TH6/H - Dole and Prospect Mills, Thornton Road

Support

Representation ID: 584

Received: 01/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Chris Scurrah

Support but with some important points to consider not mentioned. The terrace of three properties on the edge of the site must be preserved - the lintel above one indicates a date as either 1830s or 1850s (not quite clear). They are in a style of late Georgian or early Victorian architecture, with high level of symmetry and design - possibly housing for management of Prospect Mill. To preserve them and build well designed housing with quality materials (as in the development in Harden by the mini round-about) would be very important to preserving character.

Comment

Representation ID: 1077

Received: 09/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Jordan Rana

Concerns about public pathways general wildlife and nature pollution

Object

Representation ID: 1389

Received: 13/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Tom Caulfield

I believe as I have stated on another objection that this will spoil a beautiful section of the Bronte Way and also spoil Thornton's village identity.

Support

Representation ID: 1973

Received: 17/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Oliver Scurrah

This site should have been developed using the mill. The fact that it was burned to the ground was criminal. The mill was a danger when it was standing, a danger when it burned and now - more by accident than design - the land is a wild habitat. That should be considered when the site is developed. Two important points to consider to mitigate negative impact.
1) Leave some of the land as wild habitat for the endangered species there (badgers and owls).
2) Use suitable building materials as this is part of the Conservation Area.
The terrace of three houses are contemporaneous with the old mill and in a distinctive architectural vernacular. They must be renovated. The Council must be tough with profiteering developers looking to cash in on green belt release - stipulate materials that must be used and buildings that must be renovated.

Support

Representation ID: 3164

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Ms Emily Scurrah

This site is a 'brownfield site' , ready for development for years. Not everyone is aware that there are now habitats for wildlife here. There should be careful consideration about this with future development. The draft plan suggests leaving the lower section with the old trees. This might be enough to mitigate against a negative impact on wildlife (eg. badgers). The second point is that this is the site of the historic Prospect Mill. The houses adjacent to the site are old and need to be preserved. Buildings must use suitable design and materials. This is within the Conservation Zone.

Support

Representation ID: 3177

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Ms Joy Wilkings

I live on another previous mill site in Thornton and feel pleased that there can be developments close to the village centre so I can walk to use shops, Dr etc and that would be the same for this site
I hope this is a priority rather than sites which are currently on or near green belt land

Object

Representation ID: 4438

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Dr Matt Hill

This site has been unused for so long it has become a thriving informal nature reserve. Resident mammals include roe deer, badger, weasel and fox. Sparrowhawks nest annually, with woodcock and bullfinch among the numerous birds on site. The ancient trees provide roosts for several bat species.
The land is potentially contaminated by DDT, lindane, dieldrin and other hazardous organochlorine pesticides, from wool processed in Dole and Prospect Mills in the 20th century when sheep were protected from pests using them. These poisons could be liberated and people exposed to unsafe levels during any construction process. If decontamination is unsuccessful, future residents could be similarly exposed. The mill reservoir on site adjacent to Thornton Road was filled in with unrecorded waste material, so offers potential further threats to health.
This site would be better used as a protected, formal local nature reserve, leaving any health risk locked in the soil.

Object

Representation ID: 4680

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Miss Sarah Wilson

Whilst this is the site of the old Prospect Mill and, therefore not green field or green belt land, it is in a conservation area which abutts Pinchbeck, known for its diverse wildlife. Since the 2 fires which destroyed Prospect Mills, nature has reclaimed the site, making this a green space to enjoy once more. Also the proposed building works would seem to be contrary to Bradford Council's own 'Thornton Appraisal' which states 'The overall aim of the Conservation Area Management Proposals is to preserve and enhance the character of the Conservation Area, by ensuring that the Council and the community work together to maintain historic features and details and limit the loss of character.' and (page 11) LESSON: Decision makers should consider the character of the conservation area when determining planning applications.'. Also 'Loss of key open spaces' would apply to many of these proposed sites. https://www.bradford.gov.uk/media/2512/thorntonappraisal.pdf

Object

Representation ID: 4831

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Les Hall

The Dole and Prospect Mills site has been badly managed for many years. Additionally, the support provided to local residents over this time, by many agencies, has been poor. As such, I feel it wholly reasonable to ask that all proper steps are taken to fully appreciate and consider the concerns of local residents. Moving forward I would ask that there be further detailed consultations, involving all parties and residents, at all relevant points during whatever further actions are taken.

If the development is appropriate and sensitive to local residents and the local area as a whole then I would not object. I do feel that 50 homes is excessive though.

Object

Representation ID: 5170

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Ms Helen Marriott

Site would be better used as location for new, improved community facilities such as fit for purpose doctors surgery, library and community centre.
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.
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: 5220

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Nick Bewes

It's currently an eye sore after the fire destroyed the mill.

Support

Representation ID: 5252

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Clive Richardson

I support, but not for a proposed timescale of 6-10 years. There is an immediate need for dwellings on this site.

Object

Representation ID: 5588

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Neil Ward

This site should primarily be anchored by a carehome, there is a poll on the official village facebook group massively supporting this proposal.
The site could be anchored by a carehome, with a new larger doctors surgery to deal with current and future capacity shortfall and any remaining space for housing. This would provide much needed employment to local villagers, there is an undersupply of jobs in the village. Villagers mainly have to catch a bus or drive out of the village in order to work. Carehomes are crying out for land and sites particularly in the countryside. It would be possible to reinstate a mill style building and surround this with good quality homes of international design standards for tourists of the future.

Comment

Representation ID: 28762

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: 29452

Received: 29/03/2021

Respondent: Historic England

See attachment for full representation.
The site is within the Thornton Conservation Area and contains the Grade II listed 285 and 287 Thornton Road, a pair of houses associated with the former Prospect Mill. The site is also adjacent to a Grade II listed terrace along Prospect Street and the Grade II listed Ashfield House. Thornton Conservation Area is included on the Heritage at Risk Register. 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).

Comment

Representation ID: 29923

Received: 17/03/2021

Respondent: Bridge View Developments Ltd

Agent: Bradley Stankler Planning

TH6/H

Comment on Green Belt Function: N/A
General Comment: Brownfield site within defined village limits with good road frontage in conservation area. Site contains former mill pond. Southern part of site well treed. Partially greened over.
Draft Local Plan Estimated Gross Capacity: 50
Evidence Based Conclusion On Suitability & Capacity: 50 dwelling capacity but deliverability uncertain due to potential mill pond contamination and ecological interest and need to retain trees.