SH5/H - Bingley Road, Nabwood

Object

Representation ID: 672

Received: 03/03/2021

Respondent: Ms Kierston Hunt

Green belt and any open land is a precious resource for people and wildlife. Building on such land is short sighted and reprehensible. There are surely enough sites in the district to build on which dont compromise the environment.
Bring back into use the derelict building sites and empty houses/buildings for a truly sound, far sighted plan

Object

Representation ID: 673

Received: 03/03/2021

Respondent: Miss Amanda Holloway

I strongly object to building proposals on sitesSH5/H SH6H.andSH4H. Reasons being:
1 FLOODING..Branksome Drive already endured several incidents of severe flooding, the last in December 2015 left all properties on the riverside under 1.38metres of water many residents were out of their properties for over a year.we have also had recent near misses in Jan &Feb 2021
It is ludicrous when the Goverment state we are in a Climate Crisis and management of flooding is paramount that these proposals are even there early stages.

2 Green Belt.. created to stop Urban sprawl but is exactly what will be created with the proposals on above sites.Such housing developments and increased number of vehicles will have a massive impact on the already congested roads particularly on Bingley Road where traffic is already crisis levels at certain times of the day.
3 Wildlife bats present seen regularly

4 Drains unable to cope....

Object

Representation ID: 684

Received: 03/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Margaret Southerington

Environmental impact. Increased flooding risk. Increased volume of traffic to this already impacted area. Local services, ie, schools and healthcare.

Object

Representation ID: 698

Received: 03/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Joseph Wood

This land provides important greenspace

Support

Representation ID: 786

Received: 05/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Jamie Walsh

SH5/H The site would provide a lovely site for residents to live. It is important to provide people a place to live and thrive, with open space and recreational opportunities near by.

It would also help to ease the housing pressure in densely populated areas of the city centres and help to provide much needed green space there.

If the site provided affordable housing it would be a great opportunity for young families to have a very good quality of life.

Object

Representation ID: 853

Received: 06/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Arron Cawthray

The air quality by the road side is already bad enough that I choose not to walk near this development. Not only will the development increase local traffic, but the inhabitants will suffer as a result. Furthermore, it is a sorry state to see the development being built on a "100% greenfield site containing trees". There is plenty of brownfield land, most notably in Keighley, which should be built upon before we allow greenfield sites to be decimated. The Aire valley is slowly becoming less and less green. How about we redevelop and clean up old industrial sites first?

Object

Representation ID: 880

Received: 07/03/2021

Respondent: Dr Steven Maude

I have serious concerns about SH5/H because of the proximity to the River Aire and risks of flooding, which the Local Plan notes. Bingley and Baildon residents, among others, had disastrous impacts when the River Aire flooded in December 2015. Housing developments in areas at higher risk of flooding means those new residents may face floods. Removing sites that can act as natural flood barriers may also increase the risk of flooding for existing nearby residents. The Local Plan already cites flood risks for these sites.

Support

Representation ID: 884

Received: 07/03/2021

Respondent: Ms Jeanette Halliday

We need more housing for working people.

Object

Representation ID: 916

Received: 07/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs H Donnison

I oppose the construction of houses on this green belt . The traffic which is already busy at all times will be significantly worse , the area will become overcrowded and wildlife will suffer . There is also an issue of flooding in this area .

Object

Representation ID: 918

Received: 07/03/2021

Respondent: Miss Georgina Katborg

I STRONGLY object to these plans for a number of reasons: 1) FLOOD risk is massive 2) natural habitat (includes bats and otters - which are endangered and these will be disturbed) 3) pressure on local amenities like schools, doctors and dentists which are already full. 4) Traffic and emissions. More cars and traffic is not good for the environment. 5) no actual 'green space' break from Shipley to Bingley - therefore how do we identify as a 'community'. I am absolutely against these proposals and will do everything I can to prove that Bingley Road in Nabwood is NOT an appropriate area to build.

Object

Representation ID: 948

Received: 08/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Joseph Green

I feel that this proposal will severely affect this area. mainly due to the increased traffic as you have already mentioned that cars/person in the Cottingley area is above average. There is major congestion backing up to the end of the bypass. Also any further reduction in greenbelt & issues affecting drainage is a bad Idea as there are issues with flooding in Branksome Drive area.. Please take my feedback .

Object

Representation ID: 972

Received: 08/03/2021

Respondent: J&J Award Winning Projects for Schools

I object due to the following:

1. Protection of green spaces
2. Increase in traffic in the area
3. Increase risk of flooding

Object

Representation ID: 1149

Received: 15/02/2021

Respondent: Mr Richard Sorge

Flood risk
Green Belt
Wildlife habitat- active bats
Drainage
Road access
Air pollution

Object

Representation ID: 1160

Received: 17/02/2021

Respondent: Ms Linda Wood

Loss of green space
Coalescence
Traffic Increase
Overlooking
Use brownfield sites

Object

Representation ID: 1178

Received: 10/03/2021

Respondent: Ms Caroline Blount-Shah

The council should value and save the green belt land, and use of brownfield sites rather than agricultural land for building new homes. The council should aim to reduce road traffic levels along the A650 to reduce Pollution (part of CAZ) and improve health of all residents. New housing should be built close to stations and transport hubs, so that residents have the choice to use public transport. The proposal could increase flood risk for residents at the lower part of Branksome Drive (and further downstream along the Aire Valley). The field at the lower riverside floods regularly with river water and field run-off. If houses are built on the upper field area next to the A 650 there will be a huge amount of run-off from roofs, streets and parking areas, which could be reduced slightly providing houses with green/planted roofs, and providing parking areas with green absorbent paving.

Object

Representation ID: 1224

Received: 10/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Ciarán McInerney

This site is one of the worst part of the proposed development, in my opinion. It will have unacceptable ramifications on ground stability and drainage, will degrade habitats, result in loss of agricultural land and natural views, ignores viable brown-site alternatives, does not accommodate the resulting increase in traffic, and the plan generally does not respect the zero-carbon-future Council policy.

Object

Representation ID: 1252

Received: 11/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Steven Walker

Loss of natural view down the valley. Loss of wildlife habitat. Loss of privacy in the rear of my property. this land has been used for growing animal feeds in the past, that facility will be lost. Affect and stress on local infrastructure due to lack of local infrastructure. Loss of more Green belt land for dwellings, once it's gone it will never come back. Use of brownfield sites more acceptable rather than loss of greenfield. Any access will impact the local community on Branksome Drive and Grove. Additional air pollution from dwellings and vehicles as mentioned in sustainability appraisal. Additional noise pollution. Additional local road congestion. Will have the effect of making the current dwellings part of an estate which I believe current owners do not want. Not in line with council policy of zero carbon future, development will make this goal harder to attain. Development not welcomed locally.

Object

Representation ID: 1274

Received: 17/02/2021

Respondent: Mr John Taylor

Loss of green belt
Impact of development on residents
Traffic- impact on residents of Branksome Drive
Flooding from underground streams

Object

Representation ID: 1292

Received: 11/03/2021

Respondent: Mr David Pringle

This site is greenbelt and other sites should be brought forwards before such habitats are lost.
No development should be permitted until the Shipley Eastern Bypass has been completed or other major infrastructure work completed to the junction of Saltaire Road(A657), Bingley Road (A650) and Moorhead Lane. The junction is operating at over capacity and cannot take any more traffic. In addition, there are existing consented but unimplemented schemes which will increase traffic further.

Object

Representation ID: 1339

Received: 12/03/2021

Respondent: Ms Mel Frances

I object to green land being destroyed for housing. There are mature trees whose benefits would take years to reconstruct elsewhere in some kind of offsetting way, improving air quality and providing shelter for wildlife.
The site is close to the River Aire which many people are trying to improve and hosts a multitude of wildlife such as otters, king fishers etc and the reintroduction of salmon and trout.
Pasture land itself can include important and sometimes rare species of wildflowers and grasses which provide food and habitat for insects etc.

Object

Representation ID: 1340

Received: 12/03/2021

Respondent: Ms Mel Frances

Pressures on air quality and the effects this could have on the natural environment surrounding it.
This is 100% greenfield site and should not be looked at for building on as you are going to destroy an existing habitat and have knock on effects forever than can't be undone.

Object

Representation ID: 1424

Received: 13/03/2021

Respondent: Ms Stephanie Knight

As above
Detrimental effects:
Increase flood risk
Increase noise pollution, air pollution, litter, light pollution
Detrimental effect on air quality
Adverse effects on people's physical and mental health
Car dependent community -only nearby transport is a bus route, since the pandemic buses are not used as much. Not within walking or cycling distance to employment or station. Most people don't walk or cycle if more than 20 minutes to do so. Most children are driven to school.

Object

Representation ID: 1432

Received: 13/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Richard Jennings

The amount of additional traffic to an already busy road caused by the proposed development will severely impact upon the current residents. Access to the site will cause traffic holdups on an already busy and dangerous road.
The effect of this development will severely impact upon current house prices will affect the rural locality.
The development site (bottom part) as you are aware is prone to flooding a problem only likely to be further exacerbated if climate change scientists are to be believed.
Finally and personally our peaceful location will be impacted beyond believe by increased noise and traffic

Object

Representation ID: 1447

Received: 13/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Daniel English

We don’t believe that the local infrastructure could support this many new houses.

Object

Representation ID: 1462

Received: 13/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Helen Lynskey

The proposal to change the green belt boundary is not in line with the National Planning Policy Framework which states greenbelt boundaries should only be altered in exceptional circumstances - available brownfield sites must be considered first and there is a need to promote sustainable patterns of development if green belt land is released. The Council needs to allocate housing to more brownfield sites across the Local Plan area (such as at Valley Road) instead of releasing greenbelt land.

This site is not sustainable due to the following negative environmental impacts. All are strong reasons to oppose this allocation:
Loss of mature trees and woodland
Impact on water quality
Flood risk will increase downhill from the site.
Air pollution and noise from additional cars
Loss of local greenspace that is important to residents’ wellbeing
Schools already oversubscribed
Poor access to public transport (poor bus service) and local shops and services

Object

Representation ID: 1467

Received: 13/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Alan Wright

This area of greenbelt lies very close to the Shipley/Bingley boundary and is vital for retaining local community identity.

A large development here would inevitably worsen already high levels of air pollution and adversely impact the river Aire and its surrounding natural habitat.

This site is close to residential areas that have flooded several times in the recent past. A large development here could make future flooding events worse.

The A650 at this location is already congested for much of the time and this development would inevitably add more cars to the "bottle neck" leading towards Shipley.

Object

Representation ID: 1488

Received: 14/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Jenny Ambler

Branksome Drive & Grove were severely flood damaged in 2015. More houses & concrete would contribute to further overflow onto the flood plain.

300 - 400 extra cars from the extra housing would increase air pollution & traffic congestion. Problems relating to congestion from the Bingley bypass to Saltaire, Shipley Canal Rd have not yet been addressed.

It shows lack of concern to protect the green belt between Saltaire & Shipley. The brown sites should be priority for housing.

Access for construction traffic via the Grove or Drive is not acceptable. Already for bin collection, fire & ambulance services is compromised due to parked vehicles.

Object

Representation ID: 1513

Received: 14/03/2021

Respondent: Crisp

I would like to object to this planned work as a house owner on Branksome Drive

The main reasons would be as follows:

1. Loss of natural views, agricultural land and wildlife.
2. Loss of community identity.
3. Traffic noise and volume issues.
4. Detrimental impact on nearby residential amenity

Object

Representation ID: 1547

Received: 14/03/2021

Respondent: Susan & Billy Scott

Loss of habitat for the varied wildlife, grassland, meadows, loss of agricultural land
Loss of natural views, residents have bought houses so as not to be overlooked
Danger of flooding which is already a massive problem
Insufficient drainage systems that are already under pressure never mind adding nearly 200 more houses to the area
Pollution and environment issues - A650 is already a very busy road more traffic more pollution. The Council is committed to lowering air pollution. It is already a nightmare trying to turn out of Branksome Drive. Both the Drive and Grove will be used as rat runs cutting through to get to the main road
Local services schools, doctors, dentist are already over-subscribed
Green belt should be land that can't be built upon we need our open space for health and well-being and enjoy the open views this has become more essential in the last year

Object

Representation ID: 1664

Received: 15/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Christine Griffin

SH5/H and SH6/H
The area in question is renowned as a flood risk and there have been several incidents over the last few years where properties have been devastated by water ingress. The fields act as some sort of barrier and to build mutiple concrete residencies which will include hard standing car parking and minimal garden space does not seem viable. The additional traffic caused by any development is also an issue as Branksome Drive/Grove is narrow and access to main road is already difficult. The fields and trees attract birds and other wildlife which would be deterred by residential development. The fields are currently used for animal husbandry and should be kept that way.