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

Object

Representation ID: 11892

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs C 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: 11894

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Mr M Smith

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: 11934

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs J M Illingworth

1. Green Belt Exceptional Circumstances
2. Brownfield sites are available which should be used before Green Belt
3. the council is part of the Leeds City Region LEP and West Yorkshire Combined Authority. through co-operation and new Mayoral powers it is reasonable that more brownfield sites will become available
4. Highway safety and unsuitable access- Heights Lane is not suitable for additional traffic resulting from the proposals
5. Highway safety impact- junction of Heights Lane and Otley
6. need to protect open space and landscapes
7. impact on Prince of Wales Park- habitats and biodoversity
8. the proposals should be rejected
Road.

Object

Representation ID: 11979

Received: 20/03/2021

Respondent: Jane Stableford

Object to plans to remove fields BI4/H or BI8/H from the Green Belt

Land is designated as Green Belt to prevent urban sprawl. What are the “exceptional circumstances” why the field have to be removed from the Green Belt? Many alternative (non-Green Belt) sites suitable for development in the Bingley area which have not been taken into consideration to meet house building needs.

Development will generate considerable traffic on a lane with poor visibility, no pavements and limited width, and generate considerable risk to the lives and health of pedestrians and motorists.

Proposed development will not meet the overarching environmental objective of protecting or enhancing the environment including valued landscapes.

Development will increase pollution in the area.
Development close to Prince of Wales Park will inhibit and reduce the environment that supports local wildlife.

Infrastructure is at capacity with oversubscribed schools and GP surgeries. Expansion will spoil the village character.

Object

Representation ID: 12148

Received: 21/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Daniel Greenwood

Land designated as Green Belt to prevent urban sprawl. Council have not produced evidence to show “exceptional circumstances” why the fields have to be removed from Green Belt.

Proposal is not “sound”. Alternative (non-Green Belt) sites suitable for development in the Bingley area have not been taken into consideration.

Will generate considerable traffic on lane with poor visibility, limited width pavements thus generating considerable risks to lives/health of pedestrians/motorists. Increased numbers of vehicles will generate considerable standing traffic in the surrounding area.

Will not meet overarching environmental objective of protecting/enhancing the environment including valued landscapes.

Will increase pollution as well as generate pluvial flooding. Development close to Prince of Wales Park will inhibit and reduce the environment that supports local wildlife.

West Yorkshire Combined Authority Review likely to result in further parcels of (non-Green Belt) land becoming available. No need to remove the fields from Green Belt to meet targets.

Object

Representation ID: 12374

Received: 21/03/2021

Respondent: Alison Reid

Land designated Green Belt to prevent urban sprawl.
No evidence to show that there are “exceptional circumstances” for using Green Belt.
Fields should remain Green Belt.
The Council’s proposal is not “sound” as per requirements of the NPPF.
Many alternative sites (non-Green Belt) sites suitable for development which have not been taken into consideration.
Development will generate considerable traffic on a lane with poor visibility, no pavements and limited width creating risks to the lives/health .
Increased vehicles will generate considerable standing traffic on Heights Lane.
The development will not meet the overarching environmental objective of protecting or enhancing the environment including valued landscapes.

Cause increased pollution and generate pluvial flooding.

Development will inhibit/reduce the environment that supports local wildlife.
The West Yorkshire Combined Authority Review, is likely to result in further parcels of (non-Green Belt) land becoming available in the near future for development.
No need to remove the fields from the Green Belt to meet house building targets.

Object

Representation ID: 12498

Received: 19/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Tanif Catherine Hussain

I wish to object about the proposed plan to build houses at 2 sites near Heights Lane on B14/H and B18/H.

This is GREENBELT and it will ruin the village. Eldwick has already had massive housing developments built on every spare piece of land already! The village cannot take anymore traffic and the local schools cannot take anymore further children.
This will have a major impact on wildlife, pollution, congestion, surrounding house prices, I could go on. I believe there are other brownfield sites that can be built on, we must not build on GREENBELT.

Object

Representation ID: 13065

Received: 20/03/2021

Respondent: Sarah Brindle

Appear to be no exceptional circumstances or justification for removal green belt land.
The site is performing an important function as Green belt, conserving natural habitat and safeguarding the countryside..
There are brownfield sites in the Bingley area, removal of this green belt is not justified.
Release of green belt would not be sound.
Impact in wildlife - deer, fox, pheasant, deer and rabbit.
The unsuitability (narrowness, hilly and bends) of Heights Lane for any increased traffic, cyclists and walkers would have safety implications. There is no footpath or cycleway due to the narrowness of the road. Any development accessing from Heights Lane would add to the danger. The development should be refused on these grounds alone.
There are many alternative (brownfield) sites in the Bingley area for housing: nearer schools (just off the roundabout at Crossflatts opposite B&M), doctors (Kingsway Bingley) and on Bradford Road (old police station site).

Object

Representation ID: 13967

Received: 21/03/2021

Respondent: Haley Bevan

Object to development references BI4/H & BI8/H for the following reasons:

Green Belt/Loss of Pasture – do not consider removal of fields from the Green Belt fall into “exceptional circumstances” as there are several brownfield sites in/around Bingley. More sites will become available as a result of changes made to commercial properties since the pandemic. Removal of pasture land from Green Belt has a dramatic effect on local farming.

Drainage Issues – overpopulation of village has put pressure on frail infrastructure causing flooding from overflowing land and road drains. More houses would only add to the problem.

Increased Traffic – Heights Lane is one of the narrowest entries into the village. No footpaths. Little room for2 cars and pedestrians to pass each other safely.

SSSI Proximity – fields are within 2.5km buffer. Should be maintained to preserve habitats for moorland mammals and birds.

Object

Representation ID: 13991

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Richard Hurdman

1. No evidence hat there are “exceptional circumstances” to remove Green Belt
2. The proposal is not “sound” as there are many alternative (non-Green Belt) sites suitable for development in Bingley which are not taken into consideration to meet housing targets.
3. Impact on local highway network and safety- additional traffic on a lane with poor visibility, no pavements and limited width and considerable risks to pedestrians and motorists. Impact of additional traffic on on Heights Lane.
4. The proposed development will not meet the environmental objective of protecting or enhancing the environment including valued landscapes.
5. Increase in pollution and pluvial flooding. Development close to Prince of Wales Park impact on local environment and wildlife
6. he West Yorkshire Combined Authority Review. likely to result in further non-Green Belt land becoming available. There is no need to remove the fields from the Green Belt to meet house building targets.

Object

Representation ID: 14176

Received: 21/03/2021

Respondent: Victoria Leach

Object against proposed development on Heights Lane, Eldwick (refs: BI4/H & BI8/H)

Proposed location is Green belt. Further areas of brownfield land will become available due Bradford being part of West Yorkshire Combined Authority reviewed. No need to build on Green Belt land.

Access is a narrow country land with no pavements, which opens up onto a busy and often dangerous roundabout.

Residents are opposed to development. Will have detrimental effect on residents, the village, nature and the environment, and increase noise and transport.

Infrastructure cannot cope. Schools are oversubscribed and GP surgeries cannot cope.

Council has failed to show that there are ‘exceptional circumstances’ as to why development should be allowed on Green B. Without providing this information they should stay as Green Belt land.

Object

Representation ID: 14315

Received: 20/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Tom Duxbury

I object to the proposed housing development in Eldwick B14/H
- Impact of Eldwick’s historical, cultural and environmental importance
- Erasing the unique identity of Airedale by an increase of mass-housing will de-value the culture of this region.
- Impact on returning wildlife - red kite / palmate newt to the stoat returning in number, deer, owls, pheasant and many species of tree.
- Recent mass-developments (East Morton, Micklethwaite, Menston, Guiseley and Eldwick village. - Concerns about impact on services / a new primary school / widening of roads / extra trains?

Object

Representation ID: 14926

Received: 21/03/2021

Respondent: Janice Reid

Land is designated as Green Belt to prevent urban sprawl.
No evidence to show that there are “exceptional circumstances” to remove from Green Belt.
The proposal is not “sound” as per requirements of NPPF.
There are alternative (non-Green Belt) sites suitable for development in the Bingley area.
Increased traffic on a lane with poor visibility, no pavements and limited width and thus generate considerable risks to the lives and health of pedestrians and motorists. Increased considerable standing traffic on Heights Lane.
The development will not meet the overarching environmental objective of protecting or enhancing the environment including valued landscapes.
The development will increase pollution in the area as well as generate pluvial flooding . Development close to the Prince of Wales Park will inhibit and reduce the environment that supports local wildlife including deer, birds and bats.
Bradford Council is part of the WYCA Review. This is likely to result in further parcels of (non-Green Belt) land becoming available in the near future for development.

Object

Representation ID: 15486

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Claire Healey

Strongly object to plans to remove fields BI4/H & BI8/H in Eldwick from the Green Belt. Would have a massive, negative impact on the local area including:

1) The environment, wildlife & landscape - isn't this what the Green Belt status is supposed to protect?
2) Traffic & pollution - Eldwick is already becoming an extremely busy village with a lot of traffic. The road infrastructure would not cope with the extra traffic
3) Flooding to existing local house has been a big area of concern
4) Education - The school is already over-subscribed. Where would the extra children go to school?
5) Other services such as doctors would be impacted
6) Why not build on other non-green belt sites in the Bingley area to meet building targets?

Do not want to see Eldwick lose its beautiful Green Belt land to housing.

Object

Representation ID: 15701

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Rachel C Allen

The properties are situated in the Green Belt. Development would have a major potential for urban sprawl.
No exceptional circumstances.

There are alternative non Green Belt sites suitable within the Bingley area. Including the old police station/law courts on Bingley Main Street, the Old Church at Sandbeds, the land opposite Magnet at Crossflatts and the overflow car park area presently occupied by UKAR.

The Council's Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment is incomplete and not fit for purpose.
Traffic and Safety Issues


The proposed development B14/H and B18/H will not meet the overarching environmental objective of protecting or enhancing the environment including valued landscapes.

The proposed fields are a sensitive site due to their proximity to the woodland in Prince of Wales Park and the moorland at Rombalds Moor, only 2.5kms away.
Impact on wildlife and birdlife.
Development would cause light pollution, noise disturbance and would undoubtedly threaten wildlife with the introduction of domestic cats and dogs in the area.

B14/H and B18/H retains water and allows for slow drainage of the site. Development of the sites will increase pluvial flooding and will negatively impact the already stressed drainage systems

Employment assets can be used for residential conversion. WYCA will identify lots of alternative sites.

Proposals has all the appearances of them being included to "make up the numbers"

Object

Representation ID: 16099

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Margaret Reilly

1. access via Heights Lane is unsuitable for the extra traffic 39 additional houses would bring, which has in the past, been judged unsuitable for access to developments. Impact on highway safety.

2. Detrimental Impact on Prince of Wales park, which is Historic Grade 2 listed.

3. climate change the fields protect Eldwick and lower down the valley Bingley from the risk of flooding, by absorbing huge amounts of rainfall and absorb enormous amounts of carbon and CO2 helping us on the way to achieving a low or zero emissions target

4. The fields form part of a green corridor between the moors at either side and the park. Impact on habitat networks using this green corridor and local ecology.

Object

Representation ID: 16114

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Glyn and Cathy Levis

Number of people: 2

1. All sites are served by inadequate road access. The inclusion of these sites will bring additional traffic to an already overcrowded road system in the Aire Valley.

2. None of these proposed sites are on public transport routes, which will lead to an increase in road traffic in all areas and is contrary to sustainability policies

3. None of the developments are within 15 minutes walk of a railway station or town centre, in contravention of the local authority sustainability policies

4. Flooding, all these sites are wet sites or contain standing water.

5. Safety – All sites will exit onto narrow lanes or a busy mini roundabout in the case of the Heights Lane developments

6. In the case of the B13/H, B14/H and B18/H, these sites encroach onto Green belt land .

7. Insufficient existing public services. Particularly with regard to B14/H and B18H, Eldwick Primary school is full.

Object

Representation ID: 16362

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Richard Armitstead

The proposed development will put an extra 80 vehicles onto a roundabout that is already substandard and has a high accident/near-miss record.

Additional traffic coming into Eldwick from Heights Lane will increase air pollution near the roundabout, with longer queues and waiting times for all traffic.

For access to the local bus-stops a pavement would be needed in Heights Lane. This would reduce the width of the road and the ease and safety of vehicle access to the new properties.

In heavy rainstorms, the existing drainage on Otley Road is already inadequate and results in several inches of flooding near the roundabout. This will obviously worsen if there is additional surface water coming from Heights Lane.

It is unacceptable to build on green-belt land when there is an abundance of brown-field sites in Bradford that should be developed first.

Object

Representation ID: 16625

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Alan Woodhead

Loss of views.

Impact on beautiful Prince of Wales Park and surrounding countryside.

The wildlife should be left undisturbed, these areas, are a haven for deer, bats, badgers etc.

Green Belt in the past was always looked on as being "untouchable".
There must be many brownfield sites that could be used to preserve this countryside.
issue of access on Heights Lane which is not conductive to an increase in traffic flow. The roads date back hundreds of years and not designed for the volume of modern traffic, which the proposed development would increase.
The mini roundabout is always busy and additional traffic could have and adverse effect here.
Inadequate facilities, in particular the First School.

The land is a prime building plot and the houses, which would be built, would fetch a premium price. Should put conservation above financial gain.
Surely an alternative more suitable site could be found.

Object

Representation ID: 16731

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Anne-Marie Edwardes

The proposals to build a small number of houses on these greenbelt fields in Eldwick, will have a major impact on our precious greenbelt and distress in our community for very little gain.

Can more be done at the national and local level to reduce the housing numbers.

Developments ear marked for offices could at least be dual labelled as office or housing. Covert unused office space to housing.
Green Belt should be maintained, no exceptional circumstances for development.
Question why two developments not one, and whether B18/H could progress without B14/H, that would be nonsense.

Loss of long distance views.

Heights Lane provides a natural village boundary and this development is sprawl.

Impact for walkers, runners, cyclists, horses and horse-riders.

Dangerous access onto Heights Lane, its narrow and leads onto a 5-exit mini-roundabout.

Sites located more than 15 min walk from services via a steep hill. There are two buses an hour, taking a quarter of an hour to get to Bingley. Most residents drive rather than taking the bus.

No provision of affordable housing.

Eldwick Primary School has no capacity, its priority areas would need to be reviewed. Beckfoot and Bingley schools are oversubscribed.

Adverse impact on the Prince of Wales Park.

Development proposed within the 2½ km buffer of the moors.

Impact to birds, animals and bats.
 
Potential increase to flood risk.

I believe that there are other more suitable sites.

Object

Representation ID: 16760

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Martin Edwardes

The land is greenbelt and no good reasons have been made for development.
Access Road is inadequate.
Negative effects on Prince of Wales Park.
Heights Lane is natural urban boundary.
Problems of urban sprawl.
I believe ‘Friends of Prince of Wales Park’ have raised objections.
Impact on rich variety of bird life which use both the fields and woodland habitat in the park. Impact on visiting (migratory) bird life and to the bats that roost locally.

Proximity of proposed development to moorland.

The fields act as a sponge and that they have standing water more and more frequently. Suggestion that a drainage system would nullify the negative effects of building, I'm sure the victims of catastrophic flooding in Bingley, Saltaire and Shipley on more than one occasion in the last decade were similarly reassured. Development will lead to further flooding.

Buses are not a well used due to time taken to get to Bingley. Both railway stations are not accessible easily on foot. Your strategic aim is to place housing within 15 minutes’ walk of transport links is not applicable for these sites.
Treating the development as two parcels avoids the need to build affordable housing, which is far less profitable and we know that the ‘minimum density of housing’ requirement is not being fulfilled.
Eldwick Primary is at capacity.
Beckfoot and Bingley Grammar Schools are oversubscribed.
Poor, rushed and undemocratic consultation.
Need to ensure decisions are based on correct information.

Object

Representation ID: 16984

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Bingley Town Council

The proposed developments at BI3/H Greenhill Barn Lady Lane and BI4/H Heights Lane (West side) BI8H Land west of Heights Lane are in contravention of GreenBelt policies 1,2 and 3 as stated above.
The Heights Lane sites B14/H and BH18/H adjoin the Prince of Wales Registered Park. The loss of the greenfield site is likely to have a negative impact upon the local landscape and townscape, particularly the Prince of Wales Park (a Registered Park/Garden) with the potential to impact heavily on this setting. Both sites also fall within 2.5km of the South Pennine Moors SPA/ and are located in a moderate performing Green Belt parcel. The sites make a major contribution to the purposes of including land in the Green Belt. They have a major potential for sprawl and would have a moderate impact on openness. Like Greenhill Barn, the sites do not present an opportunity to create a stronger boundary than that which exists.
Heights Lane is a narrow country road with no footpaths, the sight lines at the junction with Otley Road are virtually non-existent, with no space for either footpaths or improved sight lines this proposal detracts from highways safety.

Object

Representation ID: 16999

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Carolyn Furness

- impact on Green Belt- countryside encroachment
- impact on highway and pedestrian safety- no footpath on Heights Lane with too much traffic, dangerous mini roundabout at the bottom of Heights lane and impact on surrounding Roads (Park Road)
- loss of open space
- impact on wildlife
- impact on infrastructure- schools and GPs at capacity
- loss of privacy and house value

Object

Representation ID: 17000

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Katherine Fulcher

- impact on habitats/wildlife
- impact on increased pollution and traffic
- alternative brownfield sites close by that are more suitable in line with the NPPF

Object

Representation ID: 17003

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Claire Mercer

•Local roads already very busy and often dangerous, with high levels of congestion at the roundabout where Heights Lane meets Otley Road. There have been several accidents/near misses here.
•Pedestrian access to Heights Lane is dangerous and too narrow for a pavement. To access local amenities, residents would need to use vehicles/risk walking on Heights Lane -resulting in an increase in traffic on an already dangerous road.
•Increased vehicles/congestion will worsen air/noise pollution, damaging the environment for wildlife and for people living in the area, having a potentially fatal impact.
•Area already suffers from flooding due to inadequate drainage. Removing the natural drainage of the fields and replacing with tarmac and housing will have a detrimental impact with additional surface water run off causing worse flooding, damage and disruption.
•GPs already struggling to sustain the local population. Local schools are also crowded. Additional residents will increase the burden on local amenities and impact negatively on locals’ access to healthcare.
•The proposed site does not support the council’s strategic aims to provide the type of housing required in Bingley, nor does it meet the exceptional circumstances required for the removal of greenbelt status. There are alternative brownfield sites in the area that are more suitable which, in line with the NPPF, the council has a duty to prioritise.

Object

Representation ID: 17686

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Sarah Jarman Alexander

•Land is designated Green Belt to prevent urban sprawl. Evidence to show that there are exceptional circumstances has not been produced. The fields should stay as Green Belt.
•The proposal is not sound in accordance with the NPPF. There are many alternative, non-Green Belt sites in Bingley which have not been considered.
•Considerable traffic will be generated on a lane with poor visibility, no pavements and limited width. Generating considerable risk to pedestrians/motorists and standing traffic on Heights Lane.
•Development will not meet the objective of protecting or enhancing the environment including valued landscapes.
•Development will increase pollution and pluvial flooding. Development close to the Prince of Wales Park will reduce the environment that supports wildlife.
•As part of WYCA, it is likely additional (non-Green Belt) land will become available in the near future, meaning there is no need to develop Green Belt to meet housing targets.

Object

Representation ID: 17750

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Carolyn Armitstead

The proposed development will put at least an extra 80 vehicles on the road causing;-

1. increased air and environmental pollution
2. increase in vehicles on a roundabout that already has frequent accidents and many near misses

Heights Lane is already a narrow road leaving no room for a pavement for pedestrians to access Otley Road.

There is no adequate drainage on Otley Road and flooding frequently occurs after heavy rain. This would be made worse causing even more flood damage to properties on Otley Road.

There would be a detrimental effect on global warming with the loss of bees in particular and other wild life

Schools are already over subscribed and GPs surgeries full.

This plan does not meet the 'exceptional circumstances' for removing green belt status.

There are 'brown field sites' still available in the area which are suitable for housing and should be use

Object

Representation ID: 18125

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: David & Pauline Lomax

Number of people: 2

Heights Lane is narrow and has no pavement for walkers so any increase in traffic will make walking very unsafe.

Walking on Heights Lane is the only way to access the footpaths to field and the moors which have been such a massive help to people in the pandemic.

For every house built there will be a two fold increase in vehicles using this road adding to an ever increasing traffic and pollution on all road in the area.

Allowing further housing adjacent to the Prince of Wales Park will spoil one of the best green resources in the area used by huge numbers of people for their well being and mental health.

If this application is allowed to go ahead it will destroy wildlife habitat and therefore impact on the biodiversity of the area.

Object

Representation ID: 18158

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Michael Brooke

The development of the fields will generate considerable traffic on a lane with poor visibility, no pavements and limited width and thus generate risks to the lives and health of pedestrians and motorists.

Local infrastructure is already oversubscribed in terms of doctors, dentists and school.

The Land is designated as Green Belt to prevent urban sprawl - no evidence that there are “exceptional circumstances” why the fields have to be removed from Green Belt.

There are many alternative (non-Green Belt) sites suitable for development in the Bingley area which have not been taken into consideration.

Failure to protect environment and landscapes.

Increased pollution and pluvial flooding.

Development close to the Prince of Wales Park will affect local wildlife including deer, birds and bats.

Bradford Council is part of the WYCA Review. This is likely to result in further parcels of (non-Green Belt) land becoming available in the near future for development.

Object

Representation ID: 18491

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Cllr David Hesletine

•The Heights Lane sites should be considered as one site. They will have a significant impact on the Prince of Wales Park, natural environment, road network and local infrastructure.
•Topography of the area will lead to most journeys to access local services being made by car.
•Heights Lane is a very busy road for multiple users. It is narrow with no footpaths. The lower section is only 6.9m wide. Any footpath would be substandard and reduce the carriage way, making it a very tight two-way flow.
•There is no sight line to the left at the junction of heights Lane/Otley Road/Warren Lane. To the right the sight line is severely restricted due to Pollard Avenue being set back from the main road. Currently the road is substandard and increasing its use will only exacerbate this.
•There are no special circumstances to indicate that these sites are needed. The site appraisals show there would be significant impacts and along with the significant highways issues leading to major highways safety implications, the only conclusion should be to remove the sites from the plan.