BI4/H - Heights Lane (west side), Eldwick

Object

Representation ID: 8068

Received: 08/03/2021

Respondent: Mr and Mrs P Greaves

Number of people: 2

More traffic and congestion in a village environment (already significant and increasing) causing issues with road safety for the children/schools in the area as well as air pollution.
- already over crowded schools
- loss of precious wildlife habitat
- more problems with potential flooding which Bingley already experiences due to the river Aire and overwhelmed urban drainage. Due to the steep gradient of Park Road, this development will potentially cause flooding issues for existing housing estates on Lady Lane and further down into Bingley town.

Object

Representation ID: 8111

Received: 11/03/2021

Respondent: Annette & David Mann

Number of people: 2

Object strongly to the proposed development plan on Heights Lane.
1. Both fields are in the Green Belt.
2. The fields border onto The Prince of Wales which is a wonderful haven for wildlife, also a peaceful retreat for many local residents.
3. The local schools, medical practices and local facilities are already full to bursting.
4. Concern about the increased amount of traffic along Otley Road, Heights Lane and Warren Lane. On Otley Road at peak times it can take 10 minutes to get out of the drive.
5. No doubt the houses being planned will be expensive 4/5 bedrooms with occupants having at least 2 if not 3 cars.
6. Surrounding areas are becoming swamped with housing developments and gradually losing surrounding countryside. We have seen how important it is for us to have these areas to walk and clear our minds during this past year. The Green Belt must be protected for ourselves and future generations.

Object

Representation ID: 8163

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: CPRE West Yorkshire

In line with our comments on policy SP5, we object to the following site allocations:

BI3/H
BI4/H
BI8/H

Object

Representation ID: 8253

Received: 14/03/2021

Respondent: Mark Morrison

I understand the above two fields are now earmarked for housing. I am writing to register my strong objection to using green belt land for housing. There are plenty of brownfield sites you can use. Greenbelt is greenbelt. PLease stop destroying our green spaces.
If this email does not count as a formal objection, which it is intended to be, please inform me how I can make a formal objection.
STOP DESTRYING OUR GREEN BELT - go and destroy something else.

Object

Representation ID: 8417

Received: 12/03/2021

Respondent: John and Lynda Chadwick

Number of people: 2

Development would extend development onto a greenfield area,and also spoil the tranquillity of that side of Prince of Wales Park.

Object

Representation ID: 8419

Received: 12/03/2021

Respondent: Chris Richmond

Large volumes of traffic on Park Road/Otley Road and Park Road roundabout- further homes accessing these roads would be irresponsible.
Development on Heights Lane will add to the level of traffic through the village and make negotiating the roundabout even more of a game of Russian roulette.
This is Green Belt land- what will stop further housing being built in the future along Heights Lane?

Comment

Representation ID: 8574

Received: 12/03/2021

Respondent: Anna Redmond

LOSS OF WILDLIFE (BIRDS,DEER, BATS), INCREASED POLLUTION, PROTECTED GREEN BELT SPACE, BUILDING SPRAWL, TRAFFIC VOLUMES, PARK ROAD JUNCTION AND DANGERS, CROWDED SCHOOLS, DRAINAGE OVERLOAD AND FLOODING, NARROW WINDING LANE - DANGEROUS

Object

Representation ID: 8636

Received: 12/03/2021

Respondent: James Wilson

I am concerned about the impact on the ecology of the area, as well as the continued disregard for our green belts and spaces.

Object

Representation ID: 8817

Received: 15/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs C Rose

Site designated as Green Belt to prevent urban sprawl.
No evidence for “exceptional circumstances” to remove from Green Belt.
Do not meet the overarching environmental objective of protecting/enhancing the environment including valued landscapes.
Development will increase pollution in the area as well as generate pluvial flooding.
Development close to the Prince of Wales Park will inhibit the environment that supports local wildlife - deer, birds and bats.
Important to resident’s health and wellbeing.
The proposal is not “sound” as per the requirements of the NPPF
There are non-Green Belt sites suitable for development in the Bingley area
Development of the fields will generate considerable traffic causing congestion and generate risks.
Houses built in this area cannot be considered contributing towards affordable housing.
Bradford Council is part of the West Yorkshire Combined Authority Review, likely to result in further parcels of (non-Green Belt) land becoming available in the near future for development, so no need to remove the fields from the Green Belt to meet house building targets.
Brownfield land close to the city centre would be more suitable and would provide better public transport links which could assist in reducing pollution and traffic congestion.

Object

Representation ID: 8968

Received: 14/03/2021

Respondent: C A Baines

•The main exit will be onto a mini roundabout on Otley road which is already overcrowded.
•Families of walkers use this road which is narrow and with 40 more houses which could mean as much as 80 more cars it will be very dangerous especially as a lot of older people walk along Heights lane as it leads to some lovely country walks.
•This is Green Belt land and one of the few open spaces left in Eldwick
•Otley Road is always very busy and noisy with traffic and this will greatly increase noise and the amount of traffic on the road especially at busy times.
•The great disruption to the area whilst the development is being built.
•We only have two primary schools in the area and two senior schools which are already oversubscribed.

Object

Representation ID: 9191

Received: 14/03/2021

Respondent: Georgina & Paul Swinden

Number of people: 2

•Development would have a negative impact on habitats/biodiversity of the area, especially around Prince of Wales Park, a haven for wildlife. A place where many people find solace and a vital place of peace/tranquillity.
•Development would negatively impact the visual landscape on the area of the village.
•Increased light pollution from buildings at night will harm the birds, moths, bats which make up the local wildlife.
•Heights Lane is already busy. The roundabout at the junctions with Warren Lane/Otley Road are extremely busy/hazardous, especially to cross on foot, but also when driving.
•Heights Lane is narrow and there is no footpath, so even if residents were to walk to the bus stops on Otley Road or to Eldwick school it would be very dangerous.
•Vehicles drive at high speed on Heights Lane despite its narrowness and short visibility due to a bend in the road. Extra housing brings many more vehicles to the area.

Object

Representation ID: 9756

Received: 16/03/2021

Respondent: Jane Tarver

Don't encroach on the green site to build houses.
USE/BUILD ON BROWN FIELD SITES.
Before the Swan Estate was built we frequently used to see hedgehogs, 10+ species of butterflies, damselflies and a variety of other insects and about 15 species of garden birds. NOW THERE IS VERY LITTLE WILDLIFE.
Increase in traffic has decimated the hedgehog population, trees and wild habitats have been destroyed.
GREEN spaces are vital for wildlife, ecology, and the welfare of the planet
INCLUDING HUMAN BEINGS
Heights Lane is NARROW and treacherous to walk on,as traffic speeds.
There is no way of widening the roundabout at Park Road, there are houses on both sides. This would be the artery from any new houses to the school- deplorably dangerous.
Traffic-calming has been implemented in Eldwick as the number of houses, and cars, has escalated, it makes no sense to exacerbate this problem.
DON'T TRASH OUR GREEN BELT.

Object

Representation ID: 9937

Received: 15/03/2021

Respondent: Chris Allen

See full submission for details.
1. The properties are situated in the Green Belt. Development would have a major potential for urban sprawl.
2. The Council’s proposal is not sound as per the requirements of the National Planning Policy Framework of February 2019 (“NPPF”).
3. Traffic and Safety Issues.
4. Failure to comply with the overarching environmental objective.
5. Wildlife, pollution and flooding.
6. “New Normal” and the West Yorkshire Combined Authority Review
It is acknowledged that there is a requirement to build over 700 houses in Bingley in the forthcoming decade, the inclusion of Green Belt Fields BI4/H and BI8/H, has all the appearances of them being included to “make up the numbers” rather than there actually being true and legitimate exceptional circumstances to justify removing them from the Green Belt.

There are numerous other sites within Bingley where housing development can be undertaken without the need to reduce the Green Belt.

Object

Representation ID: 10038

Received: 15/03/2021

Respondent: Barbara Cooper

•Sites are Green Belt to prevent urban sprawl and should stay that way. Insufficient evidence produced to show ‘exceptional circumstances’ for their removal.
•Proposals are not sounds as per the NPPF. Many alternative (non-Green Belt) sites suitable for development in Bingley which have not been taken into consideration.
•Development will generate considerable traffic on a lane with poor visibility, no pavements and this generating considerable risks to pedestrians and motorists. 80+ vehicles will generate standing traffic on Heights Lane making it unsafe for walkers.
•Developments will not meet the overarching environmental objective of protecting and enhancing the environment including valued landscapes.
•Development will cause pollution and generate pluvial flooding.
•Development will inhibit and reduce the environment for local wildlife.
•Bradford Council is part of WYCA review – with non-Green Belt land becoming available in the near future. Green Belt should not be removed to meet housing targets.

Object

Representation ID: 10420

Received: 16/03/2021

Respondent: Ian Holdgate

Conflict with Core Strategy Policy 5(SC5),
4 available development sites in Bingley, all previously developed, Police Station/Law Courts, redundant Church between Alexander Court/Poplar Terrace, plot at rear of Premier Inn (Jorgensens Garden Centre), unused overflow Car Park to Computershare/Croft Road.
Reduced office demand will free space for conversion.
Redevelopment of AGH at a reduced scale – will yield a significant parcel of land for development.
Rebuilding Bradford hospitals on new site, existing sites can be used for housing.
The sites identified above should be developed before Green Belt.
‘Exceptional Circumstances’ not established, inclusion of B14/H is not sound.

B14/H should be removed from Plan.
Increase in traffic and inability to provide safe pedestrian access.
Flooding of fields and ‘runoff’ issue - houses use sand bags to keep floodwater out.
Any drainage system introduced will only work if maintained.
Loss of farming land would impact on food production.
Impact on carbon capture.
Impact on Wildlife
Impact on the South Peninne Moors SAC/SPA

Object

Representation ID: 10432

Received: 16/03/2021

Respondent: Dr Jean Holdgate

B14/H Green Belt fields for development NOT SOUND.
Consultation has not been “in accordance with procedural requirements”. therefore not sound.
Use no-longer needed office buildings.
Achieving carbon zero, ignored.
Not consistent with national policy to protect Green Belt
Implication for flooding.
“exceptional circumstances” for release of Green Belt have not been described.
“the authority has not fully examined all reasonable options for meeting its identified need” NPPF
Impact on ecology, habitat and forage for wildlife.
Proximity of the South Pennine Moors.
Access into site from unsuitable roads, no footpaths and dangerous mini roundabout.
4 available development sites in Bingley, all previously developed.
Redevelopment of AGH at a reduced scale – will yield a significant parcel of land for development.
Rebuilding Bradford hospitals on new site, existing sites can be used for housing.
Climate change
Flooding
Carbon Storage.
Not consistent with national policy to protect Green Belt
Planning permission should be refused.
Remove from Plan.

Object

Representation ID: 10471

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Lynda Brabbins

Designated Green Belt, prevents Urban Sprawl.
No exceptional circumstances to remove from green belt, should remain green belt.
Urban Sprawl from the Swan Avenue estate, which joined Eldwick to Gilstead, deprived both villages of their individual status.
Non-green belt and brownfield sites are available.
Proposal is not sound as required by NPPG
Access is very narrow road with no pavements - dangerous for pedestrians.
Issues of speeding/danger and risks from traffic will be worsened by additional cars
Its unnerving to walk on Heights Lane.
Pedestrian use increased due to lockdown to access country walks necessary for good mental health.
Village is a rat run, motorists will choose Heights Lane/Warren Lane to avoid the bridge at Micklethwaite and Bingley.
Increase in pollution, congestion.
Dangerous risk crossing mini roundabout.
Requirement to protect/enhance the environment/landscapes.
Exacerbate Air pollution
Flooding.
Impact on Wildlife
Town centre diversity will enable the protection and conservation of the Green belt.

Object

Representation ID: 10729

Received: 19/03/2021

Respondent: Victoria J Holdgate

The land is Green Belt and has function of conserving natural habitat and safeguarding the countryside.
Loss of two sites would inevitably lead to the loss of many more
How would the council explain away taking pasture which contributes to carbon capture, storage of water and food production.
Impact on wildlife.
Unsuitability of Heights Lane for increased traffic, its dangerous for cyclists and families of walkers.
Road is used for recreation.
No footpath or cycleway due to narrowness of road.
Development would increase the danger.
Alternative sites in Bingley.
Council is encouraging dereliction and emptiness in the urban areas, with consequential crime, vandalism and depressing aspect.
More options because people are working from home making premises available for conversion/redevelopment
Leave the fringes, fill the fast accumulating empty urban spaces.
Development is about money exchanging hands, not the welfare of the community.
No exceptional circumstances for loss of green belt. not justified, not sound.

Object

Representation ID: 10914

Received: 13/03/2021

Respondent: Colin Stansbie

1. Visual amenity - field provides unobstructed views across Bingley and Ilkley moor and the Prince of Wales park provides a valuable community resource and views from the park would be decimated.
2.Traffic generation - Eldwick has grown over the last few years with increasing traffic- roads are already very busy
3.Road access - road incapable of supporting increase in vehicles. The junction of Heights Lane and Otley Rd is controlled by a mini roundabout which cannot support the high volume of traffic already going though the village.
4.Nature Conservation - Prince of Wales Park attracts wildlife to the area and is a route for Deer who move across the park into the proposed land. This would have a damaging impact upon wildlife and reduce availability of countryside.
5. Service impact - Eldwick has increased in size and school catchment have reduced. Priority is given to those living nearest. The proposal will have a significant impact on local school places

Object

Representation ID: 11013

Received: 14/03/2021

Respondent: Iain Cotterill

Road access wasn't allowed onto Heights Lane when the estate was built 1985 as the Council didn't want extra traffic on Heights Lane.

Creating more traffic.

Residents promenade along Heights Lane to connect with footpaths to Micklethwaite and beyond.

Loss of views from the Prince of Wales park, Local residents enjoy looking at these flower meadows, both from the park and from Heights Lane.

Development would ruin/destroy habitat for rare hedgehogs.

Infrastructure is insufficient.

Sewage spews out of drain covers frequently.

A foot way with curb needs incorporating for pedestrians negotiating the present road traffic.

The roundabout is difficult to cross at peak rush hour.

Villagers do not want additional traffic when Britain is becoming carbon neutral.

Schools/doctors are overloaded.

I want Heights Lane to remain rural to access local footpaths.

Develop disused farmland such as the long derelict fields outside Bingley Grammar School.

Keep green spaces for future generations.

Object

Representation ID: 11246

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Julie Ramsden

B14/H and BH18/H Land adjoining Prince of Wales Park. This is green space & helps distinguish Bingley from Eldwick. I object to these sites being developed , to prevent urban sprawl and to prevent additional traffic on a busy and narrow local road.

Object

Representation ID: 11295

Received: 17/03/2021

Respondent: Mr & Mrs T Thomas

Number of people: 2

Significant increase on traffic volumes.

Development of 40 houses will generate not only approximately 80 more cars, but also on-line delivery vans, refuse collection trucks, trade vehicles etc

Heights Lane is a narrow country lane with no pavements.

It is dangerous for many walkers, cyclists and horse riders, using the Lane, majority of car drivers appear to be oblivious to the dangers and drive at inappropriate speeds.

Traffic through the village has increased dramatically in recent years, more drivers use the roads to avoid major routes.

The roundabout at the top of Park Road has already to be approached with caution. Traffic approaching the roundabout from Park Road is not visible from Warren Lane until they are on the roundabout. Traffic approaching from Heights Lane is not visible to those approaching the roundabout from Otley Road.
Accidents just waiting to happen!

The potential for additional levels of pollution, which all this additional traffic will create should be a huge consideration.

Object

Representation ID: 11308

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mark & Christine Turner

Number of people: 2

BI4/H & BI8/H - Heights Lane, Bingley

We strongly wish to object to the development plan for the first two fields in Heights Lane (references above). We have concerns about the impact the development would have on the ecology of this beautiful area and its extreme proximity to the tranquility of the Prince Of Wales Park . The first field is visible from the park and not only would the development spoil the view but it would also affect the wild life nearby .

Object

Representation ID: 11369

Received: 17/03/2021

Respondent: Maureen de la Marr

Surprised that Bradford Council is considering using a green belt site for new homes when there are many derelict and prospective closure of retail premises in the Bradford District which would be ideal for new sustainable housing.

Traffic through Eldwick, Warren Lane, Parkside and roundabout is already at its peak. During school time or roadworks, the traffic jam is horrendous.

I often wait ages to exit my driveway, added traffic would be a stage too far.

Access of the Riding Club in the fields opposite to where the proposed building site would occur, riders would be completely unsafe with added traffic.

Eldwick values this green belt land for safe walking with/without dogs, there is insufficient space for pedestrian pavements, therefore making this proposal extremely dangerous.

Flooding, when it rains the water shoots down the lane and fields, affecting houses, so much so that our house has had to build a pumping system, new houses will add to this.

Comment

Representation ID: 11373

Received: 17/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Norma Royston

I always thought Green Belt land was for farming and wildlife.

The lanes are too narrow for extra traffic, the roundabout too small, the school already overcrowded and the doctors lists.
There is a drainage overload and flooding in gardens and fields.

I am sure alternative sites could be found and let our wildlife, birds and animals stay where they should be and continue to bring such pleasure to people when they are out walking, running etc.

Object

Representation ID: 11751

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Carol Woodhead

I have walked our dogs in the beautiful Prince of Wales Park for many years and enjoyed the views and surrounding open countryside. The place is a haven for wildlife and enjoyed by many people.

Green Belt in the past was always looked on as being “untouchable” and I feel that there must be many brownfield sites that could be used to preserve this countryside.

I also have grave concerns concerning access on Heights Lane, which is a narrow and winding road and not conducive to an increase in traffic flow. The mini roundabout at the bottom of Heights Lane is always busy and I feel strongly that additional traffic could have an adverse effect here.

I further doubt whether Eldwick and its facilities, and in particular the First School, could cope with the additional families that the development would create.

Object

Representation ID: 11845

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Mr KWG Redmond

Site designated Green Belt, intended to prevent urban sprawl.

Development will erode/destroy the boundary of Eldwick.

No evidence for "exceptional circumstances" to justify proposal.

Loss of open gateway to the countryside.

Proposal not "sound" as required by NPPF.

Alternative non Green Belt sites are available.

Development will generate considerable traffic on a lane with poor visibility and bends, no pavements and limited width. The health and safety of pedestrians and road users will be at risk. Additional traffic will add to danger and pollution at roundabout.

Development will not meet environmental objective of protecting and enhancing the environment/valued landscapes.

Increase of pluvial flooding.

Heights Lane floods, drains are overloaded.

Damage to Prince of Wales Park, housing will inhibit and reduce the environment supporting wildlife.

Loss of carbon dioxide production, (asset for community) and the wealth of bio-diversity.

The WYCA Review, may result in further non-Green Belt land becoming available.

New ways of working/living in the "post-Covid" world and infrastructure developments in the wider city, will mean more options will open up.

Not required for house building targets.

Object

Representation ID: 11886

Received: 20/03/2021

Respondent: Annabel Holt

Eldwick at Heights Lane does not need housing , our schools , doctors and dentists are over subscribed . There is no footpath nor room for one on an already dangerous stretch of country road where car users drive too fast and without care .

The land houses a huge amount of wildlife inc owls and hares both protected , any change to their habitat would be seen as wildlife crime .

Object

Representation ID: 11888

Received: 20/03/2021

Respondent: Anne Lockwood

I wish to object to the above plans to build on Heights Lane, Eldwick.

The land is designated as a greenbelt to prevent urban sprawl.

Development of these fields will produce considerable traffic on this country lane with no footpaths. How will this development meet the overarching environmental objective of protecting and enhancing valued landscapes?

Furthermore developing these fields so close to the Prince of Wales Park will will inhibit and reduce the environment that supports local wildlife.

Object

Representation ID: 11890

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Mr J Smith

Development will erode/destroy the boundary of Eldwick.

No evidence for "exceptional circumstances" to justify proposal.

Loss of open gateway to the countryside.

Proposal not "sound" as required by NPPF.

Alternative non Green Belt sites are available.

Development will generate considerable traffic on a lane with poor visibility and bends, no pavements and limited width. The health and safety of pedestrians and road users will be at risk. Additional traffic will add to danger and pollution at roundabout.

Development will not meet environmental objective of protecting and enhancing the environment/valued landscapes.

Increase of pluvial flooding.

Heights Lane floods, drains are overloaded.

Damage to Prince of Wales Park, housing will inhibit and reduce the environment supporting wildlife.

Loss of carbon dioxide production, (asset for community) and the wealth of bio-diversity.

The WYCA Review, may result in further non-Green Belt land becoming available.

New ways of working/living in the "post-Covid" world and infrastructure developments in the wider city, will mean more options will open up.

Not required for house building targets.