SW25/H - Lingdale Road, Woodside

Object

Representation ID: 731

Received: 04/03/2021

Respondent: Miss Ngaire Broadbelt

Damaging to wildlife & their habitats, local school full, high traffic problems, flood waters, spoiling the appearance, new homes too close to pylons, old mines underground

Object

Representation ID: 740

Received: 04/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Philip Oates

I cannot see how you can build houses between us and our view of the countryside and still maintain our view. The view is all that is left after you removed the biggest part of the view 30 years ago when you allowed building in the fields in front if us. This is not good for our health. The kids use a lot of this grass to play football and chasing etc and it is a valuable open area for all ages. I also understand there are some old provisions that do not allow the building of new houses in front of the furthest back of the existing homes. Please consider existing residents. We have had many homes built on the estate in 5he past.

Support

Representation ID: 1496

Received: 14/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Michael Barraclough

I support this development because the proposed development is modest in size and there are already houses built in this area. If the new development is planned in a way as to minimise the disruption to the existing properties (such as access and space), then new houses here would seem an appropriate development. The only downside is the loss of the green space but given the unusual shape of the land I am not sure what the current purpose of the green space is?

Object

Representation ID: 4462

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Trevor Walsh

It will spoil our green belt

Object

Representation ID: 4691

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Judy Woods Save our Heritage

Potential mine entry shaft / coal workings at NE corner of site.
• The majority of the site lies within the 200M buffer zone of overhead power line.
• The site lies within the outer tier consultation zone for BASF/Nufarm, Opportunity to include the site within master plan for adjoining site SW14/H. No such masterplan was ever registered on the Register of Master Plans under development processes in relation to the attached map circa 2005 and remains highly controversial. with substantive local objections relating to it and the infrastructure and access limitations included in HM Inspectorate report where little has changed.

Object

Representation ID: 4739

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mr C Duke

Objections to the allocation of this site for housing sating that the issues raised are similar to those raised re SW14/H .

Comment

Representation ID: 7953

Received: 12/03/2021

Respondent: Fiona & David Robinson

Number of people: 2

You are looking at building homes on the land opposite Woodside Academy SW14/H SW34/H SW25/H This is a beautiful green belt area. Which is in short demand in Woodside. Why do you need to build on green belt when there is brown land in Bradford. What about all the derelict property, mills etc. How is the school going to manage with all the extra families. The road is like a racetrack as it is. How is the drainage going to manage there is a big pond at the bottom of the field 7/8 months. We don’t need another big eyesore in this area.

Object

Representation ID: 8116

Received: 02/03/2021

Respondent: Mr & Mrs S & T Kerr & Laughlin

Number of people: 2

We have concerns regarding the proposal of houses to be built which will affect the loss of trees and wildlife, the development would cause increased pressure on existing traffic, highway safety due to school very near, parking, I trust these points will be taken into account in determining the application.

Object

Representation ID: 11087

Received: 17/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs E Roberts

SW25/H - I object and express my concerns.

The Plans will reduce the value of our properties.
Loss of views.

Effect the wildlife in this area, there is lots of wildlife here.

Traffic is horrendous in this area at school times and will become worse with cars parking on Lingdale Road, Dunnington Walk, Fenwick Drive and Eaglesfield Drive.

Emergency services unable to get through,

Buses unable to get through.

We know more houses need building but not where traffic will become a big problem.

I myself hope that these plans do not go ahead.

Comment

Representation ID: 28918

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.