NE2/H - Westfield Lane and Kingsway, Wrose

Object

Representation ID: 4518

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Linda Feeley

Strongly object. Access - Willow Avenue has already become a much busier / speedier road as the precious moorland has previously been developed. It is also used as a bypass of Five Lane Ends roundabout. 69 houses with two cars per household, would be a significant increase in traffic. The local road infrastructure, particularly Wrose Road, and the roundabout are already becoming increasingly congested by building down Bolton Hall Road and air pollution should also be considered. Planning states good access for schools and local amenities, but the planning for an adjacent piece of land, NE3/H, states access to primary school and secondary schools is limited due to distance, then the same applies to this. The local infrastructure of school places, and doctors are already stretched.
This 'online only' consultation is not a fair one. Many people are unaware and unable to contribute.

Object

Representation ID: 5983

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Saeed Mahmood

Traffic
All Alone Road already has a strain as vehicles attempt to manoeuvre along their winding ways, often with parked cars as an additional obstacle.

Loss of Amenities
The only access can be achieved via Kingway but this would mean the loss of the Eccleshill Football Club which has playing fields and attracts a much needed sports and recreation facility for North East Bradford. A replacement of this club would inevitably mean a similar allocation of playing fields. However the nature of football field would mean a large site be made available due to the traditional sizes of football clubs.

The club also provides a separate building for an independant Table Tennis Club used daily.

The club's have been taken over and have voted against allowing access through their land and or any development over their playing fields.

I have attached some supporting documents confirming the issues surrounding access.

Comment

Representation ID: 28782

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: 29025

Received: 25/05/2021

Respondent: Bradford District Ward Councillor (Liberal Democrats)

Number of people: 2

Both these sites are difficult to access and see them in the same light as the remainder of the green spaces in the wards which must be protected as contributors to re-wilding and sustainable urban drainage.

Comment

Representation ID: 30203

Received: 15/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Daniel Goodyear

We are supportive of the need for new housing in parts of the district where there hasn't been developments - there has already been significant developments in these areas already putting a strain on local facilities and provisions such as Doctors, Schools etc. It is vitally important for the current and future generations that we we retain and improve the quality of open spaces and sports facilities in the area and support for the creation of new natural and formal open spaces together with improved connections between open areas - NE2/3 has a football training pitch currently there.

Areas such as Idle Moor itself need to be designated as protected open space to be used as a natural habitat for wildlife and for the provision of exercise for the benefit of peoples physical and mental health.

Object

Representation ID: 30205

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mr J Clough

(Local Plan Team – Comments relate to Support for Idle Moor as greenspace as currently proposed with specific comments below by user)
Green Space Area North of NE2/H & NE3/H
A valuable Green Space for recreation & exercise used as a nesting area for many species of birds; Bull & Green Finches, Blue, Coal, Great & Long Tail Tits together with Black Caps & Wren. Hawks are often seen hunting for small ground mammals.

There current road and social infrastructure cannot meet the additional demand from recent new developments - the area cannot support any further development.

Poor and limited access without causing disruption to the immediate neighbourhood. The area is not marked as a HD&SS yet recent weeks has seen machinery put in place for exploratory work which I assume is an agenda for future planning applications.

This is a Green Filed Site identified as such on the plan and it should remain as such and the council should listen to those who elected them and be swayed by commercial developers.