Consultation Question 16

Support

Representation ID: 296

Received: 19/02/2021

Respondent: Ms Mel Frances

I support any policy that makes places healthier - but this can't just be about new building it must include existing areas. We are one of the most deprived regions in the country and care needs to taken of existing residents - if you build more housing, you also need to create more schools, more health services etc etc - adding more housing and more people into the district is a bit like widening roads to mitigate pollution - it's never ending.

Object

Representation ID: 1914

Received: 17/03/2021

Respondent: Burley Parish Council

BPC accepts that this is a good set of aspirational policies which the plan seeks to deliver, but regrets there is little evidence of fiscal or forward planning to support delivery.

Support

Representation ID: 2294

Received: 19/03/2021

Respondent: Clive Brook Planning

Support with commentary on improvements which need to be made to the strength and delivery of this policy in an integrated manner with other strategic policies.

Support

Representation ID: 2523

Received: 20/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Peter Down

I support the proposed Policy SP15. No further comment.

Support

Representation ID: 2762

Received: 21/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Helen Owen

Support but don’t think it’s feasible. Bradford is one of the country’s unhealthiest places to live. It will take much more than the resources and determination which BMDC currently show to make a difference.

Support

Representation ID: 3258

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Wilsden Parish Council

We support the general principles underlying Policy SP15 and will respond with our detailed comments when addressing the individual Thematic policies.

Object

Representation ID: 3683

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Philip Sutcliffe

he green belt was set up to stop urban expansion. In the case of
Bradford, to stop it becoming part of Leeds. Bradford planning office
being completely undemocratic wishes to pour cement and tarmac all
over the green belt in Tong. The reason I say undemocratic is as
follows. ~There has not been one survey, or opinion poll taken in
Bradford, which agrees with Bradford councils views on building on
green belt. In fact approx 90 % of population of Bradford totally
disagree with Bradford councils housing and road plans. However, the council which claims
represents the people is acting like a fascist state.

Your new road and housing plans directly effect my Grade II house and
land. However, you have not had the decency to contact me over the
last 10 years. I doubt you care less about me than the environment and
the creatures that need it.

Support

Representation ID: 3825

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Jenny Woodward

I support much of the above. However, there needs to be more explicit emphasis on addressing Bradford's health inequalities - and planning has a big impact on that both in terms of a fair distribution of health-promoting resources (e.g. parks / green spaces / communal facilities) and health-depriving resources (e.g. roads / incinerators). There needs to be a mechanism to assess impact on inequalities on every decision . At the moment more confident, vocal residents appear to have a unfair advantage in influence planning decisions.

Much of the above seems to apply to new developments. Yet, the vast majority of people live in existing houses. Could planning take a more pro-active approach and assess existing areas to see what can be done to improve health there. e.g. pocket parks, use of legislation to enforce housing quality.

Support

Representation ID: 3974

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Susan Burn

Looks good.

Support

Representation ID: 4544

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Ms Julie Townsend

While I support this policy, it could be improved through referencing the role of public and community transport alongside active travel in creating more healthy, less polluted environments and enabling more active lifestyles. It could also reference the evidenced importance of volunteering, community projects, local clubs and civil society to people's health and wellbeing. Nurturing and supporting these activities, and enabling wider access to them, can have a hugely beneficial effect both on health and wellbeing, while also supporting local place-making and sustainability.

Support

Representation ID: 5386

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Peter Jenkins

No further comment

Support

Representation ID: 5463

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: CPRE West Yorkshire

We support this policy, subject to our objections to policies SP6 and SP8 being addressed.

Object

Representation ID: 5718

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Kentucky Fried Chicken (Great Britain) Limited

Agent: SSA Planning Limited

Support controls on the over-concentration of food and drink uses where high levels of obesity, deprivation, health inequalities and general poor health. Evidence on the relationship between proximity and the incidence of obesity is weak and conflicting. No mechanism for any link between incidence and proximity to primary schools because their pupils do not travel to or from school unaccompanied. The inclusion of youth centres problematic as research focussed on secondary schools or the diet of their pupils. Specifically restricting hot food takeaways rather than all food and drink uses not supported by research, which often conflates them. Indeed, other food and drink uses can often constitute more of a problem.

Support

Representation ID: 5860

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Ms Alison Neave

I like these policies very much . They can make our places healthier, happier and nicer.

Comment

Representation ID: 9808

Received: 12/03/2021

Respondent: Bradford District Ward Councillor (Labour)

SP 15 Under section B8 you talk about growing crops. One of the notable features of housing developments is the removal of the topsoil leaving poor quality gardens. There SP 15 No. 8 Discusses growing crops. There should be a requirement for housing developers to replace topsoil and ensure that the underlying earth is suitable for cultivation. Too often areas round houses consist of builders rubble with a bit of turf stuck over the top. When compared to our former Council House stock, this is abysmal.

Comment

Representation ID: 11407

Received: 17/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Robert Felstead

I accept that these are a great set of aspirational policies which the plan seeks to deliver, but again there’s little evidence of fiscal or forward planning to support delivery.

Comment

Representation ID: 15824

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: West Yorkshire Combined Authority (WYCA)

As part of the Planning Delivery Fund, the Combined Authority were successfully awarded funding to provide strategic support in partnership with Leeds City Region Local Authorities to ensure investment in design quality in development plans. It is in this capacity that the following comments relating to Urban Design are made.

The Combined Authority is supportive of the inclusion of policies relating to urban design. We welcome the ambition to significantly improve quality in housing and neighbourhood design, and to create inclusive, accessible, distinctive and healthy places. Bradford’s high population of children and young people is reflected in policies that prioritise green space, doorstep play and safe routes to play destinations.

Policies could be further strengthened by including welcoming and safe routes to schools as a requirement.

The wording of Policy SP10 (Green Infrastructure) and SP15 (Creating Healthy Places) could be stronger, moving from text such as ‘The Council will seek to...’ to more explicit requirements such as ‘development proposals must show how they will provide...’ and ‘it is expected that developments will...’

Support

Representation ID: 17292

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: The Great Northern Railway Trail Development Group

This strengthens existing planning policy. However, our experience over twenty years is that approved policy is not followed through when planning schemes are submitted or when funding and legal support is required to create community opportunities for off-road cycleways.
Professional design skills are needed in the planning department by creating a post to ensure that such policies can be made meaningful in practice otherwise the status quo will continue.

Comment

Representation ID: 19660

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Sport England

Sport England welcomes criterion 3 as the policy recognises Active Design.

However, either the policy or the supporting text needs to include more information on the principles of Active Design.

Sport England in partnership with Public Health England, have produced the Active Design Guidance.

The guide features an innovative set of guidelines to get more people moving through suitable design and layout. It includes a series of case studies.

The Active Design Principles are aimed at contributing towards the Government's desire for the planning system to promote healthy communities through good urban design.

The guidance can be viewed on this link:
https://www.sportengland.org/how-we-can-help/facilities-and-planning/design-and-cost-guidance/active-design

Wakefield Council have included a detailed section on Active Design in their Development Strategy, Strategic and Local Policies document and a section from this document is appended to these comments.

Object

Representation ID: 19826

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Airedale NHS Foundation Trust

Agent: WSP UK Ltd

It is requested that Strategic Policies SP5 (Green Belt), SP15 (Creating Healthy Places) and the relevant supporting text and evidence base documents (eg The Green Belt Review) acknowledge the ‘exceptional circumstances’ to release some land from the Green Belt to facilitate the hospital’s operations. This will be necessary to comply with paragraph 136 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

Comment

Representation ID: 21616

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Bradford District Ward Councillor (Conservative)

An essential aspect for well-being – Wharfedale is blessed with many such areas.

Object

Representation ID: 21806

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Duncan Watson

BPC accepts that this is a good set of aspirational policies which the plan seeks to deliver, but regrets there is little evidence of fiscal or forward planning to support delivery.

Object

Representation ID: 21889

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Catherine Starling

BPC accepts that this is a good set of aspirational policies which the plan seeks to deliver, but regrets there is little evidence of fiscal or forward planning to support delivery.

Object

Representation ID: 21918

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Dr Samantha Cook

BPC accepts that this is a good set of aspirational policies which the plan seeks to deliver, but regrets there is little evidence of fiscal or forward planning to support delivery.

Object

Representation ID: 21947

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Birgit Almond

BPC accepts that this is a good set of aspirational policies which the plan seeks to deliver, but regrets there is little evidence of fiscal or forward planning to support delivery.

Object

Representation ID: 21976

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Corrie Hardaker

BPC accepts that this is a good set of aspirational policies which the plan seeks to deliver, but regrets there is little evidence of fiscal or forward planning to support delivery.

Object

Representation ID: 22005

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Carly Mitchell

BPC accepts that this is a good set of aspirational policies which the plan seeks to deliver, but regrets there is little evidence of fiscal or forward planning to support delivery.

Object

Representation ID: 22034

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Helen Ross

BPC accepts that this is a good set of aspirational policies which the plan seeks to deliver, but regrets there is little evidence of fiscal or forward planning to support delivery.

Object

Representation ID: 22066

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Rebecca Spencer

BPC accepts that this is a good set of aspirational policies which the plan seeks to deliver, but regrets there is little evidence of fiscal or forward planning to support delivery.

Object

Representation ID: 22095

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Lucy Ashton

BPC accepts that this is a good set of aspirational policies which the plan seeks to deliver, but regrets there is little evidence of fiscal or forward planning to support delivery.