TH3/H - Thornton Road

Support

Representation ID: 586

Received: 01/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Chris Scurrah

The properties built here must have a very high standard of design and quality of materials. Listed buildings nearby are of great historic importance. Not just the Thornton Hall and Thornton Farm, but also The Bell Chapel. It is also adjacent to The Bronte Way. The properties being built at the mini round-about in Harden are of a very high standard in both design and materials used. Harden does not have the history and heritage of Thornton, but it does have a desirable postcode.Thornton must have some protection from developers looking to make high returns from poorly designed housing using cheap materials. The postcode of an area is an indicator of profit to developers. Thornton's proximity to the city should not mean cheap and shoddy housing for developer's profits.

Object

Representation ID: 1082

Received: 09/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Tracy Walker

Don’t use green belt land, utilise brown field land and the old mills that are subjected to arson

Object

Representation ID: 1094

Received: 09/03/2021

Respondent: Miss Jade Spalding

The bronte walks and views across the valley are one of the most loved and walked of the area. This site of houses will ruin the valley views taking with it the heritage and history of said walkways. These walks and associated history should be protected at all costs. These walks are used by many, many people on a daily basis. Fearing this lovely village will soon turn into a large town when there are empty houses still to fill instead of building new. Not to mention the infrastructure doesn’t support all this housing. We have one doctors and one dentist. I highly object to this housing being built.

Object

Representation ID: 3021

Received: 21/03/2021

Respondent: Miss Sophie Hunt

Due to cultural significance of area, feel this would negatively impact on Thornton.

Support

Representation ID: 3092

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Ms Joy Wilkings

This would be a small development which I prefer

Support

Representation ID: 3146

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Ms Emily Scurrah

This site is not really a 'green space'. It could be developed but only if the developers are held to account about the suitability of buildings and the materials used. This site is adjacent to listed buildings, the historic Bell Chapel and also a section of The Bronte Way. An attachment from Bradford Council Conservation Assessment is provided and refers to the importance of new buildings being suitable.

Object

Representation ID: 4664

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Miss Sarah Wilson

This site is on green belt land and would adversely affect the village. The Bronte Way runs through here and would suffer, affecting the many visitors who come to Thornton because of the Bronte connection. Quoting the Thornton Appraisal document, published by Bradford council, it advises against 'Loss of historic street surfaces and traditional character of public realm.', and also ' Loss of key open spaces'. This would do just that.

Object

Representation ID: 5022

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Bradford District Ward Councillor (Conservative)

Again not enough schools. Royd Mount can not possible handle anymore extra car parking near this school so very dangerous as it is.
The medical centre can not cope with anymore patients as it is.

Object

Representation ID: 5160

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Ms Helen Marriott

Increased risk of water run off affecting lower buildings and roads lower due to reduced capacity of land to absorb water.
Proximity to protected habitats. Negative impact of increased footfall and traffic.
Increase in traffic leading to traffic log jams, particularly at peak times and during road works and bad weather.
Inability of local infrastructure; roads, schools, doctors, dentist, public transportation and limited leisure facilities to cope with any increase in demand.
Destruction of unique character and heritage of village.
Unnecessary destruction of green field/belt when should be developing empty properties and brown field and derelict sites first.
Negative impact on local economy as village less attractive to visitors, particularly walkers.
Reducing village to 'commuter' belt where majority of new residents are not actively engaged in the community.
Increased threat to livestock from 'out of control' dogs. Increased volume of dog faeces fouling local footpaths, pavements and other habitats.

Support

Representation ID: 5227

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Nick Bewes

A suitable place to build new property

Support

Representation ID: 5250

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Clive Richardson

I support this use of for TH3/H. I also support development on the fields to the west of the Grave Yard, which are out of the way unlike Th2/H, but you have rejected them previously.

Object

Representation ID: 5360

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Neil Ward

Bronte trail passes this site.
Also access to Thornton Hall. Admittedly the access road would benefit from upgrade.
Thornton Hall fronts the valley opposite, introduction of homes directly next to Thornton Hall would harm this important listed buildings setting / valley scene, in turning harming our growing tourist trade, culture and history!

If the homes were bungalows with green roofs not visible from the other side of the valley perhaps, and the access road was upgraded this could change from objection to support.

Object

Representation ID: 5477

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: CPRE West Yorkshire

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

TH3/H
TH9/H
TH11/H

Comment

Representation ID: 28759

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Environment Agency

Site in Flood Zone 1 ONLY
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

Representation ID: 29449

Received: 29/03/2021

Respondent: Historic England

The site is adjacent to the Grade II* listed Thornton Hall. There are also a number of other Grade II listed structures in vicinity of the site. The development of this area could harm elements which contribute to the significance of these designated heritage assets.
See attachment for full representation.
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).

Comment

Representation ID: 29920

Received: 17/03/2021

Respondent: Bridge View Developments Ltd

Agent: Bradley Stankler Planning

TH3/H

Comment on Green Belt Function: Limited Green Belt function. Well defined physical boundaries.
General Comment: Well related to built up area with good road frontage, adjoining a number of listed buildings.
Draft Local Plan Estimated Gross Capacity: 15
Evidence Based Conclusion On Suitability & Capacity: 15 dwelling capacity