Decision on huge 199 home development in Waltham postponed for site visit
Land near to Brigsley Road and Elsham Drive, Waltham where the homes are planned to be built
By Grimsby Telegraph | Posted: 1 Feb 2018
A controversial 199 home development in Waltham has been postponed until a site visit is carried out as the planning committee wanted a closer look at the land.
Decision on 199 homes plan in Waltham postponed for site visit
The huge development proposed by Cyden Homes off Brigsley Road has proven to be a highly controversial topic among local residents, councillors and the parish council, who believe that it will overwhelm the local infrastructure that is already at a breaking point.
Speaking at a meeting of the Planning Committee today it was highlighted how the development would create 199 new homes in the village, consisting of a mix of one, two, three and four bedroom homes, with a 20 per cent provision for affordable housing.
Cyden Homes have offered to make a number of contributions to the local area if the development is approved, including providing £450,000 to local primary schools and £543,000 to secondary schools, the installation of pedestrian crossings and a new bus stop for the 25 bus.
It is also offering new buyers £100 in cycling vouchers and bus passes in order to encourage the use of public transport to and from the development, also highlighting how Footpath 72 would be part of the development, creating an access point to and from it to the village.
The only access to the site will be onto Brigsley Road, something that concerns residents as it is a "notoriously dangerous" road with many blind bends.
Plans for the proposed housing site at Brigsley Road
At the meeting the developer said: "The land is currently part of the local plan which gives it significant weight in any planning policy, and has been recommended for approval by council officers.
"We held a public consultation about the development in 2016, and since then we have made efforts to amend our proposal so that it is in keeping with the concerns of the residents.
"We have offered to make a number of highway improvements to alleviate the concerns of residents including installing a sign that will warn them of when they have gone over the speed limit.
"We have also included a swale that will help to improve the drainage situation in the area and there has been no issues with the development regarding flood risk."
However a number of people spoke out against the development, with Waltham Residents Action Group (WRAG), Councillor Philip Jackson and the parish council all voicing objections.
Keith Smith Chair of WRAG said: "This development is just not acceptable.
"Great weight has been given to affordable housing, but there is no certainty that this element will be introduced in reality.
"The travel plan developed is inadequate and there is no guarantee that anyone will use the additional bus stop, as buses only stop their twice a day.
"There is a drainage problem as the area is a high flood risk and the land currently has standing water."
Waltham Councillor Mr Jackson had attempted on two occasions to have the site removed from the local plan, however failed.
He was key to stress the concerns local residents have regarding the dangers of Brigsley Road saying: "Highway officers may be satisfied with the access point but residents, councillors and the parish council are not, the bends are unsafe.
Footpath 72 which will run through the development.
"All the vehicles leaving the site will have to pass through Waltham which is already heavily congested, and will make the roads even more dangerous.
"Cyden Homes have said they have carried out a traffic study and found the roads to be ok, but that was held for two hours, in the middle of the day, during the school holidays so how can that be valid?"
Lesley Leach, Clark of Waltham Parish Council also hit out at the development saying that the access point would "create an accident hot spot" and further highlighted how local schools are already full, and as there are no plans for expansion the education contribution would be pointless.
Councillors on the planning committee were unsure how they wished to proceed with the development, with some voicing objections and others wanting a site visit as a rejection could lead to the site being approved on appeal by the planning inspectorate.
Councillor Iain Colquhoun wanted the planning committee to be aware of the sheer volume of objections submitted by local residents, while Councillor Tim Mickleburgh felt that great weight should be given to the parish council's views as they know the area best.
Councillor Matthew Brown voiced his objection highlighting the sheer number of extra vehicles on the road caused by the development, at least 776 by his count.
Although it was ultimately decided that it was best to have a site visit to the proposed location, so that the planning committee could fully understand the area where the development will be located.