NW9/H - Wilsden Road/West Avenue, Sandy Lane

Object

Representation ID: 218

Received: 16/02/2021

Respondent: Ms Kirstin Sawyer

Green belt land should not be used so as to preserve countryside and promote biodiverse habitats.

Object

Representation ID: 699

Received: 03/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Joseph Wood

This land is nessesary to mentain sandy lanes village Appeal which could be easily lost if these property’s are biult

Object

Representation ID: 1417

Received: 13/03/2021

Respondent: Ms Stephanie Knight

I object to Green Belt development. The concept of Green Belt is that it stays that way, and this also is in contradiction to national policy which states that developing Green Belt should only be considered in special exceptional circumstances.
This is not zero carbon or sustainable development-it would be a car dependent community as there are no local amenities and school are all full. The infrastructure would not support this development

Object

Representation ID: 3742

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Sandy Lane Parish Council

Sandy Lane Parish Council object strongly to the proposed development of this site to house 22 dwellings: in addition to the highly significant 'constraints' detailed below, the Parish Council's concerns regard the Plans’ impact on existing services and facilities, transport, access for sites, and impact on heritage sites such as listed buildings locally. Specifically the Parish Council’s concerns are focused upon any further development in the parish with no infrastructure to support this - there is already an over-subscribed school, no doctors, no shops, etc. - as well as the fact that this is Green Belt land, and the existing highways limitations. The highways limitations are an imperative objection in this already built up area, where cars from the local garage are already parked on roads, including on double yellow lines, causing obstruction at times, and further development in the area would only serve to acerbate this further.

Object

Representation ID: 5787

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Roger Raper

Extending into the Green Belt now will set a precedent for further erosion of the Green belt in the future.
The land targeted for development regularly floods as it acts as a run off for rain from the higher ground.
Homes built there will be susceptible for flooding or existing homes below the new planned houses will be adversely impacted.
The local infrastructure cannot cope with existing traffic and drains on its resources.
Congestion will increase significantly with the new homes. - this is at odds with a proposed zero carbon future
The area targeted acts as a corridor for wildlife. Building upon it will mean a loss of habitat, loss of natural views, as well as a loss of agricultural land and loss of community identity.
All of the above are contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework.

Support

Representation ID: 7132

Received: 10/03/2021

Respondent: David Hill LLP

We are pleased to see that the above site is allocated for housing in the Draft Bradford District Local Plan - Preferred Options (Regulation 18) February 2021. The landowners are keen to progress with developing the site and we would like to confirm it’s availability.

Object

Representation ID: 8138

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: CPRE West Yorkshire

In line with our comments on policy SP5, we object to these site allocations:
NW7/H
NW8/H
NW9/H
NW10/H
NW13/H
NW19/H - Considering the recognition of the site’s parkland setting, in our view the site is unsuitable for development at sufficient density to constitute sustainable development, and it should not therefore be allocated

Support

Representation ID: 17029

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Katie Heptonstall

I would also like to register my support for the proposed development at Wilsden Road/West Avenue Sandy Lane and Allerton Road, Prune Park Lane.

Support

Representation ID: 28236

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Hallam Land Management

Agent: Johnson Mowat

HLM support the inclusion of site NW9/H as a preferred allocation in the Draft Local Plan.

It is a much needed site in the Bradford NW sub area, which forms part of the Regional City of Bradford, a prime focus for development in the Local Plan.

The site is a deliverable and unconstrainted and capable of delivering housing in the short term to contribute towards the identified housing requirement.

The site is located in a sustainable location, close to existing services and facilities, as established in the sustainability appraisal scoring.

There are no known viability issues and both sites could deliver the full S106 requirements and other planning obligations in the Draft Local Plan.

There are no environmental constraints associated with the site that cannot be dealt with via appropriate design.

The development of NW9/H would form a logical small extension to the urban edge.

It is considered that the housing requirement in the District, coupled with the sustainable location of this site adjacent to the Bradford North West sub area provides the exceptional circumstances to justify the release of SW9/H from the Green Belt, which represents a small and logical extension to the NW urban area.

Comment

Representation ID: 28238

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Hallam Land Management

Agent: Johnson Mowat

Green Belt Assessment:

The Green Belt site specific assessment concludes that Site NW/023 is located in a ‘moderate’ performing green belt parcel and overall the site has a ‘moderate’ potential impact on the Green Belt. It is considered that with appropriate design and landscaping, a new inner Green Belt boundary could be formed creating a strengthened, more durable boundary than the existing weak boundary.

We agree with the comments referencing the existing topography and size of the site meaning that development would not be particularly prominent.

We agree that opportunities exist to contribute to the improvement of existing assets, including the nearby public right of way which runs between Wilsden Road towards the Prune Park Inn, and Chellow Dean, a designated local wildlife site to the east.

Comment

Representation ID: 28849

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: 29260

Received: 29/03/2021

Respondent: Historic England

See attachment for full representation
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 Listed Buildings in its vicinity, and what impact the loss of this undeveloped site and its subsequent 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 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 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).