ST5/E - Lyon Road

Object

Representation ID: 1652

Received: 15/03/2021

Respondent: Miss Carly Richardson

I feel parking may be an issue due to limited amount of space for people already living in the area of green lane.

Comment

Representation ID: 24285

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Bradford District Ward Councillor (Conservative)

Concerns around flooding as the site is in Flood Zone 2

Comment

Representation ID: 28620

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Environment Agency

Flood Zones 2, 3 and the current/draft 3b/3a(i) within site boundary - Site is in FZ2 near an Ordinary Watercourse

There is to be no development with the 3b/3a(i) extent unless considered water compatible or essential infrastructure. Where this is the case the development must demonstrate no increase in risk to others, no loss of Functional Floodplain and suitable mitigation measures for use and the lifetime of the development.

Development on site should follow a sequential layout so as to prevent unnecessary development within Flood Zones 3b, 3 and 2 wherever possible. If the site is considered Greenfield then surface water discharge rates post development should be restricted to the pre development Greenfield discharge rate.

If the site is considered Brownfield then there should be a 30% reduction in surface water discharges, or restricted to Greenfield rates, there should be no increase in brownfield surface water discharge rates post development. So as to support prevention of cumulative increases to flood risk and should be in line with SuDs design principles. Some SuDs principles such as storage ponds should not be solely relied upon within areas at risk of fluvial flooding as they may not be operational during a flood.

Development must be shown to be safe for the lifetime of the development. See the Adept Guidance of Access and Egress plans. Hazard ratings may need to be assessed as part of the proposal.

Mitigation such a proofing measures and raised Finished Floor Levels, must be set above the 1 in 100 plus Climate Change level for the site. Current Guidance is on .gov.

The applicant must ensure there is no increase in risk to others for the lifetime of the development (including climate change). Where on Greenfield sites compensatory storage must be actively sought.

Consideration must be made to making space for water and providing betterment in terms of flood risk management where ever possible. For development near ordinary watercourses we would recommend an 8 metre easement strip along the length of the riverbank, or a 45degree angle from the bed in the case of culverts, to be kept clear of permanent structures such as buildings. This is to maintain access to the riverbank for any improvements or maintenance. A Flood Defence Consent may be required for the LLFA for works in/affecting an ordinary watercourse.

For main rivers, we generally require an 8 metre easement strip along the length of the riverbank to be kept clear of permanent structures such as buildings, or a 45degree angle from the bed in the case of culverts. This is to maintain access to the riverbank for any improvements or maintenance. Environmental Flood Risk Activity Permits may be required for development near rivers.

It is likely these sites are going to show changes/increases in flood risk as a result of climate change.

The SFRA (to follow) is going to consider future flooding including future Functional Floodplain this may identify sites at more future risk than others which may affect its allocation or how development should be sequentially laid out on the site.

Object

Representation ID: 29413

Received: 29/03/2021

Respondent: Historic England

Two Grade II Listed Buildings, Ivy House and 23 Lyon Road, are located 40 metres east of the sites south-east corner. The development of this area could harm elements which contribute to the significance of this designated heritage asset.
When considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be given to the asset’s conservation, with any harm to, or loss of, the significance of an asset requiring clear and convincing justification. There is a requirement in the 1990 Act that “special regard” should be had to the desirability of preserving Listed Buildings or their setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which they possess. The site proforma for this site makes no reference to the sites proximity to these designated heritage assets, or to the need to
ensure that those elements which contribute to the significance of these heritage assets are not harmed by development.
If allocated, the Plan should make it clear that development proposals for this area would need to ensure that those elements which contribute to the significance of the designated heritage assets in its vicinity are not harmed.