CC25/H - Land to the rear of Cathedral House

Comment

Representation ID: 28833

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.

Support

Representation ID: 29156

Received: 29/03/2021

Respondent: Historic England

The site is within the Little Germany Conservation Area and opposite the Cathedral Church of St Peter, a Grade I Listed Building. There are also numerous other Grade II Listed Buildings in the vicinity of the site. The site is also located adjacent to the boundary of the Cathedral Precinct Conservation Area. The development of
this area could harm elements which contribute to the significance of these designated heritage assets. The site is currently allocated for development within the Bradford
City Centre Area Action Plan (AAP), adopted in December 2017. The principle of allocating this site, for the nature and scale of development set out in the APP, has therefore been recently established as part of the Local Development Plan for Bradford District.
In order to safeguard these heritage assets, we would expect the Local Plan requirements for this site relating to the conservation and enhancement of the historic environment to, as a minimum, reflect those set out in the AAP. Consequently, we welcome that the Development Considerations and Constraints & Opportunities
identified for this site in the Draft Local Plan reflect those in the AAP. However, if there have been any significant changes to the sites circumstances since its allocation in the AAP that we are not aware of, or the development proposed is significantly different (e.g. in terms of land use, density, scale, developable area etc.), the Council
should undertake a Heritage Impact Assessment of the site as part of the Evidence Base to the emerging Local Plan.

Comment

Representation ID: 29947

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Harworth Group PLC

Agent: Rob Moore

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):

CC25/H - Heritage/ severe build cost implications given surrounding properties and CA. No applications have come forward despite several property cycles. No clear evidence site is viable.