KY35/H - Land Off Golden View Drive, Thwaites

Object

Representation ID: 367

Received: 22/02/2021

Respondent: Mr Alan Hamilton

The road and junction with Thwaites Brow Road is not suitable for the level of traffic this will create. Golden view drive is a narrow road with very limited parking for homes, there are regular issues with Lorries and tucks not being able to get up the road. Significant change to the junction and Golden View Drive itself would be required to allow development, let alone ongoing use.

Object

Representation ID: 1608

Received: 15/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Matthew Eagle

1. You give 9 days as a consultation process!! Completely unacceptable and unethical.
2. Access to the site is extremely difficult, unsuitable and unsafe.
3. The land is Green Belt - Always has been and Always will be. The criteria has not changed.
4. Further development in Thwaites Brow is not needed.

Object

Representation ID: 3140

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Anne Hayes

Ref: KY35/H - Golden view drive is unsuitable for an increase in traffic. The local school is already oversubscribed. The GP surgery is also struggling to cope. I have concerns that the sewage system will be unable to cope with all the proposed new developments in the area. The ongoing pandemic has highlighted the fact that walking in the countryside is beneficial to mental health so how does removing green belt land augment this? One reason that people like this area is the access to fields, woods etc. but the more developments that occur will reduce this appeal. I also doubt that people will be able to afford any of the proposed houses but will be bought by landlords for the purpose of renting so the housing crisis will not be relieved. The bus service is woefully inadequate so more people = more cars = more pollution









y inadequate

Object

Representation ID: 5205

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Helen Allen

Long Lee/Thwaites Brow cannot sustain more housing. Local amenities, doctors, schools etc do not have capacity. Access is already difficult, on both main road into town/Coney Lane and narrow residential streets.
It is doubtful that the sewerage systems would be able to cope with additional housing.
This is a rural area, green fields and these need to remain to protect the natural habitats and wildlife. This area is already overdeveloped, and it is vital that the council maintains its integrity as a rural area and not build more. Green space has a benefit on health and mental wellness for the people who live here as well as those who can easily visit from more heavily developed areas nearer the town centre.
We are on the edge of the Yorkshire dales and local affinity lies with there, not an urban city environment.

Object

Representation ID: 5545

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Christine Graham

This is a greenbelt site. Access would be from a small cul-de-sac where the road is currently un-adopted and without pavements. This site cannot be considered on its own without first assessing the impact on the land surrounding the site. The site would quickly become a gateway site to allow further access to the green fields surrounding it. This can easily be seen by the development of Golden View Drive where the same development creep has occurred piece by piece. This is the very purpose of the greenbelt to stop this development creep and urban sprawl. If developed, this site would meet up with the proposed site KY18 if approved thereby taking a large section of the green space away from the village and urbanisation sprawling further down the valley to the A629.

Object

Representation ID: 5549

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Keith Riley

The access for 30 new dwellings will be via Golden View Drive. On this road there are 19 dwellings in total. This is a quiet unadopted/private cul-de-sac, each resident owns the area in front of their house and up to the middle of the road. Some years ago residents paid to have this road tarmacked, and only last year a private contractor repaired a section outside our house. Other sections of the road are starting to break up. With extra traffic from heavy construction vehicles and long term traffic from 30 houses, we are concerned that there will be significant deterioration to the road surface - who will be responsible for maintenance? Some of the 19 houses do not have driveways/garages and some have more than 2 cars, so there are always cars parked on both sides of the road which significantly narrows the road to one car width.

Object

Representation ID: 5621

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Jayne Bootland

This area cannot sustain more development. The local school would not be able to manage extra children, which there will be as this housing is aimed at being affordable for young families. Access would be extremely difficult, narrow residential streets would not be able to cope with heavy plant traffic. The main road into Keighley is already extremely busy and coney lane and railway line cannot take more traffic.
This is a rural area, not an urban area and needs the green space which is in short supply in the area. Keeping green space is important for the wildlife and environment as well as for the people who live here.

Object

Representation ID: 7080

Received: 15/03/2021

Respondent: Patricia Rawson-Chad

Number of people: 6

We OBJECT to new houses been built in long lee and thwaites brow.
The bridge which is our main route in and out, can not handle the traffic already, it will be made 100% worse
The problem is, housing got denied, but Bradford council as approved it them self's now.
No one in long lee or Thwaites brow want any more houses.

Object

Representation ID: 7183

Received: 10/03/2021

Respondent: Jacqueline Jarvis

I strongly object to Bradford Council building houses on Greenbelt land. There are enough Brown field sites with abandoned buildings and unused warehousing that should be considered first. Also what about housing that is unoccupied by missing landlords? Why aren’t these compulsory purchased to start with? You never consider the infrastructure, roads, doctors, schools, sewage, increased traffic etc., when drawing up these plans and what if any will be social housing which is the most needed of all builds? NONE!

Object

Representation ID: 8160

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: CPRE West Yorkshire

In line with our comments on policy SP5, we object to the following site allocations:

KY2/H
KY7/H
KY15/H
KY35/H
KY36/H
KY40/H

Object

Representation ID: 8490

Received: 12/03/2021

Respondent: Mr John Brooks

Number of people: 2

We object strongly to this proposal.
The land is green belt - What has happened to building on Brownfield sites?
Access is very restrictive - Golden View Drive is a narrow road and has cars parked on both sides. Exit into Thwaites Brow Road is hazardous with poor visibility to traffic travelling up and down Thwaites Brow Road, which is a shortcut to and from the Aire Valley Trunk Road
Site becomes very water logged during heavy periods of rain with surface water running down in streams.
No neighbour notification regarding these proposals.

Object

Representation ID: 9519

Received: 15/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Alison Joy Wilcock

Moss Carr Road cannot support 142 new houses, its incredibly busy with parked cars, single cars can pass at any one time. not suitable or safe for access to a major development. Increased traffic.
Congestion will be unacceptable.
Parking Issues
the build of 5 new homes towards the end of Moss Carr Road has caused chaos and severe damage to the road surface.
The road is never gritted during the winter months making it in passable in some cases.
Park Lane Bridge Constraints- Requirements years ago that development in Long Lee had to tackle the problem of this bridge
Amenities - No capacity to support hundreds of new homes.
Green Belt - protect,not destroy.
Loss of natural habitats
Affect on long distance views
Ruin the beauty of the landscape.

Object

Representation ID: 10629

Received: 16/03/2021

Respondent: Mr. & Mrs. Bernard & Valerie Maddocks

Proposed entry (Golden View Drive) is totally unsuitable for increased traffic use and a private (unadopted) cul-de-sac. Entrance/exit from Golden View Drive via Thwaites Brow Road has many hazards including parked cars. It is prone to speeding and use as short cut to bypass the town centre. Potential to be an accident blackspot.

If KY18/H goes ahead, this would potentially increase traffic using Thwaites Brow Road to use the “Twines” to access the bypass.

Use of greenbelt land when brownfield sites are available.

Effect on wildlife.

Sewerage/drainage system – which is already a problem at times in Lee Court.

Pollution due to additional traffic.

Local amenities such as Doctors and Schools are already near to over-subscription.

Golden View Drive is not suitable for heavy construction vehicles and equipment, which are also going to contribute to the hazardous conditions to both pedestrians and motorists on Thwaites Brow Road.

Object

Representation ID: 10934

Received: 13/03/2021

Respondent: Janet and John Baldwin

Number of people: 2

This is greenfield land,which NPPF say"to be used only in exceptional circumstances". Available brownfield sites should be taken into account.
Traffic is already a problem heading down the hill to Keighley ,this builds back on a regular basis,particularly at the bridge over the beck. Has the Coney Bridge improvement now been disregarded. How much traffic can the bridge actually take?
Flooding in recent years, has meant the road having to be closed for days at a time.
Access via Golden View Drive is already difficult, as this is on the very Brow of the hill,views obscured by parked vehicles down.
Pollution levels will increase from extra vehicles.

Object

Representation ID: 13211

Received: 20/03/2021

Respondent: David & Valerie Caven

Number of people: 2

- Lack of local amenities
- Very poor transport links - Low Bridge at Coney Lane is inadequate increased traffic and the bus service is only hourly, despite locals lobbying the bus company.
- Loss of greenfield/belt sites – erosion of character
- No evidence of local demand for extra houses

Object

Representation ID: 16294

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Keighley Town Council

The council is concerned that this site cannot be considered on its own without first assessing the impact on the land surrounding the site.

The council believes this site would quickly become a gateway site to allow further access to the green fields surrounding it. This can easily be seen by the development of Golden View Drive, where the same development creep has occurred piece by piece. This is the very purpose of the greenbelt to stop this development creep and urban sprawl. The impact assessment or local plan policies fail to address these issues in any meaningful way.

This site if developed would meet up with the proposed site on Moss Carr Road of 103 dwellings thereby taking a large section of the green space away from the village and sprawling further down the valley to the dual carriage way. These two sites would surround the cricket field and could compromise the rights of way down to Bingley.

Object

Representation ID: 17484

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Julian Thomas

KY35/H is a site situated off Golden View Drive, and is greenbelt. Access would be from a small cul-de-sac, an unadopted road. This site should not be considered without first assessing the impact on the land surrounding it. There has already been development creep around Golden View Drive despite the purpose of greenbelt to protect against development creep and urban sprawl. These issues are not meaningfully addressed within the Local Plan. This site, together with the other two proposed sites on Moss Carr Road would take away significant green space and the site would have a negative impact on rights of way down to Bingley and beyond.

Object

Representation ID: 28268

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Member of Parliament (Conservative)

Green belt should not be considered for development as it is in contravention to Governments aims and objectives.
Local Authorities should maximise the use of brownfield sites before considering changes to Green Belt boundaries.
There are no exceptional circumstances to justify releasing sites from Green Belt protection. All other reasonable options to meet housing need should be considered.
Inadequate proposals have been presented with regards to upgrading local infrastructure to cope with proposed extra housing. and extra pressures on local services.
There is no clear vision to increase passenger capacity on local public transport. This is in contravention to the Governments Decarbonising Transport strategic priority.
No justification for the proposed housing numbers identified to warrant removal of areas of Green Belt.

Comment

Representation ID: 28676

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.

Object

Representation ID: 29403

Received: 29/03/2021

Respondent: Historic England

Whilst the site is located outside of the boundary of the Saltaire World Heritage Site (WHS) buffer zone it is within an area where tall buildings could affect its setting.
Development on this site is unlikely to be built to a height that would be visible from the World Heritage Site, and thereby impact upon the Outstanding Universal Value of Saltaire. However, given that this is highlighted as a risk in the Saltaire World Heritage Site Management Plan (2014) it would be prudent to identify it as a development consideration in the Local Plan pro forma for this site.
Site KY35/H, add the following additional Development Consideration to the site pro forma:
‘Development must avoid impacting upon the outstanding Universal Value of the Saltaire World Heritage Site through affecting long distance views of the Site.’

Object

Representation ID: 29522

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Elizabeth & Tim Walton

Number of people: 2

1) GREEN BELT
Proposals through Keighley and area district which is against Government and Bradford Council Green Belt and Zero Carbon Future policies resulting in sprawl, loss of identity, damage to wildlife, loss of natural views loss of green habitat and wildlife, pollution.