KY13/H - Keighley Road, Exley Head

Object

Representation ID: 198

Received: 16/02/2021

Respondent: Mr James Myers

There are major flooding issues with the piece of land and this will be exasperated. Moorlands Avenue experience large scale flooding each time there is heavy rainfall. The fire brigade have attended due to flooding and sandbags are regularly used to protect houses. One property had to have carpets replaced due to the flooding.

Object

Representation ID: 660

Received: 03/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Steve Barnes

There is already substantial new build on the opposite side of Keighley Road and Bogthorn Hamlet will be utterly eroded with more new builds. Need to be sympathetic to the area and consider the existing new builds which have already eroded the views and aspects of existing properties, adding more to the rear creates a new build sandwich for existing properties. The field area is sloping and will dramatically elevate the profile of any housing.

Object

Representation ID: 1096

Received: 09/03/2021

Respondent: Birkbeck, University of London

Current developments slightly to the east of this proposed site, and at a similar elevation, on Occupation Lane, have proved of long-term detriment to the Exley Head area, with building run-off blocking drains along the Keighley Road and Exley Road and causing damage to road surfaces. There is also a serious shortage of access to amenities from this site, especially in walking distance. Any additional traffic pressure on Oakworth village would be a significant hardship to the residents there.

Object

Representation ID: 1482

Received: 14/03/2021

Respondent: Miss Donna Lewis

There are already new builds opposite on the south side of Keighley Road that have stolen the views. More houses in an elevate position in the same area is just too much and making this part of Oakworth just too near road side congested. There is no access to this areas without creating more destruction of this part of the village. Already built your new houses here, leave this part of village alone now please.

Object

Representation ID: 2109

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Jill Lee

Our objections are:
Ground unsuitable, run off substantial and water run off should be contained within site.
Unsuitable due to very elevated position would drastically alter skyline for many people.
Site access, looking at the mapped area there is no suitable access point to this site, close proximity to existing properties resulting in disruption on a large scale during and after construction.
If using pilings, as on the Bronte Site the disruption and damage to existing properties would be totally unacceptable.
Building work on this scale, so close and for so long has a very detrimental affect on peoples health including mental health.

Object

Representation ID: 2877

Received: 21/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Adam Ripley

Access to KY13/H will be difficult and disruptive as new roads need building. How would large amounts of building materials and machinery be put on site without extreme disruption to nearby properties? In the field nearest to Thornhill Avenue is a pipe that diverts spring water along the length of the field. It is almost permanently soddened and completely unsuited for new builds. The infrastructure in Oakworth cannot support 80 houses and their residents, especially schools, doctors and dentists.

Object

Representation ID: 2977

Received: 21/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Martin Russell

I object due to the following:
There will be considerable access issues from Thornhill Avenue due to the already congested cud-de-sac. Also, there is a natural spring that runs down the field behind Thornhill Avenue. How will that be overcome as it can’t be diverted to a drain?

Object

Representation ID: 3119

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Alan Lobley

The access to the proposed site from Thornhill Avenue is privately owned with access rights for the farming of the same.
There is a spring which surfaces at the top of the filed next to, and running adjacent to Thornhill Ave, and discharges through property on and onto Oakworth Road.
Proposed developments will only add to the pressure on drainage infrastructure, which as demonstrated with the development at Occupation Lane, is struggling to cope.
Exit from Thornhill Ave is currently very dangerous when driving because of on street parking at and very close to the junction, which will be substantially increased with any development. With Goose Cote Lane forming a cross roads, traffic congestion and accidents will potentially increase.
Oakworth School is oversubscribed and cannot sustain any further increase in numbers applying for entrants.

Object

Representation ID: 3127

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Miss Samantha Emmett-Smith

Oakworth is already overdeveloped with current housing developments not yet completed. The primary school is oversubscribed and the strain on the local amenities is too great. The infrastructure in the village is inadequate . The continued removal of the green spaces in and around the village is detrimental to the mental health of residents and devastating to wildlife.

Object

Representation ID: 3202

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Rachel Flaherty

I live adjacent to this site. I am extremely concerned about the level of surface water that comes from the field. These houses have already been flooded in the past and if adequate drainage is not put in place this situation would only get worse. There is also a natural spring on the site . Although this site comes under Keighley it is just on the boundary with Oakworth and the nearest school for any children living there would be Oakworth primary and I would question whether they could expand the school any further. The heavy flow of traffic on Lidget ,Station Rd and Dockroyd Lane at school times is certainly an issue that would need to be raised.

Object

Representation ID: 3450

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Mr David Williams

Oakworth and Exley Head has recently had a number of these developments to provide new housing including the old Bronte School site and Occupation Lane. This has put strains on the local resources including the schools and doctors plus adding to the large amounts of traffic on Oakworth Road. This development would add more strain. As a local resident who lives opposite one of the fields in question may I bring to your attention a slightly more worrying issue. Drainage. These fields drain into a land drain that passes through my garden, on to Boland Court , through another garden and down Goosecote Lane. This has caused numerous flooding issues in the past causing issues to a number of people. Houses on this land is not going to help this issue and will only cause flooding further down the hill.
Greenbelt land again ? Access issues !! Please no.

Object

Representation ID: 3462

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Stephen Nicholson

I object to this proposal, firstly, because there is a recently-built housing estate on the opposite side of Keighley Road to the proposed site, which already has room for expansion and, I believe, approval has already been given for this expansion to go ahead.

Secondly, the field above the row of cottages on Keighley Road contains a spring (as shown on the outline map) which already causes flooding problems for these houses - a development of any size would only add to this problem.

Thirdly, the only possible access to this field is, as outlined on the proposal, via a farm track which, itself, is only accessible via an already tight cul-de-sac.

Finally, I think a development of this size would overload an already full infrastructure in both Keighley and Oakworth.

Object

Representation ID: 3883

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Sam Holmes

There is limited access to the plot, which would greatly impact traffic on Keighley Road.
Residents have also had years of disruption from recent development to the front on the old Bronte school site.
I also believe development here would increase flood risk!

Object

Representation ID: 4057

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Charles Lee

Ground unsuitable, run off substantial and water run off should be contained within site.
Unsuitable due to very elevated position would drastically alter skyline for many people.
Site access, looking at the mapped area there is no suitable access point to this site, close proximity to existing properties resulting in disruption on a large scale during and after construction.
If using pilings, as on the Bronte Site the disruption and damage to existing properties would be totally unacceptable.
Building work on this scale, so close and for so long has a very detrimental affect on peoples health including mental health.
Surely brownfield land should be used ie old British Gas site and demolished school sites, Wingfield Dve to name but 2.
We are short of green space doesn't make sense to build on it, it would deprive deer and other wildlife too.

Object

Representation ID: 4694

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Joanne Wood

The area is overpopulated. The schools nearby are full without extra housing. The doctor nearby is closing down. The roads and access roads are not suitable. The land is used and enjoyed by many over many years and has offered a lifeline in the current pandemic. House prices will be lowered and crime has already gone up with the houses that were built on Bronte fields. A beautiful view and many peoples privacy will be ruined. Houses already suffer from flooding during heavy rain, houses being built will make this situation much worse.

Object

Representation ID: 4944

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Michael Parkinson

I strongly object to the proposed building of houses on the greenfield site.
-Concern about building work (lights)
-Concerns about overshadowing.
-Concerns about loss of privacy
-Negative impact on the visual amenity
-Impact on wildlife and general ambience of the current situation.
-This would almost certainly be replaced with increase noise levels and disturbance.
-Concerns about access to the site
-Increased highway safety issues due to limited site access funnelling traffic to the site through Thornhill Avenue.

Object

Representation ID: 5693

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Margaret Ripley

Reference KY13/H . As I understand it there are 3 springs in the field next to Thornhill Avenue and there have been several failed attempts to put drainage in. Also access to any houses in those fields would be extremely difficult and roads like Thornhill Avenue are simply not suited to a massive increase in traffic. Oakworth needs more facilities before such large numbers of houses could be built.

Support

Representation ID: 7449

Received: 10/03/2021

Respondent: David Hill LLP

We are pleased to see that the above site is 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 site and we would like to confirm it’s availability.

I have attached a land registry plan which shows an extra piece of land (edged in red and coloured blue) that the landowner has purchased. This land joins Keighley road directly and so could be added to the site as an additional access point and so we would ask that this piece of land is added into the allocation.

Object

Representation ID: 14784

Received: 17/03/2021

Respondent: John Bates

I also want to object to the plan KY13/H for the same reasons OH1/H and OA2/H

The development of these sites would cause over subscriptions to schools and medical services.
Increases traffic would create danger to other road users especially on overcrowded planned access There are also negative impacts on the flora fauna and wildlife in the village

Object

Representation ID: 16289

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Keighley Town Council

KY13/H is a proposed site, separated from KY12/H by a small piece of land, but it is clear these sites could easily be merged in the future. This site also has issues of access, the top of Thornhill Avenue (a cul de sac) is steeper than Moorlands Avenue and this could make it unsuitable for heavy construction traffic.

Object

Representation ID: 16516

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 executive 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: 20759

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Cllr Adrian Farley

I have particular concerns with KY10/H; KY12/H and KY13/H. These areas offer the only green spaces in this area and I think it needs to remain as such.

Comment

Representation ID: 28647

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.