KY1/H - Hollins Lane

Object

Representation ID: 16523

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Anita Selby

Object to houses being built on greenfield or Green Belt sites when all options for new housing on inner town/city areas have been exhausted. Changes plans to explore all brownfield options first.

Keighley town centre – lots of empty buildings. Could be converted to flats or dwellings. On the outskirts there are derelict areas that could be built on first without encroaching fields from the villages, or building in more desirable areas.

Object that many proposals will be for 3/4 bed excutive housing especially in villages. Does Keighley need all housing that is proposed?

Could consideration be given to building sheltered housing/wardened flats for the over 60s or some bungalows?

Reconsider plans to build on Green Belt and greenfield sites. Is against current thinking about climate change, preserving the environment, nature and wellbeing. Should cherish green/open spaces. Policy is Green Belt land should be protected and to prevent sprawl.

Comment

Representation ID: 28635

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Environment Agency

Site in Flood Zone 1 ONLY
Mitigation should be set above the 1 in 100 plus cc level for the site as suitable for the proposed vulnerability classification (EA standing advice should cover this).

If the site is considered Greenfield then surface water discharge rates post development should be restricted to the pre development Greenfield discharge rate. If the site is considered Brownfield then there should be a 30% reduction in surface water discharges, or restricted to Greenfield rates, there should be no increase in brownfield surface water discharge rates post development. So as to support prevention of cumulative increases to flood risk and should be in line with SuDs design principles.

For developments near ordinary watercourses we would recommend an 8 metre easement strip along the length of the riverbank, or a 45degree angle from the bed in the case of culverts, to be kept clear of permanent structures such as buildings. This is to maintain access to the riverbank for any improvements or maintenance. A Flood Defence Consent may be required for the LLFA for works in/affecting an ordinary watercourse.

For main rivers, we generally require an 8 metre easement strip along the length of the riverbank to be kept clear of permanent structures such as buildings, or a 45degree angle from the bed in the case of culverts. This is to maintain access to the riverbank for any improvements or maintenance. Environmental Flood Risk Activity Permits may be required for development near rivers.

It is possible the sites within close proximity to Flood Zones 3b, 3 and 2 may be subject to future risk identified within the SFRA (to follow) which may affect its allocation or how development should be sequentially laid out on the site.

Consideration must be made to making space for water and providing betterment in terms of flood risk management where ever possible.

Support

Representation ID: 29393

Received: 29/03/2021

Respondent: Historic England

The site is close to the Grade II listed Whinburn Lodge & ancillary listings and the Grade II Whinburn Registered Park and Garden. The garden is included on the Heritage at Risk Register. The development of this area could harm elements which contribute to the significance of these designated heritage assets. The Heritage Impact Assessment for this site, which includes land to the south-west of the allocated site, considered that mitigation measures are likely to be less effective in the south-western quarter of the site where the steeply sloping topography is likely to mean any development is highly visible. The HIA concluded that with appropriate mitigation, the lower sections of the site (which includes the area allocated in the Draft Plan) are likely to result in
less than substantial harm (of an acceptable level).
Historic England would concur with this analysis and with the assessment of the degree of harm that the development of this site would be likely to cause. Historic England would also endorse the removal of the area of land identified as being of medium sensitivity in the HIA from the allocated site, and the mitigation measures
which have been put forward in the Heritage Impact Assessment.
We consider that these are likely to be effective in reducing the harm to the level indicated. Historic England welcome the requirement for a Heritage Impact
Assessment to be prepared in support of any planning application on this site.

Support

Representation ID: 29513

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: The Illingworth Family

Agent: Johnson Mowat

Our client the Illingworth family, support the identification of Site KY1/H and confirm its deliverability within the Plan Period.

The site has been identified as suitable for development, having been identified as a safeguarded site in the 2005 Replacement UDP (Ref K/UR5.24) and prior to this the as a Housing Site in the 1998 UDP (Ref H2/68).

The Site Description, states the site consists of a number of fields used for animal grazing. This is incorrect. The preferred allocation is a single field.

Access to KY1/H should be via Hollins Lane.

This site is available and deliverable in the short term. There is therefore no reason why the delivery timescales cannot be 0-5 years.

We are confident that any heritage constraint can be factored in to the design of a deliverable scheme. It is noted that the Council’s Heritage Impact Statement for this site refers to the mitigation measures and opportunities to enhance the significance, which refers to strengthening the landscaped/ tree boundary along the north western and south-western boundaries of the site and retaining / rebuilding the dry-stone boundary walls.

In summary:

The site is available and is well located within the Keighley NW urban area. It has no known viability issues and could deliver the full S106 requirements. It constitutes a logical infill within the existing urban area in what is a well-served and well-located site in the north west Keighley urban area.