Consultation Question 5

Object

Representation ID: 24697

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Danny Schofield

3.4.1; 3.4.2 - Please see Q2 for BPC’s comment on brownfield delivery. BPC strongly supports BDMC’s decision not to adopt the 35% urban centre uplift proposed by government as this is most likely to be delivered from Green Belt due to the stated non-viability of brownfield land.

Object

Representation ID: 24735

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Hamish Logan

3.4.1; 3.4.2 - Please see Q2 for BPC’s comment on brownfield delivery. BPC strongly supports BDMC’s decision not to adopt the 35% urban centre uplift proposed by government as this is most likely to be delivered from Green Belt due to the stated non-viability of brownfield land.

Object

Representation ID: 24764

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Ashera Grande

3.4.1; 3.4.2 - Please see Q2 for BPC’s comment on brownfield delivery. BPC strongly supports BDMC’s decision not to adopt the 35% urban centre uplift proposed by government as this is most likely to be delivered from Green Belt due to the stated non-viability of brownfield land.

Object

Representation ID: 24842

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Chris Knowles

3.4.1; 3.4.2 - Please see Q2 for BPC’s comment on brownfield delivery. BPC strongly supports BDMC’s decision not to adopt the 35% urban centre uplift proposed by government as this is most likely to be delivered from Green Belt due to the stated non-viability of brownfield land.

Object

Representation ID: 24929

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Bridget Day

3.4.1; 3.4.2 - Please see Q2 for BPC’s comment on brownfield delivery. BPC strongly supports BDMC’s decision not to adopt the 35% urban centre uplift proposed by government as this is most likely to be delivered from Green Belt due to the stated non-viability of brownfield land.

Object

Representation ID: 24958

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Rob Pawson

3.4.1; 3.4.2 - Please see Q2 for BPC’s comment on brownfield delivery. BPC strongly supports BDMC’s decision not to adopt the 35% urban centre uplift proposed by government as this is most likely to be delivered from Green Belt due to the stated non-viability of brownfield land.

Object

Representation ID: 24987

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Anil Mander

3.4.1; 3.4.2 - Please see Q2 for BPC’s comment on brownfield delivery. BPC strongly supports BDMC’s decision not to adopt the 35% urban centre uplift proposed by government as this is most likely to be delivered from Green Belt due to the stated non-viability of brownfield land.

Object

Representation ID: 25017

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Louise Judd

3.4.1; 3.4.2 - Please see Q2 for BPC’s comment on brownfield delivery. BPC strongly supports BDMC’s decision not to adopt the 35% urban centre uplift proposed by government as this is most likely to be delivered from Green Belt due to the stated non-viability of brownfield land.

Object

Representation ID: 25047

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Richard Watson

3.4.1; 3.4.2 - Please see Q2 for BPC’s comment on brownfield delivery. BPC strongly supports BDMC’s decision not to adopt the 35% urban centre uplift proposed by government as this is most likely to be delivered from Green Belt due to the stated non-viability of brownfield land.

Object

Representation ID: 25081

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Tina Collins

3.4.1; 3.4.2 - Please see Q2 for BPC’s comment on brownfield delivery. BPC strongly supports BDMC’s decision not to adopt the 35% urban centre uplift proposed by government as this is most likely to be delivered from Green Belt due to the stated non-viability of brownfield land.

Object

Representation ID: 25106

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Tina Collins

•BDMC not following it’s Brownfield First Approach. In that, for the first 5-year period, it is proposed that development is split roughly equally between Brownfield, Greenfield and Green Belt, not with an emphasis on Brownfield In addition, there is an longstanding unused capability for brownfield and greenfield to contribute a very significant number of dwellings. This totally contradicts the policy of prioritising other areas before building on Green Belt.

Object

Representation ID: 25132

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Donna Radcliffe

3.4.1; 3.4.2 - Please see Q2 for BPC’s comment on brownfield delivery. BPC strongly supports BDMC’s decision not to adopt the 35% urban centre uplift proposed by government as this is most likely to be delivered from Green Belt due to the stated non-viability of brownfield land.

Object

Representation ID: 25179

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Bradford Chamber of Commerce

The policy should on balance be deleted as it serves very little if any purpose. It is far from clear in the written justification why a system of sequential selection or prioritisation of sites for allocation is necessary. In certain settlements there are few if any previously developed sites likely to come forward except on an unpredictable 'windfall' basis. Given past high rates of development of brownfield, it has to be recognised that the opportunities for the future identification of potential brownfield allocations is severely restricted in at least one of the three principal towns and in other settlements in the lower tiers of the hierarchy. Similarly, the opportunities for developing greenfield sites are greatly restricted in all tiers of the hierarchy as a result of existing greenfield uses or designations or the need for these to become publicly accessible open spaces in the future.

Object

Representation ID: 25186

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Stephen Radcliffe

3.4.1; 3.4.2 - Please see Q2 for BPC’s comment on brownfield delivery. BPC strongly supports BDMC’s decision not to adopt the 35% urban centre uplift proposed by government as this is most likely to be delivered from Green Belt due to the stated non-viability of brownfield land.

Object

Representation ID: 25215

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Denise Stanford

3.4.1; 3.4.2 - Please see Q2 for BPC’s comment on brownfield delivery. BPC strongly supports BDMC’s decision not to adopt the 35% urban centre uplift proposed by government as this is most likely to be delivered from Green Belt due to the stated non-viability of brownfield land.

Object

Representation ID: 25309

Received: 19/03/2021

Respondent: Harworth Estates Property Group Ltd

Object to increase of housing target in the city center on the basis of deliverability (see attached document Menston Reps Local Plan Document Regulation 18)

Comment

Representation ID: 25419

Received: 19/03/2021

Respondent: Snell Developments Ltd

Agent: Pegasus Group (Leeds)

generally supportive of the prescribed hierarchy for the location of development, however it must also strike a sensible balanced against deliverability, sustainability and viability to ensure plan-making applies the presumption in favour of sustainable development.

Object

Representation ID: 25427

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Rebecca Stokes

3.4.1; 3.4.2 - Please see Q2 for BPC’s comment on brownfield delivery. BPC strongly supports BDMC’s decision not to adopt the 35% urban centre uplift proposed by government as this is most likely to be delivered from Green Belt due to the stated non-viability of brownfield land.

Object

Representation ID: 25476

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Mary Pawson

3.4.1; 3.4.2 - Please see Q2 for BPC’s comment on brownfield delivery. BPC strongly supports BDMC’s decision not to adopt the 35% urban centre uplift proposed by government as this is most likely to be delivered from Green Belt due to the stated non-viability of brownfield land.

Comment

Representation ID: 25659

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: John Hunt

I would like to register my opposition to any building on green field sites within the Bradford District. My knowledge is specifically on the Ilkley / Burley-in-Wharfedale sites but I object to all of the proposed green field or green belt sites.

Making urban areas more attractive and repurposing existing buildings makes much more sense – allowing the some parts of the centre of Bradford to remain as they are, is criminal in my opinion.

Object

Representation ID: 25705

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Penny Price

3.4.1; 3.4.2 - Please see Q2 for BPC’s comment on brownfield delivery. BPC strongly supports BDMC’s decision not to adopt the 35% urban centre uplift proposed by government as this is most likely to be delivered from Green Belt due to the stated non-viability of brownfield land.

Object

Representation ID: 25734

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Sue Bell

3.4.1; 3.4.2 - Please see Q2 for BPC’s comment on brownfield delivery. BPC strongly supports BDMC’s decision not to adopt the 35% urban centre uplift proposed by government as this is most likely to be delivered from Green Belt due to the stated non-viability of brownfield land.

Object

Representation ID: 25763

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs M Armitage

3.4.1; 3.4.2 - Please see Q2 for BPC’s comment on brownfield delivery. BPC strongly supports BDMC’s decision not to adopt the 35% urban centre uplift proposed by government as this is most likely to be delivered from Green Belt due to the stated non-viability of brownfield land.

Object

Representation ID: 25792

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Stuart Bell

3.4.1; 3.4.2 - Please see Q2 for BPC’s comment on brownfield delivery. BPC strongly supports BDMC’s decision not to adopt the 35% urban centre uplift proposed by government as this is most likely to be delivered from Green Belt due to the stated non-viability of brownfield land.

Object

Representation ID: 25821

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Jackie Cooper

3.4.1; 3.4.2 - Please see Q2 for BPC’s comment on brownfield delivery. BPC strongly supports BDMC’s decision not to adopt the 35% urban centre uplift proposed by government as this is most likely to be delivered from Green Belt due to the stated non-viability of brownfield land.

Object

Representation ID: 25850

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Elizabeth Archer

3.4.1; 3.4.2 - Please see Q2 for BPC’s comment on brownfield delivery. BPC strongly supports BDMC’s decision not to adopt the 35% urban centre uplift proposed by government as this is most likely to be delivered from Green Belt due to the stated non-viability of brownfield land.

Object

Representation ID: 25879

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Jill Buckley

3.4.1; 3.4.2 - Please see Q2 for BPC’s comment on brownfield delivery. BPC strongly supports BDMC’s decision not to adopt the 35% urban centre uplift proposed by government as this is most likely to be delivered from Green Belt due to the stated non-viability of brownfield land.

Object

Representation ID: 25908

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Andy Wheeler

3.4.1; 3.4.2 - Please see Q2 for BPC’s comment on brownfield delivery. BPC strongly supports BDMC’s decision not to adopt the 35% urban centre uplift proposed by government as this is most likely to be delivered from Green Belt due to the stated non-viability of brownfield land.

Object

Representation ID: 25937

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Christine Hardaker

3.4.1; 3.4.2 - Please see Q2 for BPC’s comment on brownfield delivery. BPC strongly supports BDMC’s decision not to adopt the 35% urban centre uplift proposed by government as this is most likely to be delivered from Green Belt due to the stated non-viability of brownfield land.

Object

Representation ID: 25966

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Norah and David Jackman

3.4.1; 3.4.2 - Please see Q2 for BPC’s comment on brownfield delivery. BPC strongly supports BDMC’s decision not to adopt the 35% urban centre uplift proposed by government as this is most likely to be delivered from Green Belt due to the stated non-viability of brownfield land.