the dwellings known as 31-45 Mill Way to the east being constructed as part of the L&G development, new site notices were posted on Mill Way 3.12.24 and Portholme Drive. 10 of additional objections were received, 3 were from the same household.
7.19. Finally, a final round of publicity occurred on 15.9.25 due to changes to the design of the scheme. A further 6 letters of objection were received.
7.20. A summary of the comments is provided below, however, please see website for full comments.
· The main concern is over the sheer size of the proposed building and the fact this will totally dominate the views from residents on Portholme Drive.
· A 3-storey building so close to the rear of dwellings on Mill way and Portholme Drive will have a significant impact on the amount of natural light to the dwellings and garden and create overlooking.
· The large 3 storey building will dominate outlook and be overbearing.
· Concerns over surface water treatment with flooding of gardens surrounding the site since Osbourne house has been built.
· The site is flood zone 2.
· No significant differences exist between the proposed and 2015 refusal.
· The construction phase will entail machinery and construction vehicles using the site in early hours, including weekends, and continued late into the night. Residents are concerned at what issues a construction much closer would cause.
· The development will disrupt the biodiversity of the site that currently supports a variety of wildlife, including many birds and squirrels. This area is vital for maintaining local biodiversity, and its destruction would have lasting ecological consequences.
· The construction phase will likely bring considerable noise, dust and disruption to the community, reduce air quality and even after completion, increased activity could result in ongoing disturbances. Noise levels from vehicles and people will exponentially increase.
· The site will be overdeveloped bearing in mind the Portholme Road site that has only just been completed. The building is too big for the site.
· Due to recently built Aldi & Portholme estate the traffic in the area has already considerably increased adding an extra 25 properties will only increase this more.
· Preserving this green space is essential for maintaining the character and liveability of our neighbourhood.
· Flood Mitigation: The site currently acts as a natural sponge, absorbing rainwater and preventing surface flooding. Its removal could increase the risk of floods in the area.
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, the use class and housing land supply
- Access, Transport and Highway Safety
- Heritage Impacts of the Proposal
- Contamination
- Noise and Vibration
- Flooding and Drainage
- Design and Effect upon the Character of the Area
- Trees and Landscaping
- Impact on residential amenity
- Recreational Open Space
- Ecology
- Minerals
- Impact on the railway
- Other matters
- Legal Agreement
10.0 ASSESSMENT
Principle of Development
10.1. 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. Relevant policies in respect of the principle of this proposal include Policy SP2 “Spatial Development Strategy” and Policy SP4 “Management of Residential Development in Settlements” and Policy SP5 “The Scale and Distribution of Housing” of the Core Strategy.
10.2. The proposed scheme is a full application for the erection of 24 sheltered residential accommodation units and parking. The application site is situated within the defined development limits of Selby which is designated as the Principal Town as defined by Policy SP2(A) of the Core Strategy. This establishes that Selby will be the focus for new housing and growth. Policy SP2(A) also stipulates that proposals for development on non-allocated sites must meet the requirements of Policy SP4.
10.3. Policy SP4 of the Core Strategy Local Plan defines the type of development that would be acceptable within the defined development limits of the Principal Town, Local Service Centres, Designated Service Villages and Secondary Villages. This policy includes the redevelopment of previously developed land in Selby. Core Strategy Policy SP8 requires proposals for housing to contribute to the creation of mixed communities by ensuring the types and sizes of dwellings reflect the demand and profiles of households.
10.4. The application site is located on previously developed land within the defined development limits of Selby and therefore would comply with Policies SP2(a) and SP4(a) of the Selby District Core Strategy and is acceptable in principle. Policy SP 4 c) and d) indicates that in all cases proposals will be expected to protect local amenity, preserve and enhance the character of the area, comply with normal planning considerations, and be of an appropriate density, character and form of the local area. These matters are assessed in the relevant sections below.
10.5. In respect of the wider sustainability objectives advocated in Paragraph 8 of the NPPF, the site is well served by local services, which reduces the need to travel, utilises previously developed land utilises existing infrastructure which contributes towards the environmental sustainability. The development will also provide jobs in the construction of the proposal and roles for staffing the facility which contributes towards economic objectives of sustainability. The application form suggests job creation will be minimal i.e. 3 jobs and that’s due to the nature of the use with most occupants living independently. In terms of the social aspect of sustainability, the scheme will provide increased choice for the extra care sector of the housing market in a well-designed scheme with accessible services.
C2 Residential institution vs C3 Dwellinghouses Use
10.6. It is important to establish if this proposed facility falls within a Class C2 or C3 of the 1987 (as amended) Use Class order. This is because a class C3 uses may be subject to affordable housing contributions, whereas C2 uses do not.
10.7. This is all dependant on the level of care provided. The Use Class Order defines “Care” as means personal care for people in need of such care by reason of old age, disablement, past or present dependence on alcohol or drugs or past or present mental disorder, and in class C2 also includes the personal care of children and medical care and treatment.
10.8. C2 Residential institutions are:
· Use for the provision of residential accommodation and care to people in need of care (other than a use within class C3 (dwelling houses)).
· Use as a hospital or nursing home.
· Use as a residential school, college or training centre.
Class C3. Dwellinghouses
· Use as a dwellinghouse (whether or not as a sole or main residence) —
· (a)by a single person or by people to be regarded as forming a single household,
· (b) not more than 6 residents living together as a single household where care is provided for residents: or
· (c) not more than six residents living together as a single household where no care is provided to residents (other than a use within Class C4).
10.9. The definition of “care” is provided in article 2 of the use classes order and is described above.
10.10. For the purposes of Class C3(a) a “single household” is to be construed in accordance with Section 258 of the Housing Act 2004. Persons are to be regarded as not forming a single household unless they are all members of the same family, or their circumstances are circumstances of a description specified for the purposes of this section in regulations made by the appropriate national authority.
10.11. Osbourne House which lies adjacent to the site was permitted in 2008 and was 64-bed care home employing up to 20 staff on site at any one time. The level of care provided means it’s a lawful C2 residential use. This application is for sheltered housing and the certainty of the use becomes less clear.
10.12. Sheltered Housing and Extra Care Housing are likely to be Use Class C3. This was reinforced in the judgment from Rectory Homes Limited v Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government [2020]. If the units can be used as independent dwellings, (in this case they each had their own front door and private facilities) then they can be considered as “dwellings”, irrespective of whether an element of care is provided.
10.13. The distinguishing feature of C2 accommodation is occupants being in “need of care” as opposed to simply having care available if needed.
10.14. Officers consider the use is best described as an extra care facility and therefore likely to fall within a C3(b) use where residents live independently but optional care is provided for residents.
10.15. The previous outline application in 2015 was not described as a C2 use and was therefore assessed as a C3 use for sheltered housing. If the use is regarded as C3 residential then an affordable housing contribution is necessary as 24 units meets the 10-unit trigger.
10.16. Core Strategy Policy SP9 “Affordable Housing” sets out the affordable housing policy context for the District. For schemes of more than 10 units or 0.3 hectare on-site provision of affordable housing up to a maximum of 40% of the total new dwellings is sought. Paragraph 65 of the NPPF is relevant to the approach to affordable housing and seeks contributions for major applications such as this.
10.17. The previous outline application in 2015 did not provide a contribution towards affordable housing provision and was refused for the following reason:
The proposed development is for Class C3 dwelling units and fails to provide any Affordable Housing provision. The development therefore fails to accord with Policy SP9 of the SDCSLP and the adopted SPD on Affordable Housing 2014.
10.18. This submission seeks to address this issue in the planning statement and suggests the use is C2 being limited to over 55 with a minimum 2 hours care per week. The applicants state the building will be inherently linked to the adjacent care home with servicing and management arrangements. The applicants state the care units will form an extension of the existing care home and will be registered with the Care Quality Commission. The applicants stressed it will be very institutionalised and satisfies the C2 definition. Care is needed by virtue of the occupants age, and this will be a single planning unit, where rooms are rented and controlled by the care organisation with no opportunity to live in the building as a single household as per C3. The applicants also point out the shared communal facilities within the building and are also willing to enter into a Section 106 legal agreement ensuring the occupancy restriction is complied with and that no affordable housing provision is required.
10.19. This proposed use see’s all the apartments laid out with a kitchen, lounge and separate bedrooms to allow for independent living. The access has no main reception, and all residents have their own front door to come and go as they please. The building has some communal facilities i.e. a managers office, residents lounge, residents’ tea making facility and hobby room at ground floor and 1 sleep over room for relatives on the first and second floor.
10.20. The units are best described as assisted care apartments and are intended to form a continuing retirement community. The distinction between C3 and C2 hinges on whether the property is primarily for "dwelling houses" (C3) or the provision of "care" (C2). In this case officers consider the primary use will be independent living and therefore it falls within an extra care facility class C3(b).
10.21. Therefore, whilst there is conflict with Policy SP 3 in that no affordable housing is being provided, this is justified given the type of C3 accommodation being proposed. The proposed legal agreement can control the age of the occupants meaning it’s not open market housing where affordable housing is normally applicable. The applicant has confirmed in the planning statement that the rooms will always be rented out and managed by the applicant and not individually sold off. This will allow the occupants control the facility. This satisfies SP9 of the Core Strategy.
Housing Supply
10.22. Given that this application is to provide C3 housing, it is important to consider the housing land supply position.
10.23. The NPPF is a material consideration. In this context, currently there is a lack of a five-year housing land supply in the Selby legacy area, due to the increase in housing requirements arising from the NPPF (December 2024) and as such applications are required to make decisions in accordance with Paragraph 11 d of the NPPF (December 2024) and the ‘tilted balance’ is engaged.
10.24. Paragraph 11d states that in terms of decision-making and the presumption in favour
of sustainable development:
“d) where there are no relevant development plan policies, or the policies which are most important for determining the application are out-of-date, granting permission unless:
i. the application of policies in this Framework that protect areas or assets of particular importance provides a strong reason for refusing the development proposed; or
ii. any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in this Framework taken as a whole, having particular regard to key policies for directing development to sustainable locations, making effective use of land, securing well-designed places and providing affordable homes, individually or in combination.”
10.25. Footnote 7 notes that the “assets of particular importance” are: habitats sites (and those sites listed in paragraph 189) and/or designated as Sites of Special Scientific Interest; land designated as Green Belt, Local Green Space, a National Landscape, a National Park (or within the Broads Authority) or defined as Heritage Coast; irreplaceable habitats; designated heritage assets (and other heritage assets of archaeological interest referred to in footnote 75); and areas at risk of flooding or coastal change”.
10.26. In light of the above, the site’s only asset of importance is its flood zone 2 status and the development has passed the sequential test and provided a satisfactory Flood Risk Assessment, and it is considered that the scheme accords with the NPPF when taken as a whole. The development is in a sustainable location within a main town, and it is making effective use of the land providing a well-designed scheme which is also delivering a form of sheltered housing provision. In this context it is considered under Paragraph 11d of the NPPF that the principle of development on the site should be supported.
10.27. To conclude this proposed use is appropriate in terms of its location in the settlement boundary in accordance with Core Strategy SP 2 and SP 4. The proposal is therefore acceptable in principle subject to the other impacts discussed in the following sections.
Access, transport and highway safety
10.28. 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.
10.29. 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.
10.30. 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.
10.31. 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”.
10.32. 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, following mitigation, would be severe, taking into account all reasonable future scenarios.”
10.33. The application was accompanied by a Transport Assessment in 2018. This detailed how the application site is in a sustainable location, with local amenities being accessible by walking, cycling and public transport. There were no committed developments or highway network changes that may have an impact on the findings of the assessment. The report described how the proposal would attract the usual servicing requirements and how the design and layout of the scheme will allow for all movements and turning points to be accommodated within the site. Parking levels accorded with North Yorkshire Council’s car and cycle parking guidelines.
10.34. In terms of sustainable travel, a Welcome Pack is recommended for new occupants to ensure that the impact on the adjoining roads network is mitigated. In terms of traffic movements, the analysis indicates that the proposed development will result in a maximum of 5 two-way vehicular movements during the peak hours, with the highway network capable of taking the development without being a detrimental to highway safety of road users.
10.35. The proposed use shows 14 car parking spaces within the red line, however 7 already exists on site. The site is access from Union Lane and no alterations to the access are needed. The site will have very little impact on the highway network as all turning will take place within the site and due to the nature of the use, car dependency is likely to be low. The site also very sustainable which will equally discourage vehicular movements.
10.36. The Local Authority Highway officer reviewed the presented information and initially suggested a slight change to the layout to ensure 6m between parallel spaces. The plans were amended, and no objections were raised. Conditions were suggested covering access, parking and turning and details of construction traffic and parking. This will ensure compliance with Selby District Local Plan Policies ENV1, T2, and Core Strategy Polices SP15 and SP 19 section 9 of the NPPF.
Heritage impacts of the proposal
10.37. 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.
10.38. 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’.
10.39. The application was not supported by any heritage information, as the site lies outside the Selby Conservation Area and not near any listed buildings. The Heritage Officer did consider the submission and noted the development site is located at some distance from the medieval core of the town of Selby. Historic maps indicate that the site has previously been truncated by a former railway line. The officer concluded that it is unlikely that archaeological remains will survive in this area should they ever have been present and therefore no further investigation is necessary. Heritage is therefore not a constrain to the development and compliance with the above policies is adhered to.
Contaminated land and ground conditions
10.40. 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.
10.41. 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.
10.42. 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 191 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.
10.43. The proposal involves an end use that would be particularly vulnerable to contamination. The application was accompanied by a risk assessment and remediation strategy. The report is dated 17th August 2015 and was produced to accompany the previous 2015 refusal. Whilst this is outdated, it is unlikely that the ground conditions would have changed over recent years.
10.44. The report was assessed by the council’s contaminated land expert who states that the report provides a good overview of previous works that have been undertaken at the site and the identified contamination. This provides a base line to enable the planning application to be approved. However, further survey work should be carried out to ensure that a remediation strategy is produced and implemented. 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.
10.45. 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 Vibration
10.46. The policies referred to in the contaminated land section above are relevant.
10.47. In terms of noise and vibration the site is directly adjacent to the Selby Railway line, which has frequent movements throughout the day. The applicants supplied a Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment produced by Hepworth Acoustics. The assessment has shown that vibration levels are well within the adopted criteria and the potential noise impact can be adequately mitigated with the recommended scheme of upgraded glazing and ventilation.
10.48. The Environmental Health Officer assessed the information and was satisfied that the mitigation proposed i.e. double-glazing, acoustic trickle ventilation and the erection of a 2.4m high close-boarded timber acoustic fence to the perimeter would enable noise standards to internal living areas to be achieved. However, concerns were raised that this would result in residents being unable to open windows without being subject to unacceptable noise levels from the railway line. This also applies to the proposed garden area whereby regular high impact noise will occur irrespective of the proposed acoustic fence to the perimeter.
10.49. Officers note these concerns; however, noise never previously formed a reason for refusal in 2015 and the standoff distances remain the same. Information online suggests the amount of trains passing through Selby has not consistently increased in recent years; rather, there have been fluctuations and service adjustments, with the network recovering from COVID-19 impacts, however this may increase in the future.
10.50. The noise source is infrequent with the passenger train service ending at around 11pm so as not to disrupt core sleeping hours. Likewise, the need for windows to be opened throughout the year will be periodic and mainly in summer months. Also due to the nature of the use, it’s unlikely the outside space will be used for long periods and the landscaped area is at the north eastern part of the site away from the railway, with the building itself providing a barrier for noise. On this basis a reason for refusal based on noise could not be substantiated.
10.51. Finally, the EHO indicated that the construction phase would also have the potential to adversely impact on the nearest residents by way of dust, dirt, noise and vibration. Conditions were therefore suggested covering the need for a scheme to minimise the above, hours of working conditions, control over piling and noise mitigation measures installation. The proposal is therefore acceptable with respect to noise and vibration in accordance with Policy ENV2 of the Local Plan and Policy SP19 of the Core Strategy.
Flooding and Drainage
10.52. 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 which seeks to apply sequential and exceptions tests, 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.” Paragraph 174 states “The aim of the sequential test is to steer new development to areas with the lowest risk of flooding from any source. Development should not be allocated or permitted if there are reasonably available sites appropriate for the proposed development in areas with a lower risk of flooding.”
10.53. The flood zone which the application falls within has also fluctuated of the lifetime of the application, being zone 2 (medium probability of flooding) when first submitted, then changing to zone 3 (high probability of flooding) in 2018 and currently back to zone 2. The site is protected and benefits from flood defences. The proposed development is classified as “More Vulnerable” in accordance with Table 2 of the PPG.
10.54. The flood risk assessment submitted with the application was dated July 2015 and was the same as submitted for the refused outline consent. This explains how the site falls from the north west to the south east with the lowest point of the site is at a level of 4.96m AOD in the southeast corner, and the highest point is at a level of 5.93m AOD in the northwest corner of the application site. The FRA explains how the adjacent existing Care Home (Osbourne House) development is served by a private surface water drainage system, which is attenuated via a below ground cellular tank which then pumps at a rate of 30 l/s into a gravity sewer which in turn discharges into Brayton Drain within Union Lane. Similarly, the existing Care Home is drained via a private foul drainage system which discharges by gravity into the existing public foul sewer within Union Lane. The proposed scheme will replicate this.
10.55. In terms of floor levels, the FRA says normal advice is to set the FFL at 600mm above the 1 in 100 +CC level which based on the Selby Scenario is 6.36m resulting in a min FFL of 6.96m. The FRA explains that this would not be viable on the site due to access arrangements to the care home and the physical elevation and planning issues. The FRA states “As the site is within an area benefitting from defences, then it has been agreed with the Environment Agency that the FFL should be set at 6.29m AOD which is 600mm above the 1 in 100 (Selby Scenario) level and also 180mm above the 1 in 200 (Selby Scenario) flood level. In addition, the first 600mm of the building will incorporate Flood Resilience measures and the site will be linked to the EA 24 hour flood warning system with a suitable Flood Evacuation plan in place.”
10.56. The FRA also confirms that states that the ground is considered unsuitable for infiltration SUDs techniques due to the presence of contamination and impermeable clay in the ground. It is proposed to discharge surface water run off from the application site to the surface water drainage system serving the existing site, which pumps surface water run off to Brayton Drain at a rate of 30l/s. Underground cellular attenuation storage is to be installed and sized to store surface water run off for all events up to and including the 1 in 100 year + 30% climate change storm events, since the site levels do not allow for any exceedance storage above ground. The size of this storage volume is proposed to be 82m3.
10.57. The report concludes stating that surface water attention requires a detailed drainage design, and that all waters will pass through a suitably sized oil/petrol interceptor from car parking before the flow is discharged to Brayton Drain. The development shall be signed up to the Environment Agency’s 24-hour flood warning system and flood resilience measures shall be incorporated into the development 600mm above the FFL of 6.29m AOD.
10.58. The original FRA also provided no details of any alternative sites to apply the sequential test and states that sequential testing is a matter for the Local Planning Authority. In terms of the exception test the FRA details that the wider sustainability benefits include the development of a brownfield site and the site specific flood risk assessment ensures the site can be made safe.
Amended Flood Risk Assessment
10.59. Due to the age of the FRA submitted with the application, a new assessment was requested by officers. The applicants commissioned a new assessment with the latest version being produced by JC Consulting and dated 1.8.2025. This provided a more up to date assessment of the risk and adjusted the minimum finished floor level from 6.29m AOD to 6.21 which is conditioned.
10.60. The IDB raised no objection to the scheme providing water discharge was at 1.4 litres per second. The LLFA only responded in 2018 and suggested the FRA was out of date due to the flood zone changing to zone 3. The LLFA also commented on the treatment of surface water and considered the FRA to be a reasonable approach to the management of surface water and recommended a condition covering run off rates, storage requirements and maintenance which is added as condition No.15. The EA raised no objection to the proposals and offered standing advice given its flood zone 2 status.
10.61. In terms of the Sequential Test the aim is to steer new development to areas with the lowest probability of flooding. The 2015 application agreed that the search area should be the Selby main urban area only and officers agreed that this should still be the case, as the development needs to be in a sustainable town centre location. The site is also brownfield and therefore only brownfield sites should be considered in flood zone 1 as these would be a lesser flood zone. This accords with the Selby District Council Flood Risk Sequential Test Developer Guidance Note October 2019. This approach is also consistent with the paragraphs 173 and 174 of the NPPF and NPPG guidance on flood as the application of the sequential test is a matter for the Local Planning Authority.
10.62. A revised sequential test was submitted produced by Lichfields dated 9.9.25. This examined a series of other sites in the development limits, some of which were mainly old employment allocations. The assessment demonstrated that there are no alternative sites that are ‘reasonably available’ and are less prone to flooding that that of the application site. The sequential test has therefore been passed in accordance with Policy SP15 of the Core Strategy and Section 14 of the NPPF.
10.63. In terms of the exception test, the use is considered the proposed development is classified as ‘more vulnerable’ under Annex 3 of the NPPF, and is located within Flood Zone 2, there is no requirement for the exception test to be undertaken in accordance with the requirements of the NPPG.
10.64. 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, SP16 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.
10.65. 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. Paragraph 135 of the NPPF states that planning decisions should ensure that developments; are visually attractive as a result of layout and landscaping; sympathetic to local character, while not preventing change, and establish a sense of place.
10.66. The proposed development is accessed from Union Lane; however, it is set back from the highway on a vacant site tucked between the railway line to the south, existing care home to the west and existing residential dwellings to the north and east. Views into the site are limited, except for those land uses that share boundaries. The residential use is therefore characteristic of this urbanised location. The proposal is effectively an extension of the existing care facility albeit detached and linked by the existing car park and on a smaller footprint. Its scale and design are consistent with that of the Osbourne House, albeit the recent redesign of the building means it now has a flat roof with parapet to lessen its scale and dominance to surrounding dwellings. This contrasts with Osbourne House which has mainly 3 storey elements with a hipped roof.
10.67. The building is mainly 3 storeys with a ridge height of 9.7m, with the eastern section reducing to 2 storey with a ridge height of height of 6.5m. This 2-storey part is lower than that of surrounding dwellings. Whilst flats roofs are not a characteristic feature, the location of this building means it can easily assimilate into the local vernacular. The building also introduces some quality design features, with stepped facades, small projections to create shadow lines and definition and the use of differing materials in the elevations, grey and black fenestration and brick detailing. This gives the building a modern appearance which complements the existing care facility and the dwellings that surround it. The materials are also controlled by condition.
10.68. A further element of good design advocated by the NPPF, National Design Guide and PPG’s is designing dwellings that are spacious, fit for purpose, have internal storage area and an outlook. There are 3 types of apartments, which are all 2-bed 3 person units and have a very similar layout with a central hallway, leading to a single bedroom, then a double bedroom, with a separate shared bathroom and open lounge and kitchen. The layout shows all lounges and bedrooms have windows with an appropriate outlook. All the units have 2 internal storage areas in the hallway.
10.69. The units are 2 bed 3 persons rooms over a single storey meaning the floor area needs to be 61m2 with 2.0m2 of storage. All units have 2m storage area and all apartments are over 61 sqm. Apartment 7 is the smallest at 61.7sqm but there are only 3 in number, with the 2 remaining apartment types being 65.8sqm and the largest being 66.8sqm. These comply with the national space standards and exemplify good design.
10.70. 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) of the Selby District Local Plan and Policies SP4 and SP19 of the Selby District Core Strategy Local Plan (2013) and the NPPF in terms of design.
Trees and landscaping
10.71. 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.
10.72. The submission was accompanied by an Arboricultural report from 2018 and a tree constraints plan which showed existing tree cover on the northern boundary providing cover between the application site and the rear gardens of the dwellings on Portholme Road and Union Street. Whilst this report is now somewhat dated it is sufficient for assessment purposes as the main trees identified are on the northern boundary and the building is positioned away from these trees and these are being retained.
10.73. A further tree belt exists on the southern boundary adjacent to the railway. None of the trees are protected by TPO’s or within a Conservation Area. The site has since become more overgrown and the trees that have been self-set more established over the last 7 years. The strategy is to clear the scrub and save the more established boundary trees. The trees on the northern boundary will provide a visual screen and will be retained. The protection during construction will be conditioned.
10.74. A landscape plan was initially submitted based on a previous layout, which shows how the north and eastern parts of the site will be landscaped, adding pathways, a gazebo, fruit trees and shrubbery to the site to provide residents with a landscaped area to enjoy. The frontage of the building is also softened by planting. The landscape plan wasn’t updated to reflect the latest layout and will instead be controlled by condition. Officers are satisfied that a suitable landscaping scheme can be achieved as a similar level of space exists to accommodate the 2018 submitted landscaping scheme. This will just need adjusting to take account of the revised building form.
10.75. The lack of a useable garden space for residents previously formed a reason for refusal on the 2015 outline i.e. ‘The proposed development fails to provide an adequate and useable amount of recreation open space resulting in a poor quality design and environment for the occupants.’
10.76. The proposal has been scaled back from the previous refusal creating more opportunity for amenity space on the northern and eastern boundary. This communal amenity is considered satisfactory and not dissimilar to that approved for Osbourne House. The proposed landscaping condition will ensure its final design is implemented to benefit residents of the sheltered housing facility. This will ensure compliance with Policy ENV1 (1) of the Selby District Local Plan and Policy SP19 of the Selby District Core Strategy Local Plan and national planning policy guidance as set out in the NPPF.
Residential Amenity
10.77. Relevant policies in respect of the effect upon the amenity of adjoining occupiers include Policy ENV1 (1) of the Selby District Local Plan. This is consistent with the aims of the NPPF to ensure that a good standard of amenity is achieved, in particular the new development’s impact on outlook, light and privacy.
10.78. The proposed development is surrounded by residential dwellings to the north and east. Objection letters were initially received from the residents to the north on Portholme Drive. As a result of the more recent publicity, objections have been received from the newly built dwellings to the east (Mill Way) which have been constructed since the application was submitted. These concerns are detailed in the representation sections and mainly stem from the original 3 storey nature of the building and the impact on privacy, noise, loss of light.
10.79. The agent argues that consideration should have been given to the interrelationship of dwellings and the care home when the L&G development was approved to the east. This is noted however both were pending applications at the time. The L&G dwellings that back onto the site were permitted first and have reasonable sized rear gardens and should be afforded a reasonable outlook and privacy. This requires a minimum 21m distance between elevations of a 2 storey nature.
10.80. In terms of the impact of the proposed building of the dwellings on Portholme Drive to the north, the 2015 application was refused for the following reason “The proposed development would adversely the living conditions of the occupants of residents on Portholme Drive, in particular Nos 31,33 and 35 due to the scale and mass of the three storey building proposed which due to its close proximity would result in overshadowing of private garden space and an overbearing effect on the outlook from the dwellings. The proposal would therefore conflict with Policies ENV1 of the LP and with the NPPF.”
10.81. This had a separation of approximately 25m and was regarded as being oppressive due to the scale and nature of the scheme. This revised submission reduces the scale of the development on the northern boundary and pulls a significant section of the building away from the boundary, whilst retaining the more established boundary landscaping. An element of the northern elevation has also been reduced to 2 storeys and the whole of the pitched roof has been removed. This improves the relationship with the dwellings to the north on Portholme Drive. Also, the main windows facing north are a first-floor seating area corridor on the first and second floor. This separation and growth of the vegetation on the boundary is regarded as being satisfactory in terms of privacy, outlook and overshadowing.
10.82. With regards to the new dwellings to the east on the newly constructed Mill Way L&G development, the revised plans now show a 21m separation distance between the rear elevations of the dwellings on Mill Way and the closest 2 storey element of the eastern elevation of the proposed building. Whilst the Local Planning Authority doesn’t have any supplementary guidance on minimum window distances, it is widely acknowledged that 21m should exist between 2 storey dwellings and a greater distance facing a 3 storey building. This is achieved by the new design, as first floor and of the new building facing east has bedrooms and lounge facing east at 21m and 2 storeys. The building then jumps to 3 storeys at the south eastern corner, however only 1 small lounge window exists on the first and second floor and this doesn’t look directly into adjacent dwellings. The building then elevates to 3 storeys within the site and has 2nd floor windows facing east. These are 28m away and mainly serve a corridor. The interaction between the dwellings on Mill Way and the proposed building in terms of overlooking and privacy is deemed satisfactory because of the amended plans.
10.83. In terms of outlook, it is evident that the outlook of the current dwellings on Mill Way will undoubtedly change from scrubland to built form. The proposed building is some 30m long and therefore its impact in terms of massing is significant. However, the amended design has introduced 2 storey elements on the eastern section and incorporated a flat roof to reduce the massing. This scale and level of separation is acceptable, particularly when new residential dwellings only need an 11m rear to side gable distance for outlook purposes.
10.84. There would be no adverse impact on the existing care home to the west due to the juxtaposition and space between the two buildings. Likewise, no impact to the south as this faces the railway line. As such, the proposal complies with Policies ENV1 (1) of the Selby District Local Plan and Section 12 of the NPPF.
Recreational open Space
10.85. In terms of amenity space, the 2015 proposal was a more intensive use of the site and was refused for the following reason “The proposed development fails to provide an adequate and useable amount of recreation open space resulting in a poor quality design and environment for the occupants. The proposal therefore fails to comply with Policy RT2 and ENV1 of the LP, SP19 of the CS and with the NPPF.” Officers considered the space was poorly designed with small strips of grass would make for a useable or accessible open space area.
10.86. Policy in respect to the provision of recreational open space is provided by Policy RT2 of the Local Plan, the Developer Contributions Supplementary Planning Document, Policy SP19 of the Core Strategy.
10.87. Policy RT2 of Selby District Local Plan says: “Proposals for new residential development comprising 5 or more dwellings will be required to provide Recreation Open Space at the rate of 60sqm per dwelling “
10.88. This indicates that 1,440sqm of recreation open space should be provided (based on 24 units). The 2015 proposal provided 700sqm of recreational open space. This is substantially below the requirement, hence the refusal.
10.89. Policy RT2 does allow for proposals of less than 50 units to provide the open space within the locality or elsewhere. Where it is not practical or not deemed desirable for the provision to be made within the site the Council may accept a financial contribution to enable provision to be made elsewhere. However, given that the proposal will be used for independent living/sheltered accommodation, the provision of on-site recreational open space is important as this will contribute to residents’ quality of life. This is a need clearly established through Policy SP19 (f) of the Core Strategy that says:
“Residential and non-residential development should promote access to open spaces and green infrastructure to support community gatherings and active lifestyles which contribute to the health and social well-being of the local community.”
10.90. The planning statement on this revised submission suggests the building has been pulled away from the northern boundary and reduced in footprint leaving 856 sqm of land for landscaping to be created. The eastern elevation faces this landscaped garden and an opportunity for onsite landscaping exists in the north east corner of the site. A landscaping condition will ensure this is delivered and given it’s privately owned, this will be maintained by the operator.
10.91. The planning submission also states that the occupants will not require a significant space to walk around but require a more attractive space to sit and experience different views. The submission also points out that the RT2 requirement is more aimed at C3 housing and doesn’t take account of different type of residential accommodation such as sheltered housing.
10.92. Officers have considered the arguments and consider that the increased amenity area, combined with the opportunity to create a landscaped garden area are satisfactory. Whilst the compact recreational area doesn’t fulfil the 60 sqm requirement as advocated in RT2, it is considered satisfactory in this instance due to the type of accommodation being provided. This will fulfil the social objective of paragraph 8b of the NPPF and paragraph 98 which requires decisions to provide social and recreational facilities for community needs and plan positively for the provision of shared spaces.
Ecology
10.93. 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.
10.94. 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.
10.95. The application submitted in 2018 was not initially accompanied by any ecological information and the planning statement (paragraph 5.12) relies on the fact that the site has no formal designation for nature conservation and the previous committee report in 2015 regarded no nature conservation interests would be harmed. Notwithstanding this the site is brownfield and was cleared of buildings and very little vegetation existed apart from the boundary trees. This is still the case with regards to the designation, however after 7 years of the application being undetermined, the site has naturally revegetated in part with self set saplings and bushes. The council’s ecologist indicated that an up-to-date preliminary ecological appraisal should be submitted just to rule out any protected species using the site and will document the habitats present and the value of the site for any local species e.g. birds, badger. This will guide any necessary mitigation such as timing of clearance.
10.96. The applicants commissioned an extended phase one habitat survey (Preliminary Ecological Appraisal) dated 3.9.25 and Ground Level Tree Assessment for bats by ecologists ‘Amenity Tree’. This was assessed by the council’s ecologists and confirms the site comprises modified grassland, dense scrub, mixed woodland, and developed land. There are no statutory or non-statutory designations within or close to the site boundary. The survey found no habitats of principal importance or evidence of protected species on site, though suitable habitat exists for bats, hedgehogs, reptiles, and breeding birds. Recommendations include a precautionary breeding bird checks prior to vegetation clearance, and Reasonable Avoidance Measures for mobile species such as reptiles and hedgehogs.
10.97. Whilst the site has no designations or significant presence of protected species, the site is of local value for breeding birds and foraging and commuting bats. The habitats on site provide connectivity along the railway line allowing movement of species between areas of semi natural habitats. The council’s ecologist suggests the design should seek to retain as much boundary vegetation as possible and ensure there is no light spill onto retained habitat to minimise disturbance to bats and birds. As there is the potential for disturbance to locally occurring species during site clearance and construction works, a Construction Ecological Management Plan (CEcMP) is required and is suitably conditioned. This should include precautionary working method statements, timing of works to avoid sensitive periods and temporary fencing and exclusion zones to protect retained habitats.
10.98. There is also the opportunity to incorporate integrated bat and bird boxes into the fabric of the new building. The detail of this is secured by the need for a Species Enhancement Plan condition. In addition, a condition is imposed requiring the need for a sensitive lighting strategy that demonstrates how external lighting will avoid light spill onto boundary habitats, thus minimising impacts for bat foraging and community routes. The lighting strategy will also control light spill onto the railway as suggested by Network Rail and control its impact of glare for nearby residential amenity.
10.99. In terms of Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG) the application pre-dates mandatory BNG procedures but previous ‘BNG in principle’ policy is secured by SP18 from the Selby Core Strategy. NPPF paragraph 193(a) requires that significant harm to biodiversity must be adequately mitigated or compensated for. The Preliminary Ecological Appraisal did not identify significant harm to biodiversity and no Biodiversity Nett Gain Assessment was submitted due to the applications age. The Local Authority Ecologist was satisfied that a landscaping condition could control and retain boundary vegetation and strengthen existing habitats and provide for new habitat creation which makes use of native species in preference to ornamental species. The planting scheme should incorporate species for pollinators and structural planting to provide shelter, foraging and nesting opportunities for birds. This can be delivered through the proposed landscaping scheme without the need for a specific nett gain condition. The standard Nett Gain also couldn’t apply due to the applications age.
10.100. 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
10.101. The Minerals and Waste Joint Plan was adopted in 2022, so 4 years after the initial submission. The site is within a brick and clay and sand and gravel safeguarding area designated by Policy S01 of the Minerals and Waste Joint Plan. Policy S07 lists the exemption criteria including the redevelopment of previously developed land where the footprint of the former development doesn’t increase. The 2002 google images show all the site laid to hard surfaces as part of the former Roose House factory and storage yard. The development meets the safeguarding exemption criteria.
10.102. 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.
Impact on the railway
10.103. The site lies to the immediate north of the Selby Railway line controlled by Network Rail. The application sites boundary adjoins the Network Rail embankment and the proposed building sits close to this boundary, with limited opportunity for any landscaping on the southern boundary.
10.104. Network Rail were consulted on the application and advised that due to the proximity of the railway it would be necessary for the applicant to provide details of drainage, boundary fencing, Armco barriers, method statements, sound proofing, lighting and landscaping via planning conditions to ensure the safety and operational need and integrity of the railway isn’t disturbed. Network Rail’s response indicated the other matters in the consultation response could be informatives. The response indicated that the proposed 2.4m fence would meet the trespass proof fencing requirement. Conditions 16 and 17 in the recommendation cover the need for drainage details, condition 18 addresses the need for Armco barriers in the south west end of the car park, condition 19 covers the fencing specification, condition 20 covers the need for a construction method statement, condition 21 covers landscaping and condition 24 requires a lighting schemes. Sound proofing is addressed above in the noise section of this report. Officers are therefore satisfied that the interests of Network Rail are protected and that the necessary information Network Rail require is controlled by condition.
Other matters
Section 149 of The Equality Act 2010
10.105. 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.
10.106. 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.
S106 Legal Agreement
10.107. The following Heads of Terms have been agreed with the applicant for this application.
|
Table 1 |
||
|
Category/Type |
Control |
Amount & Trigger |
|
Occupation limitation |
Limit occupation to primary resident, which is a person who needs at least 2 hours of Personal Care a week and who is aged 55 years or older.
Ensure the units are not sold off and are run as a single entity.
|
Prior to Occupation of an Extra Care Unit each Primary Resident shall undertake a Health Assessment in order to identify the level and type of Personal Care and other support and assistance they require. This is reviewed on an annual basis. Residents pay a fee and sign up to a basic care package.
|
10.108. The proposed agreement will control the persons that occupy the development to people in need of extra care and over 55. This will then overcome the need for an affordable housing contribution as this will not be mainstream market housing. The legal agreement will enable the Local Planning Authority to retain control over occupancy to over 55 and people in need of care and ensure the units are not sold off.
10.109. It is considered that the above S106 Heads of Terms are necessary, directly related to the development and fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development and as such complies with the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Regulations 2010.
11.0 PLANNING BALANCE AND CONCLUSION
11.2. In favour of the scheme the applicants present that the proposed site forms a natural expansion of the existing care facility at Osbourne House. The development will boost the supply of extra care accommodation in the former District and provide economic benefits both during the construction phase and limited employment opportunities once occupied, which are afforded moderate weight.
11.3. Neutral impacts include the scheme having no detrimental impact on the character of the area, no harm to heritage assets, no highway safety implications and low ecological impacts that can be mitigated by planning conditions.
11.4. The site is in flood zone 2 and has passed the sequential test and demonstrated that there are no other sites in the Selby development limit that are capable of accommodating the development of this scale in a lesser food zone. No exception test is required due to the vulnerability classification of the use. The Environment Agency and drainage authorities were satisfied with the level of flood risk information and a condition is added covering the need for foul and surface water drainage details. The scheme seeks to retain and strengthen existing landscaping and requires further contamination assessment as controlled by condition. The scheme is capable of providing sufficient open space within the site for the specific end users, and the final design is controlled by condition.
11.5. The application has received several objections over the buildings impact on the outlook and privacy of residents to the north and east. These concerns are noted, however a reduction in the scale of the proposal has enabled a suitable compromise to be achieved. The building will undoubtedly have some visual impact on the outlook from rear gardens of dwellings that surround it, however it is now of a scale and distance to maintain appropriate levels of privacy and outlook.
11.6. The adverse impacts of granting permission would not significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits. The proposal benefits from the presumption in favour of sustainable development. Therefore, planning permission should be granted subject to conditions and prior completion of a S106 agreement.
12.0 RECOMMENDATION
12.1 That planning permission be GRANTED subject to the conditions set out below and the prior completion of a Section 106 Agreement.
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:
Site Layout 3033.02.102 Rev E
Elevations 3033-02 300 P1
Ground Floor Plan 3033-02 310 P1
First Floor Plan 3033-02 320 P1
Second Floor Plan 3033-02 330 P1
Roof Plan 3033-02 340 P1
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.
Highways
4. Unless otherwise approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, there shall be no excavation or other groundworks, except for investigative works, or the depositing of material on the site in connection with the construction of the access road or building(s) or other works hereby permitted until full details of the following have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority in consultation with the Highway Authority:
(iii) vehicular and cycle parking
(iv) vehicular turning arrangements
Reason:
In accordance with Selby Local Plan Policies ENV 1, T1 and T2, Core Strategy Policy SP19 and to ensure appropriate on-site facilities in the interests of highway safety and the general amenity of the development.
Highways
5. No part of the development shall be brought into use until the approved vehicle access, parking, manoeuvring and turning areas approved under condition number: 4 are available for use unless otherwise approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Once created these areas shall be maintained clear of any obstruction and retained for their intended purpose at all times.
Reason:
In accordance with Selby Local Plan Policies ENV 1 and T2, Core Strategy Policy SP19 and to ensure appropriate on-site facilities in the interests of highway safety and the general amenity of the development.
Parking
6. There shall be no establishment of a site compound, site clearance, demolition, excavation or depositing of material in connection with the construction on the site until proposals have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority for the provision of:
(i) on-site parking capable of accommodating all staff and sub-contractors vehicles clear of the public highway
(ii) on-site materials storage area capable of accommodating all materials required for the operation of the site.
The approved areas shall be kept available for their intended use at all times that construction works are in operation. No vehicles associated with on-site construction works shall be parked on the public highway or outside the application site.
Reason:
In accordance with policy ENV 1 and T5 of the Selby District Local Plan and to provide for appropriate on-site vehicle parking and storage facilities, in the interests of highway safety and the general amenity of the area.
Contamination
7. 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
8. 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
9. 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
10. 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.
Flooding
11. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the details shown on the submitted Flood Risk Assessment prepared by JC Consulting Ref JCC25-139-C-01 August 2025 and the following mitigation measures it details:
- Finished floor levels shall be set no lower than 6.210 metres above Ordnance Datum (mAOD).
The mitigation measure shall be fully implemented prior to occupation and shall be retained and maintained thereafter throughout the lifetime of the development.
Reason:
To reduce the risk of flooding to the proposed development and future occupants and to prevent flooding by ensuring the satisfactory storage of / disposal of surface water from the site. 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.
Noise and dust scheme
12. Prior to the site preparation and construction work commencing, a scheme to minimise the impact of noise, vibration, dust and dirt on residential property in close proximity to the site, shall be submitted to and agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority.
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
13. 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
14. 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.
Drainage
15. Development shall not commence until a scheme restricting the rate of development flow runoff from the site has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The flowrate from the whole site (development site and adjacent site) shall be restricted to a maximum flowrate of 30 litres per second for up to the 1 in 100 year event. A 30% allowance shall be included for climate change for the lifetime of the development. Storage shall be provided to accommodate the minimum 1 in 100 year plus climate change critical storm event. The scheme shall include a detailed maintenance and management regime for the storage facility. No part of the development shall be brought into use until the development flow restriction works comprising the approved scheme has been completed. The approved maintenance and management scheme shall be implemented throughout the lifetime of the development.
Reason:
To mitigate additional flood impact from the development proposals and ensure that flood risk is not increased elsewhere. 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.
16. All surface and foul water drainage from the development area be directed away from Network Rail's retained land and structures into suitable drainage systems, the details of which are to be approved by Network Rail before construction starts on site. Water must not be caused to pond on or near railway land either during or after any construction-related activity.
Reason:
In the interests of maintaining the safety of the adjacent rail infrastructure. 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.
Network Rail Drainage
17. The construction of soakaways for storm or surface water drainage, surface water retention ponds/tanks, SuDS or flow control systems should not take place within 30m of the Network Rail boundary. Any new drains are to be constructed and maintained so as not to have any adverse effect upon the stability of any Network Rail equipment, structure, cutting or embankment.
Reason:
In the interests of maintaining the safety of the adjacent rail infrastructure. 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.
Network Rail barrier
18. An Armco or similar barrier should be located in positions where vehicles may be in a position to drive into or roll onto the railway or damage the lineside fencing. Network Rail's existing fencing / wall must not be removed or damaged. Given the considerable number of vehicle movements likely provision should be made at each turning area/roadway/car parking area adjacent to the railway. This is in accord with the new guidance for road/rail vehicle incursion NR/LV/CIV/00012 following on from DfT advice issued in 2003, now updated to include risk of incursion from private land/roadways.
Reason:
In the interests of maintaining the safety of the adjacent rail infrastructure. This will ensure compliance with Policy ENV1 of the Selby District Local Plan.
Network Rail fencing
19. The Developer must provide a suitable trespass proof fence adjacent to Network Rail's boundary (minimum approx. 1.8m high) and make provision for its future maintenance and renewal. Network Rail's existing fencing / wall must not be removed or damaged.
Reason:
In the interests of maintaining the safety of the adjacent rail infrastructure. This will ensure compliance with Policy ENV1 of the Selby District Local Plan.
Network Rail method statement
20. Prior to development commencing a Method statement shall be submitted to Network Rail's Asset Protection Project Manager. This should include an outline of the proposed method of construction, risk assessment in relation to the railway and construction traffic management plan. Where appropriate an asset protection agreement will have to be entered into. Where any works cannot be carried out in a "fail-safe" manner, it will be necessary to restrict those works to periods when the railway is closed to rail traffic i.e. "possession" which must be booked via Network Rail's Asset Protection Project Manager and are subject to a minimum prior notice period for booking of 20 weeks. Generally if excavations/piling/buildings are to be located within 10m of the railway boundary a method statement should be submitted for NR approval.
Reason:
In the interests of maintaining the safety of the adjacent rail infrastructure. This will ensure compliance with Policy ENV1 of the Selby District Local Plan, Policy SP19 of the Core Strategy.
Landscaping details
21. Prior to the commencement of development, save for the Permitted Preliminary Works a detailed hard and soft landscaping scheme for the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall favour native species over ornamental specimens and include a detailed schedule of all boundary fencing. The approved scheme shall be implemented in its entirety within the first available planting season following the construction of the development hereby permitted. All trees, shrubs and bushes shall be adequately maintained for the period of five years beginning with the date of completion of the scheme and during that period all losses shall be made good as and when necessary. The scheme shall be retained and managed the lifetime of the development.
Reason:
In the interests of visual amenity and in order to comply with Policies SP17, SP18 and SP19 of the Core Strategy and Policy ENV1 of the Selby District Local Plan.
CEcMP
22. Prior to development commencing, a Construction Ecological Management Plan (CEcMP) shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The CEcMP
should address habitat and species protection during site clearance and construction in line with the recommendations in the Preliminary Ecological Appraisal (PEA). It should also include or be supported by pre commencement update surveys of mobile species where
previous survey data has expired.
Once agreed, the development shall be carried out in accordance with the Construction Ecological Management Plan.
Reason:
To consider the impact upon biodiversity and protected species during development, in accordance with Policies ENV1 and ENV9 of the Selby Local Plan, Policies SP18 and SP19 of the Selby Core Strategy and the NPPF.
Species Enhancement Plan
23. No development shall commence above slab level until details of a Species Enhancement Plan (or equivalent) have been submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Species Enhancement Plan shall detail measures to secure species enhancements, including but not limited to bat boxes, bird boxes/bricks and fence gaps for hedgehogs. The plan shall also detail measures for ongoing maintenance of these features. Once agreed, the development shall be carried out in accordance with the Construction Ecological Management Plan.
Reason:
To improve biodiversity within the site in accordance with Policies ENV1 and ENV9 of the Selby Local Plan, Policies SP18 and SP19 of the Selby Core Strategy and the NPPF.
Lighting
24. Prior to the use of the site becoming operational, a sensitive lighting strategy shall be submitted to and agreed in writing. The strategy shall:
- demonstrate how external lighting will avoid light spill onto boundary habitats, thus minimising impacts on bat foraging and commuting routes,
- Protect nearby residential amenity from glare,
- not to dazzle trains and the location and colour of lights must not give rise to the potential for confusion with the signalling arrangements on the railway.
Once agreed the lighting shall be installed in accordance with the agreed details and thereafter be so retained.
Reason:
In accordance with Policies ENV1 and ENV 9 of the Local Plan and Core Strategy policy SP18 and SP 19 to ensure that lighting does not spill out from the application site and cause harm to the ecological value of the boundary habitats, residential amenity and railway safety.
Noise Mitigation
25. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the noise mitigation measures shown in section 4 of the Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Report P18-237-R01v1 May 2018. The mitigation measure shall be fully implemented prior to occupation and shall be retained and maintained thereafter throughout the lifetime of the development.
Reason:
To reduce the risk of noise to the proposed development from the railway. This will ensure compliance with Policy ENV1 and ENV 2 of the Selby District Local Plan, Policy SP19 of the Core Strategy.
Tree Protection
26. No site clearance, preparatory work or development shall commence on site, until a scheme for the protection of the retained trees (the tree protection plan) and the appropriate working methods (an Arboricultural Method Statement (AMS)) in accordance with paragraphs 5.5 and 6.1 of British Standard BS 5837:2013 Trees in relation to design, demolition and construction - Recommendations (or in an equivalent British Standard if replaced) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. All works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.
Reason:
To ensure existing trees on the site which are being retained are not damaged or removed in the interests of biodiversity and in accordance with Policies ENV1 and ENV9 of the Selby Local Plan, Policies SP18 and SP19 of the Selby Core Strategy and the NPPF.
Case Officer: Gareth Stent
Appendix A – site plan
Appendix A
