SH5/H - Bingley Road, Nabwood

Object

Representation ID: 3330

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Luke Oddy

Ecology

From an ecological perspective the two sites are extremely unsuitable. The proposed sites act as green corridors for wildlife including bats, woodpeckers, deer, herons, rabbits, hawks, otters, foxes (all of which I have seen from my own window)……amongst other less noticeable birds and insects. Photograph of deer grazing within Site SH6 included...also spotted in SH5/H

The existing fields act as key green links between Hirst Wood towards Cottingley Woods / Harden Woods, Baildon Moor and other green areas further afield. Many animals travel through these areas at night and also use the fields for hunting / grazing, which they will no longer do if there are houses, lights, people and obstructions.

The fewer green spaces there are connecting these patches of woodland and open space, the less likely that wildlife diversity can be maintained.

Object

Representation ID: 3333

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Jennifer Netherwood

I am objecting to this proposed development primarily on the grounds that the site in Green Belt. Building here will allow Shipley to merge into Cottingley, and Green Belt was designed to check unrestricted sprawl and prevent neighbouring towns from merging.
The additional housing and associated traffic will cause pollution (air, noise, light, water), putting more strain on an already inadequate and congested road system. It will set a dangerous precedent, potentially allowing other local developments on Green Belt easier approval. Developing here, in an area that has flooded in the recent past, could also increase the risk current residents being affected again.
Loss of habitats will threaten wildlife, the loss of agricultural land will affect livelihoods and the loss forever of this green space will diminish the future mental and physical health of many local residents.

Object

Representation ID: 3339

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Luke Oddy

Air pollution
Branksome Drive is already at a level 3, indicating significant pollution levels. The council have implemented a clean are zone around Shipley. Building houses on greenbelt land with no facilities close by contradicts the aim to reduce air pollution.

It is unreasonable to assume that the majority of people will either walk / cycle or get the bus to the proposed sites. Therefore, additional traffic congestion associated with the site access / egress, additional delay on the A650 and additional vehicles routing to the site will further exacerbate the problem of pollution.

Pollution will further increase if an impact on traffic movements along the bypass is experienced, which is likely due to the close proximity the site has to the roundabout.

Object

Representation ID: 3341

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Luke Oddy

Flooding

The site is unsuitable and should not be built upon in relation to flooding.

Not withstanding that lower proportion of the site is within the floor plain and that the existing houses have experienced catastrophic flooding in recent years, which is becoming more and more regular occurrence. The existing fields help to store water and slowly release it into the river, further helping to reduce flooding further downstream in Shipley and beyond.

It is also unlikely that retention ponds (if built) within the site would be sufficient to hold the volume of water required within the site. Therefore, any proposals here will be placing houses along Branksome Drive / Grove and businesses further down the river at risk.

Object

Representation ID: 3344

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Tina Sheehy

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 which is already greatly impacting on residents' health, safety and wellbeing locally.
Loss of local greenspace that is important to residents’ wellbeing.

Object

Representation ID: 3346

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Karen Hunt

The area is a lovely place to live with walks along the old footpath. Much wildlife including deer can be seen. The area has suffered in recent years with flooding and general water running down the hill. If planning goes ahead and the fields are concreted over there will be even less ground for the surface water to drain into and more will come this way.

Traffic already bad will be horrendous and this is almost all day long. Wildlife will have nowhere to go, schools, dentists, doctors will not be able to manage the extra numbers. I am also of the understanding that you wish to close the crematorium due to pollution as its old but the extra traffic these properties will bring will be just as bad if not greater.

Object

Representation ID: 3351

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Karen Hunt

Branksome Drive & Grove are wholly unsuitable for handling any increase in numbers or traffic flow.
Branksome Drive and Grove will become a 2 way rat run, much used by the residents of the new homes.
Upper part of Branksome Drive is too narrow already, it is only 18ft wide at best, more traffic will make this worse.
Existing roadside parking on Branksome Drive creates challenges for the current traffic and delivery vehicles.
Access by BMDC waste collections and Emergency vehicles will see increased difficulty, navigating.
Planning application for just 4 homes was recently refused, unsuitable access, narrow sharp bend, poor visibility.
Historically a dangerous junction with Bradford Rd, highways needed to install traffic light sensors to help exit.
Junction of Branksome with Bradford Rd remains dangerous, highways installed double yellow lines 15/02/2021.
Junction of Branksome with Bradford Rd would likely need traffic signals, bringing more delays and standing traffic.

Object

Representation ID: 3354

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Ian Hunt

INFASTRUCTURE
There is already a lack of infrastructure to support the current population and its needs.
The sewers were not built for the number of properties now feeding in, they back up in wet season events.
The schools, all ages are very nearly full or oversubscribed, compromising education and increasing travel.
People new to the area, fail to get GP & Dental practices for NHS treatment, oversubscribed.
No nearby convenience stores to provide food or essential goods to occupants of the new homes.
None of the 3 rail stations, Bingley, Saltaire, Shipley are within walking distance of these development sites.
No satisfactory direct transport (buses) to the entrances of 3 nearest rail stations from Nab Wood SH5.
Poor provision of easily navigable footpath route on Bradford Rd between Cottingley lights and Branksome Drive.
Poor easily navigable cycle lanes between Cottingley Lights to Saltaire, most cyclists disregard the marked routes.

Object

Representation ID: 3355

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Luke Oddy

Historic Environment

The site is part of historic green view across the Aire Valley towards Bingley, which gives the area its charm and character, further making it a desirable area of Bradford to live. Without these views and green spaces, Bradford are at risk of once again ruining the charm and character of its localities for short term gain.

In addition, the PRoW’s that run adjacent and through the sites are historic and wonderful green footpaths that will lose their historic importance and charm if built upon or around. Not only this, the animals that use them and the hedgerows surrounding them will no longer once housing developments are included.

Object

Representation ID: 3363

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Ian Hunt

FLOOD RISKS
There is no guarantee of a zero increase of water into the river Aire from any source and raising the river level.
Higher river levels in wet season will lead to more regular and new flooding the length of Shipley Aire Valley.
There is evidence of significant flooding events of the lower lying lands in this area, 2000, 2015, 2020.
Increased speed/volumes of surface water run off due to loss of water absorbing trees and greenery.
Increased surface water run off from rainfall brought on by the many hard surfaces of a housing development.
Increased land saturation will raise water table levels under the lower lying river proximity properties.
The natural water courses that converge on Nab Wood Beck will bring extra volumes that add to an existing risk.
The culvert under Bradford Rd (Nab Wood Beck) cannot cope with wet season events and so floods the A650.

Object

Representation ID: 3376

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Caroline Howarth

Green belt should mean just that and not be up for development. Those of us who walk regularly in this area know the huge implications any further development here will have for wildlife. There should be no acceptance of further air pollution from the extra traffic this development would bring. We need this land to remain green for water from the hillside to soak in before reaching the river.

Object

Representation ID: 3379

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Chris Mcdermott

Flooding impact of additional houses and extra run off into River Aire and loss of green space / views towards Bingley. Also additional traffic on an already congested road at rush hour

Object

Representation ID: 3392

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Miss katie Sadeghi

Air Pollution - This proposal completely contradicts the clean air zone implemented by Bradford council for Shipley and the surrounding area. I can first hand advise that the pollution levels from the already existing busy roads are horrific - building the new proposed sites in this area is only going to make matters worse which is hugely concerning for both us and our future generations.

Object

Representation ID: 3399

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Miss katie Sadeghi

Traffic/congestion - The existing traffic queues along the A650 are already horrendous. Regardless of peak/off peak travel times it is always a struggle to turn out of our junction (Branksome Drive) (particularly if turning right) and once you do, you are almost always joining a slow crawling queue of other vehicles.

If the proposed access will be via the existing Bankfield Hotel signalised junction; this will mean even further congestion backing up as far down to the roundabout leading to the Bingley Bypass. This completely goes against the purpose of the bypass forcing many to find alterntive routes, pushing traffic further afield to come through Bingley Town centre/ through the back roads of Nab Wood residential streets.

Object

Representation ID: 3401

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Miss katie Sadeghi

Ecological factors - The proposed sites contain a wealth of wildlife who rely on these areas as their habitat. Destroying these areas has a huge impact on the local woodlands and wildlife including deer, woodpeckers, rabbits, foxes, insects and birds. Building on these green areas will have a detrimental impact on wildlife as many of these species use these fields as connectors to other green links such as Hirst Wood and further afield to St Ives Estate, Baildon Moor etc.

Object

Representation ID: 3403

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Miss katie Sadeghi

Risk of flooding - The site is unsuitable and should not be built upon as it is a floodland area.
The lower section of Branksome Drive/Branksome Grove has already been subject to significant floods over recent years - unfortunately something we are experiencing more & more frequently. The existing fields help to support the excess run off, instead slowly releasing it into the river, helping to reduce the risk of flooding overall.

Object

Representation ID: 3414

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Rob Johnson

SH5/H and SH6/H I think these lots would reverse the good work done by the bingley bypass - lead to massive congestion around the intersection with the roundabout which will be dangerous. There are no local amenities to support additional needs of housing. The schools are full already. The land is on flood plains and a known flood risk area. Additionally the proposed works would destroy the natural habitat which includes ancient trees and valuable native species including voles, otters, badgers, owls and newts. I strongly object to the proposed local plan on these grounds.

Object

Representation ID: 3433

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Catherine Sadeghi

The proposal of building 140 houses on this land is ridiculous. The houses already there are built on a small complex and there is no through road. To leave the complex you enter the very busy A650 which at most times of the day is a difficult thing to do. Any more traffic which building new houses will create will make it a near impossible task. As well as this problem, creating more traffic will impact further down the A650 at the roundabout going onto the Bingley bypass and going in the other direction to Saltaire.
Apart from the problem of the increased traffic there is also the case of building on green belt which will impact on the residents as you are proposing reducing their level of natural beauty. Houses are going to be overlooked and there will be more noise which is now a nice quiet area.

Object

Representation ID: 3445

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Ash Bowles

There will be a huge detrimental effect to wildlife and the surrounding green space. There will be an increased risk of flooding if trees and fields are removed as they help to absorb some of the rainfall in an area already affected by floods. Traffic volume would increase and make an already busy area worse. There is opportunity to build on brownfield sites without ruining the habitats in a greenbelt area.

Object

Representation ID: 3489

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Ben Wray

Three areas of concern
FLOODING
WILDLIFE/AMENITY
TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT/SAFETY

Object

Representation ID: 3502

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Kay Bardsley

I object to the proposal to build on this land on the basis that this is green belt land. Building here would result in the loss of important wildlife habitats. The land is also susceptible to flooding and the devastation this could cause to residents is unthinkable. Any development here would also increase traffic volumes and increase congestion along the busy A650 corridor. The development would also create further pressure on the infrastructure - local schools, medical facilities and so.

Object

Representation ID: 3504

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Ms Jan Taylor

This would be an unacceptable loss of Green Belt land, and housing here would mean the loss of open land as a buffer between Shipley and Cottingley. It could impact on the River Aire and Saltaire as a World Heritage site. It would have a detrimental impact on wildlife and biodiversity, such as birds, butterflies and bees, which are a joy to see in that area.
The river and paths nearby have never been more used or appreciated for walking, running, enjoying nature, improving mental and physical health.
The impact of this development so close to the river would be devastating, and there must be high risk of flooding, as this area has suffered serious flooding in recent years. Using meadows and grassland for flood alleviation is a priority, rather than building on them.
Access from the already heavily-congested Bradford Road would worsen traffic and be detrimental to air quality.

Object

Representation ID: 3591

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Ian Thorpe

OBJECTION TO PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PLANS Ref SH5/H and SH6/H

1) Adverse impact to peak river levels and increase of flood risk to existing properties from surface water run off. Longitudinal study required by environment agency and other professional bodies to evaluate proposed development on resultant river discharge rates.

2) Increased vehicular traffic and impact on air quality. Additional traffic congestion and risk to pedestrians.

3) Environmental impact on natural green space and woodland and farmland. Also habitat for fox, roe deer, bats, owls, woodpecker and other wildlife. Loss of amenity and enjoyment of existing greenspace for community wellbeing.

Object

Representation ID: 3616

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Attiya Ahmed

Reduction in air quality and land or ecological and preservation purposes. Reduction in house prices adjacent and adjoining the space.

Object

Representation ID: 3631

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Charlie Gilmour

Adverse impact on house prices, standard of living and child safety.
Flood risk - there is already significant and regular flooding on Branksome Grove and Branksome Drive. The river will not cope with additional surface run off.
Infrastructure - there is already a lack of amenities in the area including GPs, dentists, schools and public transport
Wildlife - the site is home to deer, bats, owls, heron, foxes to name but a few.
Local roads - Branksome Grove and Drive are unsuitable for the increased traffic flow
Environment - contradicts the plan for Clean Air Zone. Ignores the climate emergency.

Object

Representation ID: 3736

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Miss Rozanna Shah

The conclusion cannot state that it is sustainable to build on this site before other brownfield sites in the area are utilised. It must mention and commit to Biodiversity Net Gain to call itself sustainable and retain all mature trees in the site.
The proposal identifies that the site sits within the CAZ car therefore air pollution targets will be more difficult to achieve. This is therefore contradictory and cannot be called sustainable to build and add further air pollution in a climate emergency. The site is not within short walking distances of train stations to provide public transport and counteract car usage in the valley.
The site is part of the Aire river flood zone and has flooded in recent years along with properties on Branksome drive. Further development will impact surrounding properties from potential river floods but also an increase in surface water.

Object

Representation ID: 3888

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Ian Hunt

LOCAL ROADS (Branksome Drive/Grove) +3 photos
Branksome Drive/Grove are wholly unsuitable for site access that brings any incremental vehicles
Branksome Drive/Grove will become a 2 way rat run, mainly used by the residents of the new homes.
Upper part of Branksome Drive is too narrow already, only 18ft wide, more traffic will make this worse.
Roadside parking on Branksome Drive creates challenges for the current traffic and delivery vehicles.
Access by BMDC waste and Emergency vehicles will be increasingly difficult, navigating a busier road.
Planning application (Sept 2018) for 4 homes was refused (Sept 2018), unsuitable access, narrow sharp bend, poor visibility.
Historically a dangerous junction with Bradford Rd, highways needed to install traffic light sensors to help exit.
Junction of Branksome with Bradford Rd is dangerous, highways installed double yellow lines 15/02/2021.
Junction of Branksome with Bradford Rd would need full traffic signals, bringing more delays and standing traffic.

Object

Representation ID: 3999

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Ms Joana Tavares

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: 4030

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Pete Chambers

This land is green belt - it would be awful to take it away. Bingley Road and amenities, GPs, schools etc. already oversubscribed. Stop filling in the tiny and much needed green spots in built up areas - build a new town with schools etc instead.

Object

Representation ID: 4047

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Ian Hunt

ENVIRONMENT
The plans fail to correctly factor in the carbon footprint of the new housing, albeit declaring a climate emergency.
These plans contradict the Public Health England directive, to improve, maintain and protect current green space.
Green space is a critical asset for maintaining and supporting good health and wellbeing.
Greenbelt boundaries should only be altered where exceptional circumstances are fully evidenced and justified.
SH5 site falls within the buffer zone for the Saltaire World Heritage Site, envionmental damage will ensue this must not be ignored.
The sites will contradict the intentions of the BMDC decision and declaration to become a Clean Air Zone (CAZ).
Extra traffic volumes and queuing on all nearby roads will exacerbate levels of noise and air pollution for all.
The site is known to be subjected to significant water saturation via the exacerbated level of the water table - homes will be flooded again.