KY8/H - Higher Wheathead Farm

Object

Representation ID: 750

Received: 04/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Ellen Dobson

I object to this development due to the access being via Occupation Lane via Camborne Way.
Occupation Lane needs to have full access from Oakworth road due to the Branshaw Park Development. There is far too much traffic on the sunken extremely heavily used Camborne Way and it is becoming a hazard trying to gain access to our drive at peak times of the day. The Bridal way up Occupation Lane onto the Golf Course is heavily used by pedestrians walking dogs and families daily throughout the year. More traffic on this road will cause an accident if not a fatality. If this development goes ahead access should be via the Top of Old Wheathead Lane not Camborne Way which has enough if not too much already and currently planned traffic congestion. I have a family and want to enjoy the green space without CO2

Object

Representation ID: 755

Received: 04/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Cath Herbert

The surface water issues will cause significant damage to existing local residents. They have never been addressed by the present landowner.
Access roads are already over burden, and the private road is unadapted and not connected to highway gullies for surface water

Object

Representation ID: 781

Received: 05/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Lauren Brook

Due to current traffic and parking in the area I would be concerned for my child's safety, there are already major access issues at the bottom of Wheathead Lane and also on Cambourne Way which would both be used to access this site. Other areas of concern are the current infrastructure of the roads in the area as well as drainage.

Object

Representation ID: 974

Received: 08/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Jonathan Brook

Access is my main concern as the roads around this area are already congested enough so adding another 'estate' would make the situation worse. The entrance to Wheathead lane where it joins Oakworth Road always has cars double parked as are the areas leading to Cambourne way and Occupation Lane. This areas is greenfield and is a prime factor for the purchase of my home to be able to enjoy the countryside and local area whilst not having to drive to places to do this. As I have a small child I would be worried for his safety is the amount of traffic would be increased by potentially up to another 100 vehicles or more given most households have 2 vehicles or more.

Object

Representation ID: 3480

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Kevin Howley

Occupation Lane is a bridleway. This land should only be developed if the western end of Occuption Lane is adopted at no cost to present householders.
There are already more than 300 properties served by a single access i.e. Wheathead Lane between Camborne Way and Wheathead Drive. Development of KY7H and KY8H would mean that the nationally recommended number of houses served by a single access road would be exceeded.

Object

Representation ID: 4707

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Sian Atkinson

This is another greenfield area planned to be developed in the area after losing a significant amount of green area in the district already when there are desolate areas of the town in need of renovation. Access via Occupation Lane is unsuitable due to the road condition and nature of it being an unadopted road/bridleway. There are also established trees and wildlife habitats along Occupation Lane and limitations in terms of access of vehicles. There is already a significant increase of traffic within the area via Cambourne Lane onto Occupation Lane which will meet a large capacity once the persimmon development (currently still being built) is completed in the area. This development has caused damage to local areas with roads on the verge of collapse in sections, flooding from poor drainage and landscape difficulties. Therefore another development would only increase more issues and traffic to a dangerous capacity.

Comment

Representation ID: 6104

Received: 06/03/2021

Respondent: Diane Royston

Wish to comment on proposed sites KY8/H Higher Wheathead Farm & KY7/H Wheathead Lane.

These sites show that they may have access onto Occupation Lane which would presumably feed into Camborne Way.

Occupation Lane is a bridleway for pedestrians, cyclists and horses and is used by many walkers and cyclists on a daily basis, it is not a pubic road.

When the Persimmon housing site was proposed in 2015 it wanted to build 148 houses but as access was only via Camborne Way it was reduced to 124 as this was the maximum vehicle allowance for the width and current feed of houses on Camborne Way.

If these new developments where allowed they would not be able to feed into either Occupation Lane (a bridleway) or Camborne Way as it has maximum capacity already. Access would need to be via the existing farm road that feeds onto Wheathead Lane. Noted that the developments are being referred to as Wheathead Lane and Higher Wheathead Farm, neither mention Occupation Lane in their address

Object

Representation ID: 7208

Received: 10/03/2021

Respondent: Mr & Mrs Jeffrey & M Parker

Number of people: 2

I would like to comment on local plan regarding KY8/H Higher Wheathead Farm KY7/H Wheathead Lane It mentions access would be Occupation Lane which is a bridal Way used by walkers/cyclists/horses Access to these sites would also involve Camborne Way/Wheathead lane down into Oakworth Road With Persimmons building 124 houses(branshaw Park)at the end of Camborne Way the cars/van are at maximum limit now The access to Persimmons site should not have been allowed to cross Occupation Lane (BRIDLEWAY)no consideration was given to local residents when this site was given permission Site access should have been Oakworth Road Wheathead lane is the only way out of all these developments Seriously consideration should be given to infrastructure SCHOOLS/DOCTORS

Support

Representation ID: 7494

Received: 10/03/2021

Respondent: David Hill LLP

We are pleased to see that the above sites are allocated for housing in the Draft Bradford District Local Plan - Preferred Options (Regulation 18) February 2021. The landowners are keen to progress with developing the sites and we would like to confirm their availability.

Comment

Representation ID: 7496

Received: 10/03/2021

Respondent: David Hill LLP

These sites were submitted as part of a larger section of land, reference KY/02. In the updated SHLAA document this site is seen as achievable and to have a potential yield of 135 units. The landowner notes that under the revised methodology for calculating housing requirement, that Bradford Council will need to provide more housing than is shown in the current draft. It is our belief that the larger site, could contribute to this and ask that its allocation is given further consideration.

Object

Representation ID: 13493

Received: 21/03/2021

Respondent: Carl and Leanne Mawer

Number of people: 2

I am writing to strongly object to local planning proposals, KY8/H
Not only is it yet another green space being put up for proposal but the land concerned is currently a massive drainage issue which affects all the residents on Steadings Way. Water constantly floods the rear gardens and driveways of Steadings Way, yet nobody wishes to address this problem. If you intend to replace a field with tarmac and houses where is all this surface water to be drained to? Not to mention that everyone on the rear of Steadings Way will be overlooked by this proposed development which will allow people to look directly into our bedrooms due to the development being above our house level, which in itself is an invasion of privacy.

I cannot believe the council would consider such a inappropriate site.

Object

Representation ID: 14375

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Stephen Horsted

Privacy - the land In question is considerably higher than our property. Any development would look straight down and over our rear aspect.

Drainage 1 - the land slopes steeply from the development down to our property. There is no way to drain this slope.

Drainage 2 - the previous developer given permission to build in the area laid a drainage channel without the appropriate consents or permissions. This has caused flooding on at least 3 occasions in the last 3

Drainage 3 - Developers using the existing illegal drainage from the farm will overload a poorly installed system which is already a significant flood threat

Object

Representation ID: 16512

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.

Object

Representation ID: 21137

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Stuart Crichton

-impact on amenity and views
-surface water flooding issues/impact local drainage system
- Access and congestion- Occupation Lane is not suitable for the proposed increase in traffic, bottle necks in traffic at Wheathead lane at peak times

Object

Representation ID: 24901

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Dave Blackburn

This site should not be considered.

Occupation Lane is not acceptable as access to and from this site.

This route is also a Bridle way and would access Camborne Way which already at its full capacity.

The cross roads that is formed by Camborne Way crossing Occupation Lane is very poorly designed with regards road traffic signage, pedestrian footpaths rights of way that cross Occupation lane, and traffic priority.

Occupation Lane is unadopted and in a very poor condition with a bad junction with the B6143 Oakworth Road.

Occupation Lane is also a very popular with School children walking to and from school.

The lane is also very popular with dog walkers, ramblers, and walking groups.

Should this site be considered, the traffic to and from this site including construction vehicles, residents and all deliver vehicles should use the agricultural access route to Wheathead Lane.

Comment

Representation ID: 28642

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.