|
Village Web Site Forum
Liz Kildunne
NODISC
Wednesday, February 11, 2015 18:51 |
Sutton under attack - yet another Green Field Planning Application - Sutton Lane - 50 Houses
Dear All
There has been yet another application from the Inghams to build houses off Sutton Lane - this time for 50. We have to stand firm against this as a village. With all the development going on in the neighbouring villages of Eastburn, Silsden, those approved for Green Lane Glusburn, and the latest talk of another 220 in Crosshills, where the hell are the kids going to school, how are we all going to get adequate healthcare, where's all the water going, what about all the traffic. This has to stop. There were 85 comments made to the Local Plan Consultation regarding Sutton Lane, more than anywhere else in the entire Craven District - that has got to count for something. We need everyone to fight this.
Application number: 66/2015/15334
http://www.planning.cravendc.gov.uk/fastweb/fastweb_upload/Letters/Correspd/Sutton_0in_0Craven/66-2015/66-2015-15334/ORIGINAL_0SUBMISSION_0DOCS/15334_0-_0SITE_0PLAN_0PROPOSED_0revision_0A.pdf
Please object before it is too late |
Graham Smith
Glusburn (ex Suttoner)
Thursday, February 12, 2015 17:30 |
Nodisc reforming liz ?
Nodisc= no overdevelopment in South craven |
Liz Kildunne
NODISC
Thursday, February 12, 2015 18:07 |
Yeah, wouldn't be a bad idea Graham, just a matter of finding the time and getting the gang back together again! What's happened at Green Lane, is that still going ahead? |
Derek Bowers
Sutton in Craven
Friday, February 13, 2015 14:06 |
Having looked at the plans tp build 50 houses in Sutton on Main St/Sutton Lane,they look acceptable and the benefits to the parish look good.The footpath/cycle path along Sutton Ln as far as the Bradford boundary will improve the safety(long time needed),the other good benefit will be the field that will be given to the parish council to act as a buffer between Eastburn and Sutton.This field
is never to be built on but be available for the parish to do with want it wants,perhaps some more allotments or more community based uses.There are a number of people objecting to the plans who live in houses that were only built in the last sixty years.Personally I think that is a very selfish attitude, and we should all allow other people to enjoy the benefits of living in a village community.
|
Graham Smith
Glusburn (ex Suttoner)
Friday, February 13, 2015 21:07 |
When does the benefits of living in a village community stop and become part of a town community ,because the amount of houses planned for the next 10-15 years will turn sutton.crosshills .glusburn in to a town ..the local infrastructure cannot cope with all the proposed developments like liz says.
It's not a selfish attitude Derek it's reality .
Have you seen bridge road / Holme lane at school run time ? We already have the biggest secondary school in North yorks .add another 100/200 kids to these schools then the roads will be completly gridlocked |
Liz Kildunne
NODISC
Sunday, February 15, 2015 08:32 |
Correct Graham, we have more and more houses being built/proposed to be built in the South Craven Area, and Eastburn/Steeton without additional infrastructure to cope.
I'm glad that I don't live next to the Aire Valley Sewer outlet that spews sewerage out because it can't cope. I don't have any children so haven't struggled to get places in the local schools, but I know people who have. I do have a car, and am familiar with the heavy traffic, and the recent motor cycle accident that happened on our narrow Main Street. 50 more houses equates to a good 75 more cars - the planned estate is too far out of the village for the new home occupiers to walk to amenities such as the park, so our traffic problems will only be exacerbated. And the supermarkets are too far for people to walk, so again, more cars on the road.
Yes, I agree that the plans look very pretty, and give us a much needed footpath, and leave a field alone (which I THINK is in West Yorkshire, but will check it out today for sure), but remember these are only outline plans, to establish the principle of acceptability of building there. Once granted, the land-owners will no doubt sell the land to developers with planning permission, then all bets are off - developers will then have new designs drawn up, to fit with their budgets. Building houses and associated access routes and sewers, etc, will be much more expensive putting them half way up a hill, than down at the roadside, where the facilities already exist. Then we have a new battle which will be more difficult to win once planning is granted - and fighting the likes of Skipton Properties will be a losing battle.
I agree we need a footpath down Sutton Lane - if the land-owners are so interested in the well-being of Sutton and are prepared to "donate" a field in return for planning permission, then perhaps their generosity could just extend to donating part of the lower fields for a footpath, and leave the rest as farming land!
In the recent consultation on the Local Plan, there were 81 comments submitted about Sutton Lane alone, more than any other region in Craven, and a total of around 10% of the total number of comments made for the entire Craven District. There were 99 comments about Sutton in general. Yes, there are the obvious complaints from people who live right next door to the site, however, as with the previous planning application from last summer, there are people throughout the village who are looking at the overall issues that such a big development will bring to Sutton.
From a personal viewpoint, Greenfield should be left untouched until all brownfield sites are gone. I have objected to greenfield development throughout Craven over the last 10-15 years, including sites in Sutton, Hellifield, Skipton, Settle and Glusburn, so have been consistent in my approach. Sutton has had too much development in recent years, including Greenroyd Mill and Woodturners, both brownfield, all without improving infrastructure, unless you count a zebra crossing! We have some brownfield sites left in Sutton (inc Yeadon House) which should be developed before we start on green fields, but not without improving the facilities, schools, roads, healthcare, etc.
Sutton (and South Craven generally) is full! |
Liz Kildunne
NODISC
Sunday, February 15, 2015 09:52 |
Just checked out the land that could be gifted - it is in Sutton, not West Yorks, and looks to be about 1/3 of the area of the final field. Not sure how it could be used for allotments or whatever, as there would be no parking nearby, unless users would be parking on the new estate. Seems a bit too far out of the village to be useful as anything community-orientated. |
Liz Kildunne
NODISC
Thursday, February 19, 2015 08:50 |
Dear All
I asked what "Outline Planning Application with All Matters Reserved" means - it is to decide if the site is suitable for planning in principle, full response below. So, the plans that are shown are not set, the green space at the lower end of the fields and the footpath are not guaranteed, nor is the possible gift of land.
"I can advise an outline application, with all matters reserved, is an application to establish whether the site is deemed suitable for development. Although you are not able to comment on design etc of the residential development you are able to make comments/concerns on the residential proposal on a whole. Guidance is given on our website for commenting on applications.
www.cravendc.gov.uk/article/3638/What-are-relevant-planning-considerations
Should, outline consent is issued then there would be a further brand new application called ‘reserved matters’ which would be to agree such things as the, design, access, landscaping etc. Comments would be invited via neighbour notification, parish council, site notices, press notice."
Hope this is useful - article in Craven Herald today - anyone submitting on-line comments who objects, please tick the "object" box, rather than the "observation" box. There are quite a few currently who have observed rather than objected, but the comments they have put suggest an objection.
Thanks All
|
Ian Gratton
Sutton in Craven
Tuesday, February 24, 2015 11:29 |
I have to-day objected in the strongest possible terms to the planning application for 50 new homes |
Liz Kildunne
NODISC
Thursday, February 26, 2015 10:11 |
Many thanks Ian.
Dear All
this planning application is on the Agenda for Monday 2nd March Parish Council meeting - 6.45pm. Please come along if you can.
Best Wishes |
Jean McClennon
United Kingdom
Friday, February 27, 2015 14:34 |
I have sent my objection ( from a house built in 1904!) Where is the Parish council meeting held please ? |
Paul Wilkinson
webmaster
Friday, February 27, 2015 15:20 |
It's in the Community Centre on North Street.
|
Liz Kildunne
NODISC
Friday, March 6, 2015 08:41 |
Dear All
time is running out for you to place your objections - 12th March deadline - please help. Last year we had 224 letters of objection to just 29 houses, how many can we get for 50!
Best Wishes
Liz |
Liz Kildunne
NODISC
Monday, March 9, 2015 13:36 |
Dear All
Deadline is Thursday 12th March - we have 180 pages of objections now, thanks to all who have taken the trouble to write in so far, here's hoping we can beat last year.
Best Wishes
Liz |
Liz Kildunne
NODISC
Saturday, June 6, 2015 16:58 |
Dear All - the application off Sutton Lane has been refused. Many thanks to all who supported this campaign, I will keep everyone posted as best I can with any future developments.
Best Wishes
Liz |
Elaine Polshaw
Holme Lane, Sutton in Craven
Monday, June 8, 2015 07:14 |
Woohoo great news |
Hazel Martell
Sutton
Monday, June 8, 2015 15:00 |
Brilliant news - and many thanks to you, Liz, for keeping us up to date! |
Posting to the forum is de-activated due to lack of use.
You are welcome to browse through posts but cannot add comments or start new topics.
|
|
