Council report opposes A64 service station plans

Council report opposes A64 service station plans

Council report opposes A64 service station plans

First published in News
Last updated

AN AMBITIOUS scheme to put a new service station on an A64 roundabout east of the York looks set to be halted by councillors today.

A planning application by Enita Europe to build a petrol filling station, restaurant and hotel at the Hopgrove roundabout is due to be discussed by the council's planning committee this afternoon.

The application would see a triangle of land between the A64 the outer ring road and Old Malton Road built on, but officials have recommended the application is turned down because it lies within the Green Belt.

Their report to the planning committee says the plans are "inappropriate within the Green Belt" and would bring "unacceptable harm" to the area.

The recommendations also say the service station would give rise to "severe and on-going harmful impact to the residential amenity" of people living nearby, and would be at a high risk of flooding.

Wildlife could also be at risk if the new development were to go ahead, the report says, including protected water voles living on the site, and a sewage treatment plant on the site could leak and infect the water table.

The recommendations reflect objections from Huntington Parish Council, which warned the plans could cause a build up of traffic on local roads and inflict higher noise and light pollution levels on homes nearby.

But a statement by planning consultants England and Lyle said the service station would meet an identified need for more motorists services on the A64.

Meanwhile, plans for 65 new homes on a former fruit factory site north of York have been submitted to the council.

Del Monte has applied for planning permission to create a new residential development to replace its disused factory in Skelton.

After six months of marketing the site for employment uses, the company's land agents now say a buyer could not be found and the company wants to redevelop the site for residential use.

The proposed development would see 65 new homes including two, three and four bedroomed homes in either detached, semi-detached, or terraced properties, on the six acre site.

The application has already attracted comments from several neighbours, many of whom support the idea of development but are worried about access from the development on the A19, and the safety of people trying to walk from the new houses to services in the village across the busy road.

Comments (17)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

10:54am Thu 24 Jul 14

Miles Davis says...

I am opposed to this developement, however, since when does the council take 'Green Belt Land' into consideration??!! The proposed housing plan for York tramples all over Green Belt!! When it suits.....
I am opposed to this developement, however, since when does the council take 'Green Belt Land' into consideration??!! The proposed housing plan for York tramples all over Green Belt!! When it suits..... Miles Davis
  • Score: 27

11:01am Thu 24 Jul 14

goatman says...

Housing on Greenbelt - No Problem!
Motorist Amenities on Green Belt - No Chance!
Housing on Greenbelt - No Problem! Motorist Amenities on Green Belt - No Chance! goatman
  • Score: 25

11:07am Thu 24 Jul 14

SteveSCA says...

Miles Davis wrote:
I am opposed to this developement, however, since when does the council take 'Green Belt Land' into consideration??!! The proposed housing plan for York tramples all over Green Belt!! When it suits.....
Exactly. A service station in the green belt at Hopgrove is a big no no. But 1500 houses in the green belt a mile round the ring road at Earswick - no problem!!
[quote][p][bold]Miles Davis[/bold] wrote: I am opposed to this developement, however, since when does the council take 'Green Belt Land' into consideration??!! The proposed housing plan for York tramples all over Green Belt!! When it suits.....[/p][/quote]Exactly. A service station in the green belt at Hopgrove is a big no no. But 1500 houses in the green belt a mile round the ring road at Earswick - no problem!! SteveSCA
  • Score: 28

11:15am Thu 24 Jul 14

York2000 says...

The council the council wah wah wah
The council the council wah wah wah York2000
  • Score: -20

12:01pm Thu 24 Jul 14

Miles Davis says...

York2000 wrote:
The council the council wah wah wah
So you have nothing to say, but thought you would say nothing? You should work for the hot air balloon company, they always need hot gas!!
[quote][p][bold]York2000[/bold] wrote: The council the council wah wah wah[/p][/quote]So you have nothing to say, but thought you would say nothing? You should work for the hot air balloon company, they always need hot gas!! Miles Davis
  • Score: 17

12:07pm Thu 24 Jul 14

Ichabod76 says...

York2000 wrote:
The council the council wah wah wah
Awww other peoples opinions upsetting you ?
[quote][p][bold]York2000[/bold] wrote: The council the council wah wah wah[/p][/quote]Awww other peoples opinions upsetting you ? Ichabod76
  • Score: 14

1:46pm Thu 24 Jul 14

York2000 says...

Oh come on. The Press has realised the small group of people who've hijacked the comments threads click them 20/30 probably more times a day, which is great news for it's stats and as such is uploading three or four articles a day on ANYTHING about the council.

Have you seen some of the comments on here? It's become a joke. I will be the first to say the council have made some woeful decisions and the Lendal Bridge fiasco was the worst. But do I want the city's main news provider to encourage argument and abuse just to drive traffic to the website? No. It's embarrassing, and actually a distraction from the issues.

Added to that, the Press has turned into a pro-Conservative newspaper, which it should just admit so readers can make their own decision on reading. The Press is clearly modelling itself on the Sun and the Mail, you can see that from the poorly written articles hastily uploaded, and the sprawling Mail style headlines. The Press even opened comments threads on the last two articles on the Claudia Lawrence case. It's just poor reporting.

Now, my memory might be wrong here, but I can remember the Press being a great newspaper with decent, well thought articles and considered response to the city's issues. The Press we have now is none of those. It even undermined it's own Stamp Out Poverty campaign to get a cheap headline on the cost of an anti poverty meeting.

Of course, you lot will read this and roll your eyes and dismiss everything I have typed. Like I said, the small group who've hijacked the comments threads have made it unbearable for everyone else.
Oh come on. The Press has realised the small group of people who've hijacked the comments threads click them 20/30 probably more times a day, which is great news for it's stats and as such is uploading three or four articles a day on ANYTHING about the council. Have you seen some of the comments on here? It's become a joke. I will be the first to say the council have made some woeful decisions and the Lendal Bridge fiasco was the worst. But do I want the city's main news provider to encourage argument and abuse just to drive traffic to the website? No. It's embarrassing, and actually a distraction from the issues. Added to that, the Press has turned into a pro-Conservative newspaper, which it should just admit so readers can make their own decision on reading. The Press is clearly modelling itself on the Sun and the Mail, you can see that from the poorly written articles hastily uploaded, and the sprawling Mail style headlines. The Press even opened comments threads on the last two articles on the Claudia Lawrence case. It's just poor reporting. Now, my memory might be wrong here, but I can remember the Press being a great newspaper with decent, well thought articles and considered response to the city's issues. The Press we have now is none of those. It even undermined it's own Stamp Out Poverty campaign to get a cheap headline on the cost of an anti poverty meeting. Of course, you lot will read this and roll your eyes and dismiss everything I have typed. Like I said, the small group who've hijacked the comments threads have made it unbearable for everyone else. York2000
  • Score: 1

2:07pm Thu 24 Jul 14

gav10 says...

There is no evidence of a need for an extra filling station on this stretch of the A64. Up to 2003 there was a station that closed due to lack of use and lack of profit in fuel on what is now Thompons Fish and Chips, similarly other closed stations on the other side of the carriage way. The most probable outcome would be closeure of the Londis facility at Harton which is a lifeline for many that are much further away from York.
There is no evidence of a need for an extra filling station on this stretch of the A64. Up to 2003 there was a station that closed due to lack of use and lack of profit in fuel on what is now Thompons Fish and Chips, similarly other closed stations on the other side of the carriage way. The most probable outcome would be closeure of the Londis facility at Harton which is a lifeline for many that are much further away from York. gav10
  • Score: 9

2:18pm Thu 24 Jul 14

Pinza-C55 says...

York2000 wrote:
Oh come on. The Press has realised the small group of people who've hijacked the comments threads click them 20/30 probably more times a day, which is great news for it's stats and as such is uploading three or four articles a day on ANYTHING about the council.

Have you seen some of the comments on here? It's become a joke. I will be the first to say the council have made some woeful decisions and the Lendal Bridge fiasco was the worst. But do I want the city's main news provider to encourage argument and abuse just to drive traffic to the website? No. It's embarrassing, and actually a distraction from the issues.

Added to that, the Press has turned into a pro-Conservative newspaper, which it should just admit so readers can make their own decision on reading. The Press is clearly modelling itself on the Sun and the Mail, you can see that from the poorly written articles hastily uploaded, and the sprawling Mail style headlines. The Press even opened comments threads on the last two articles on the Claudia Lawrence case. It's just poor reporting.

Now, my memory might be wrong here, but I can remember the Press being a great newspaper with decent, well thought articles and considered response to the city's issues. The Press we have now is none of those. It even undermined it's own Stamp Out Poverty campaign to get a cheap headline on the cost of an anti poverty meeting.

Of course, you lot will read this and roll your eyes and dismiss everything I have typed. Like I said, the small group who've hijacked the comments threads have made it unbearable for everyone else.
I am very far left of the Labour party and I don't knock, or like to see knocked, the council. So when somebody blamed JA for the Hungate HQ/St Leonards Place mess I pointed that Labour were not in control of the council in 2008.
I think the commenters here have a fair point when they say that to turn this development down because it is on the "greenbelt" and then to plan a large housing development on that same "greenbelt" smacks of double standards.
I also think it is disingenuous of you to write off opposition to council policy as "conservative council bashing" - they may be conservative but they may also be right.
If the greenbelt has any meaning it should mean "no development". If it doesn't mean that then it should be abolished.
Just for clarity I have never owned a car in my life so the Hopgrove development would not benefit me in the slightest. No do i live anywhere near Earswick or even on the greenbelt.
[quote][p][bold]York2000[/bold] wrote: Oh come on. The Press has realised the small group of people who've hijacked the comments threads click them 20/30 probably more times a day, which is great news for it's stats and as such is uploading three or four articles a day on ANYTHING about the council. Have you seen some of the comments on here? It's become a joke. I will be the first to say the council have made some woeful decisions and the Lendal Bridge fiasco was the worst. But do I want the city's main news provider to encourage argument and abuse just to drive traffic to the website? No. It's embarrassing, and actually a distraction from the issues. Added to that, the Press has turned into a pro-Conservative newspaper, which it should just admit so readers can make their own decision on reading. The Press is clearly modelling itself on the Sun and the Mail, you can see that from the poorly written articles hastily uploaded, and the sprawling Mail style headlines. The Press even opened comments threads on the last two articles on the Claudia Lawrence case. It's just poor reporting. Now, my memory might be wrong here, but I can remember the Press being a great newspaper with decent, well thought articles and considered response to the city's issues. The Press we have now is none of those. It even undermined it's own Stamp Out Poverty campaign to get a cheap headline on the cost of an anti poverty meeting. Of course, you lot will read this and roll your eyes and dismiss everything I have typed. Like I said, the small group who've hijacked the comments threads have made it unbearable for everyone else.[/p][/quote]I am very far left of the Labour party and I don't knock, or like to see knocked, the council. So when somebody blamed JA for the Hungate HQ/St Leonards Place mess I pointed that Labour were not in control of the council in 2008. I think the commenters here have a fair point when they say that to turn this development down because it is on the "greenbelt" and then to plan a large housing development on that same "greenbelt" smacks of double standards. I also think it is disingenuous of you to write off opposition to council policy as "conservative council bashing" - they may be conservative but they may also be right. If the greenbelt has any meaning it should mean "no development". If it doesn't mean that then it should be abolished. Just for clarity I have never owned a car in my life so the Hopgrove development would not benefit me in the slightest. No do i live anywhere near Earswick or even on the greenbelt. Pinza-C55
  • Score: 4

2:18pm Thu 24 Jul 14

york_chap says...

In some respects it would be handy to have a petrol station somewhere along the A64 in that area, rather than having to come off to find fuel; but the restaurant and hotel kind of seemed like overkill (in my opinion).

As for the new houses at Skelton, 65 is a reasonable number and won't overwhelm the local area/services/roads, unlike the proposal at Earswick. It'd certainly look better than the wasteland that's there now.

As for access onto the A19, there's no need to worry. Any new development in York, no matter how small, seems pretty much guaranteed to have traffic light access with at least 15 traffic light poles and at least 3 green-man crossings. They usually change on a fixed sequence too, rather than on demand, so the main road traffic has to stop even though there's no other traffic in sight.

It's worth pointing out that the old factory used to have trucks and articulated lorries going in and out all the time without any real problems and the turning into the main Skelton village, with many hundreds of houses, has managed as a T junction for 30 odd years.
In some respects it would be handy to have a petrol station somewhere along the A64 in that area, rather than having to come off to find fuel; but the restaurant and hotel kind of seemed like overkill (in my opinion). As for the new houses at Skelton, 65 is a reasonable number and won't overwhelm the local area/services/roads, unlike the proposal at Earswick. It'd certainly look better than the wasteland that's there now. As for access onto the A19, there's no need to worry. Any new development in York, no matter how small, seems pretty much guaranteed to have traffic light access with at least 15 traffic light poles and at least 3 green-man crossings. They usually change on a fixed sequence too, rather than on demand, so the main road traffic has to stop even though there's no other traffic in sight. It's worth pointing out that the old factory used to have trucks and articulated lorries going in and out all the time without any real problems and the turning into the main Skelton village, with many hundreds of houses, has managed as a T junction for 30 odd years. york_chap
  • Score: 16

2:21pm Thu 24 Jul 14

Pinza-C55 says...

PS sorry about the numerous omissions and typos in that post. This heat is melting my brain.
PS sorry about the numerous omissions and typos in that post. This heat is melting my brain. Pinza-C55
  • Score: 8

3:31pm Thu 24 Jul 14

piaggio1 says...

Have noticed most of your comments seem to invovle the er...dail mail ???
Have they found you out !or somert.!!!!!
And its obvious ...not enough brown envelopes have bin submitted on this one !!!
Have noticed most of your comments seem to invovle the er...dail mail ??? Have they found you out !or somert.!!!!! And its obvious ...not enough brown envelopes have bin submitted on this one !!! piaggio1
  • Score: 6

6:56pm Thu 24 Jul 14

Knavesmire view says...

York2000 wrote:
Oh come on. The Press has realised the small group of people who've hijacked the comments threads click them 20/30 probably more times a day, which is great news for it's stats and as such is uploading three or four articles a day on ANYTHING about the council.

Have you seen some of the comments on here? It's become a joke. I will be the first to say the council have made some woeful decisions and the Lendal Bridge fiasco was the worst. But do I want the city's main news provider to encourage argument and abuse just to drive traffic to the website? No. It's embarrassing, and actually a distraction from the issues.

Added to that, the Press has turned into a pro-Conservative newspaper, which it should just admit so readers can make their own decision on reading. The Press is clearly modelling itself on the Sun and the Mail, you can see that from the poorly written articles hastily uploaded, and the sprawling Mail style headlines. The Press even opened comments threads on the last two articles on the Claudia Lawrence case. It's just poor reporting.

Now, my memory might be wrong here, but I can remember the Press being a great newspaper with decent, well thought articles and considered response to the city's issues. The Press we have now is none of those. It even undermined it's own Stamp Out Poverty campaign to get a cheap headline on the cost of an anti poverty meeting.

Of course, you lot will read this and roll your eyes and dismiss everything I have typed. Like I said, the small group who've hijacked the comments threads have made it unbearable for everyone else.
Thanks for taking time out of your busy day to share your opinions with us James.
[quote][p][bold]York2000[/bold] wrote: Oh come on. The Press has realised the small group of people who've hijacked the comments threads click them 20/30 probably more times a day, which is great news for it's stats and as such is uploading three or four articles a day on ANYTHING about the council. Have you seen some of the comments on here? It's become a joke. I will be the first to say the council have made some woeful decisions and the Lendal Bridge fiasco was the worst. But do I want the city's main news provider to encourage argument and abuse just to drive traffic to the website? No. It's embarrassing, and actually a distraction from the issues. Added to that, the Press has turned into a pro-Conservative newspaper, which it should just admit so readers can make their own decision on reading. The Press is clearly modelling itself on the Sun and the Mail, you can see that from the poorly written articles hastily uploaded, and the sprawling Mail style headlines. The Press even opened comments threads on the last two articles on the Claudia Lawrence case. It's just poor reporting. Now, my memory might be wrong here, but I can remember the Press being a great newspaper with decent, well thought articles and considered response to the city's issues. The Press we have now is none of those. It even undermined it's own Stamp Out Poverty campaign to get a cheap headline on the cost of an anti poverty meeting. Of course, you lot will read this and roll your eyes and dismiss everything I have typed. Like I said, the small group who've hijacked the comments threads have made it unbearable for everyone else.[/p][/quote]Thanks for taking time out of your busy day to share your opinions with us James. Knavesmire view
  • Score: 5

9:31pm Thu 24 Jul 14

piaggio1 says...

See this clowncil has bin thumped again.
Social care !!!!.
Not fit for purpose....again n again....
See this clowncil has bin thumped again. Social care !!!!. Not fit for purpose....again n again.... piaggio1
  • Score: 7

12:18am Fri 25 Jul 14

Magicman! says...

There is one key reason not to allow this development on Hopgrove to take place: futureproofing.

IF the Highways Agency ever do decide it might be a half decent idea to continue the A64 as dual carriageway at least to Claxton where the existing dual section starts for a while, then Hopgrove will need a new junction - even more so if the A1237 also gets dualled up to that point... the likely outcome would be a 'trumpet' style junction, with the A1036 re-routed to run behind Asda at Monks Cross so as to have a stretch of dual carriageway at least 1 mile long between junctions so vehicles can change lanes safely and thus getting rid of both roundabout at Hopgrove and having a fully freeflowing junction instead. With a service area on the site, such an improvement would be hampered and cost a lot more as the whole road would need to be realigned - plus getting rid of the roundabouts would then sever the connection between the service area and the road it is supposed to be serving....

I'm sure the variety of chip shops, restaurants, and whatever is on the Little Chef site now would be able to meet the requirements of passing motorists for the time being... and if not, stick a sign on the A64 pointing to the A1036 and Monks Cross labelled as "Local Services"
There is one key reason not to allow this development on Hopgrove to take place: futureproofing. IF the Highways Agency ever do decide it might be a half decent idea to continue the A64 as dual carriageway at least to Claxton where the existing dual section starts for a while, then Hopgrove will need a new junction - even more so if the A1237 also gets dualled up to that point... the likely outcome would be a 'trumpet' style junction, with the A1036 re-routed to run behind Asda at Monks Cross so as to have a stretch of dual carriageway at least 1 mile long between junctions so vehicles can change lanes safely and thus getting rid of both roundabout at Hopgrove and having a fully freeflowing junction instead. With a service area on the site, such an improvement would be hampered and cost a lot more as the whole road would need to be realigned - plus getting rid of the roundabouts would then sever the connection between the service area and the road it is supposed to be serving.... I'm sure the variety of chip shops, restaurants, and whatever is on the Little Chef site now would be able to meet the requirements of passing motorists for the time being... and if not, stick a sign on the A64 pointing to the A1036 and Monks Cross labelled as "Local Services" Magicman!
  • Score: 0

10:01am Fri 25 Jul 14

alanyork says...

york_chap wrote:
In some respects it would be handy to have a petrol station somewhere along the A64 in that area, rather than having to come off to find fuel; but the restaurant and hotel kind of seemed like overkill (in my opinion).

As for the new houses at Skelton, 65 is a reasonable number and won't overwhelm the local area/services/roads, unlike the proposal at Earswick. It'd certainly look better than the wasteland that's there now.

As for access onto the A19, there's no need to worry. Any new development in York, no matter how small, seems pretty much guaranteed to have traffic light access with at least 15 traffic light poles and at least 3 green-man crossings. They usually change on a fixed sequence too, rather than on demand, so the main road traffic has to stop even though there's no other traffic in sight.

It's worth pointing out that the old factory used to have trucks and articulated lorries going in and out all the time without any real problems and the turning into the main Skelton village, with many hundreds of houses, has managed as a T junction for 30 odd years.
well said york chap you and I and many other drivers get pulled up all the time at these stupid lights ! example Shipton Road park+ride stop you @ midnight no one there and last bus went hours ago ! STUPID OR WHAT ?
[quote][p][bold]york_chap[/bold] wrote: In some respects it would be handy to have a petrol station somewhere along the A64 in that area, rather than having to come off to find fuel; but the restaurant and hotel kind of seemed like overkill (in my opinion). As for the new houses at Skelton, 65 is a reasonable number and won't overwhelm the local area/services/roads, unlike the proposal at Earswick. It'd certainly look better than the wasteland that's there now. As for access onto the A19, there's no need to worry. Any new development in York, no matter how small, seems pretty much guaranteed to have traffic light access with at least 15 traffic light poles and at least 3 green-man crossings. They usually change on a fixed sequence too, rather than on demand, so the main road traffic has to stop even though there's no other traffic in sight. It's worth pointing out that the old factory used to have trucks and articulated lorries going in and out all the time without any real problems and the turning into the main Skelton village, with many hundreds of houses, has managed as a T junction for 30 odd years.[/p][/quote]well said york chap you and I and many other drivers get pulled up all the time at these stupid lights ! example Shipton Road park+ride stop you @ midnight no one there and last bus went hours ago ! STUPID OR WHAT ? alanyork
  • Score: 2

12:57pm Fri 25 Jul 14

bolero says...

york_chap wrote:
In some respects it would be handy to have a petrol station somewhere along the A64 in that area, rather than having to come off to find fuel; but the restaurant and hotel kind of seemed like overkill (in my opinion).

As for the new houses at Skelton, 65 is a reasonable number and won't overwhelm the local area/services/roads, unlike the proposal at Earswick. It'd certainly look better than the wasteland that's there now.

As for access onto the A19, there's no need to worry. Any new development in York, no matter how small, seems pretty much guaranteed to have traffic light access with at least 15 traffic light poles and at least 3 green-man crossings. They usually change on a fixed sequence too, rather than on demand, so the main road traffic has to stop even though there's no other traffic in sight.

It's worth pointing out that the old factory used to have trucks and articulated lorries going in and out all the time without any real problems and the turning into the main Skelton village, with many hundreds of houses, has managed as a T junction for 30 odd years.
I didn't realise that skelton is effected by traffic on the A64.
[quote][p][bold]york_chap[/bold] wrote: In some respects it would be handy to have a petrol station somewhere along the A64 in that area, rather than having to come off to find fuel; but the restaurant and hotel kind of seemed like overkill (in my opinion). As for the new houses at Skelton, 65 is a reasonable number and won't overwhelm the local area/services/roads, unlike the proposal at Earswick. It'd certainly look better than the wasteland that's there now. As for access onto the A19, there's no need to worry. Any new development in York, no matter how small, seems pretty much guaranteed to have traffic light access with at least 15 traffic light poles and at least 3 green-man crossings. They usually change on a fixed sequence too, rather than on demand, so the main road traffic has to stop even though there's no other traffic in sight. It's worth pointing out that the old factory used to have trucks and articulated lorries going in and out all the time without any real problems and the turning into the main Skelton village, with many hundreds of houses, has managed as a T junction for 30 odd years.[/p][/quote]I didn't realise that skelton is effected by traffic on the A64. bolero
  • Score: 1

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree