HA6/H - Ivy Bank Lane

Showing comments and forms 1 to 8 of 8

Object

Draft Bradford District Local Plan - Preferred Options (Regulation 18) February 2021

Representation ID: 43

Received: 10/02/2021

Respondent: Miss Michelle Lee

Representation Summary:

Road safety - inadequate access, steep and hazardous in winter
Flood zone 2- will add to flooding in lower part of village
Conservation Area - new stone will take years to look in keeping with the area.
Ivy bank mill has bats roosting and owls use to perch when hunting the natural habitat and roosting points will be removed leaving them without.

Object

Draft Bradford District Local Plan - Preferred Options (Regulation 18) February 2021

Representation ID: 1734

Received: 09/02/2021

Respondent: Joanne Addie

Representation Summary:

The development of the site will cause increased run off into the bottom of Haworth - should not be developed until a sustainable flood alleviation scheme is implemented for Mill Hey

Support

Draft Bradford District Local Plan - Preferred Options (Regulation 18) February 2021

Representation ID: 5986

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Kathryn Gower

Representation Summary:

This area has been in a bad state since the fire at the old Ivy Bank Mill. In an area that has such lovely vistas this is somewhere that really needs a sympathetic development. At the moment it just looks like a neglected waste land.
The access is always pointed out as the impasse here, but Mill wagons and vehicles used it years ago. Also the street at Ivy Bank Terrace is in an appalling condition. A sympathetic solution must be found as this area of a lovely village is an eyesore.

Object

Draft Bradford District Local Plan - Preferred Options (Regulation 18) February 2021

Representation ID: 6122

Received: 02/03/2021

Respondent: Gillian Davies

Representation Summary:

I was sent a letter regarding this development but am concerned about the access to this proposed site! The traffic access onto Bridgehouse Lane is adding to the already busy through traffic. With the coming Coop needing car park entry, like Bridge Housing estate, onto the roundabout. It is hard to cross the road and to drive out of Earl street. I realise more housing is needed but this village, of major tourist interest, is being turned into a town. The new housing spoiling the local walking areas and makes driving more difficult. Ebor Lane, already being developed , has to access the narrow road out of Haworth in both directions. I cannot view the planning application on the site you gave so am writing in the hope that you can clarify the access to this development.

Object

Draft Bradford District Local Plan - Preferred Options (Regulation 18) February 2021

Representation ID: 7166

Received: 10/03/2021

Respondent: Jacqueline Jarvis

Representation Summary:

I strongly object to Bradford Council building houses on Greenbelt land. There are enough Brown field sites with abandoned buildings and unused warehousing that should be considered first. Also what about housing that is unoccupied by missing landlords? Why aren’t these compulsory purchased to start with? You never consider the infrastructure, roads, doctors, schools, sewage, increased traffic etc., when drawing up these plans and what if any will be social housing which is the most needed of all builds? NONE!

Comment

Draft Bradford District Local Plan - Preferred Options (Regulation 18) February 2021

Representation ID: 18240

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Bradford District Ward Councillor (Conservative)

Representation Summary:

HA6/H Ivy Bank Lane
There has been a planning application ongoing since 2018 with the main issue being the difficult access to the site. Ivy Bank Lane is an unadopted single track road and the site is at a lower level than the lane. There are also ownership issues over some of the access routes. So far despite a number of planning applications none have proceeded. This site is in the Haworth Conservation Area so any development would have to be carefully designed. It also runs alongside the KWVR heritage railway so any impact on the visual impact would need special consideration.

Comment

Draft Bradford District Local Plan - Preferred Options (Regulation 18) February 2021

Representation ID: 28697

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Environment Agency

Representation Summary:

Site in Flood Zone 1 ONLY - Close to River and FZ2 and 3 alwell as current 3ai extent.

Mitigation should be set above the 1 in 100 plus cc level for the site as suitable for the proposed vulnerability classification (EA standing advice should cover this).

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.

For developments 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 possible the sites within close proximity to Flood Zones 3b, 3 and 2 may be subject to future risk identified within the SFRA (to follow) which may affect its allocation or how development should be sequentially laid out on the site.

Consideration must be made to making space for water and providing betterment in terms of flood risk management where ever possible.

Object

Draft Bradford District Local Plan - Preferred Options (Regulation 18) February 2021

Representation ID: 29438

Received: 29/03/2021

Respondent: Historic England

Representation Summary:

See attachment for full representation.
The site is entirely within the Haworth Conservation Area and close to the Grade II listed Bridgehouse Mills. The southern end of the site is identified in the Conservation Area Appraisal as providing a positive contribution to the character of the Conservation Area. The development of this area could harm elements which contribute to the significance of these designated heritage assets.

Before allocating this site for development:
(1) An assessment needs to be undertaken of the contribution which this site makes to those elements which contribute towards the significance of the Listed Buildings in its vicinity, and what impact the loss of this undeveloped site and its subsequent development might have upon their significance.
(2) If it is considered that the development of this site would harm elements which contribute to the significance of the Listed Buildings, then the measures by which that harm might be removed or reduced need to be effectively tied into the Plan.
(3) If, at the end of the process, it is concluded that the development would still be likely to harm elements which contribute to the significance of these Listed Buildings, then this site should not be allocated unless there are clear public benefits that outweigh the harm (as is
required by NPPF, Paragraph 195 or 196).