CC12/H - City Village Top of Town

Showing comments and forms 1 to 4 of 4

Object

Draft Bradford District Local Plan - Preferred Options (Regulation 18) February 2021

Representation ID: 2876

Received: 21/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Mark Lyness

Representation Summary:

This key piece of land once the market has moved is too strategic to be used for housing . The housing will not be in demand for a city centre location and will end being very poor standard of tenants making the area worse.
My suggestion would be create an outdoor space for music, dance, theatre that will become a vibrant area at the top of town. An area in an oval shape that is flagged in the centre and around the edge would be planting, area for stands and covered areas in case of rain and at one end of the bowl would be a stage and small changing room.The "Bradford Bowl" fenced around to close at Night and could be rented for events craft markets etc. The zone would cater for upto 500 standing at an event and create a "top of town activity zone

Comment

Draft Bradford District Local Plan - Preferred Options (Regulation 18) February 2021

Representation ID: 28816

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Environment Agency

Representation Summary:

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

Draft Bradford District Local Plan - Preferred Options (Regulation 18) February 2021

Representation ID: 29139

Received: 29/03/2021

Respondent: Historic England

Representation Summary:

Before allocating this site for development:
(1) An assessment needs to be undertaken of the contribution which this site makes to those elements which contribute towards the significance of the Conservation Area and Listed Buildings in its vicinity, and what impact development might have upon their significance.
(2) If it is considered that the development of this site would harm elements which contribute to the significance of the Conservation Area and Listed Buildings, then the measures by which that harm might be removed or reduced need to be effectively tied into the Plan.
(3) If, at the end of the process, it is concluded that the development would still be likely to harm elements which
contribute to the significance of the Conservation Area and any of these Listed Buildings, then this site should not be allocated unless there are clear public benefits that outweigh the harm (as is required by NPPF, Paragraph 195 or 196).

Comment

Draft Bradford District Local Plan - Preferred Options (Regulation 18) February 2021

Representation ID: 29939

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Harworth Group PLC

Agent: Rob Moore

Representation Summary:

A significant proportion of the city centre sites carry risk and if relied upon Bradford may not be able to deliver the quantum of housing envisaged. Our summary assessment of these sites is set out below (Table 1 – Savills City Centre Housing Supply Site Assessment):

CC12/H - Site involves existing car park/ listed buildings on-site with build cost implications. Council-owned in part with leaseholders/ freeholders across the wider site. No applications have come forward. No clear evidence site is viable.