Consultation Question 43

Showing comments and forms 1 to 9 of 9

Support

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

Representation ID: 313

Received: 19/02/2021

Respondent: Ms Mel Frances

Representation Summary:

An incinerator in the Aire Valley would be both dangerous and an eyesore.

Support

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

Representation ID: 3289

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Wilsden Parish Council

Representation Summary:

We are generally supportive of Policy EN5. A key feature of the landscape character for large parts of the district are the dry stone walls and we propose that this should be specifically referenced in B.

Object

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

Representation ID: 3707

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Philip Sutcliffe

Representation Summary:

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

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

Representation ID: 3759

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Andrew Lund

Representation Summary:

While I support the aims of this policy I contend that several proposals elsewhere in the draft local plan fail to comply with it. Examples are the proposals for housing development on sites IL1/H and IL3/H which would conflict with sections B1, 2 and 3 of the policy.

Comment

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

Representation ID: 9817

Received: 12/03/2021

Respondent: Bradford District Ward Councillor (Labour)

Representation Summary:

EN 5 This particularly strikes home in may ward where a developer has put up floodlights in an open area of Greenbelt.

Comment

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

Representation ID: 15749

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: West Yorkshire Archaeology Advisory Service

Representation Summary:

Historic England funded a 5 year long Historic Landscape Characterisation assessment of West Yorkshire that was completed in 2017. A copy was supplied to Bradford planning dept & copy is also held in the West Yorkshire HER held by WYAAS. This identified the extent to which the historic character of anywhere in West Yorkshire survived as a recognisable element of the modern landscape and should be helpful to developers in ensuring sympathetic development in areas outside conservation areas to help respect and preserve the surviving historic character of an area. It would be helpful if the Local Plan were to acknowledge the existence of this study (as other Local Plans do in West Yorkshire, see Kirklees’ for instance) & refer large-scale developers to WYAAS, to consult this information.

Support

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

Representation ID: 19869

Received: 01/04/2021

Respondent: Natural England

Representation Summary:

Natural England welcomes Policy EN5, and the use of our National Character Areas for England in developing this policy, which is supported by Bradford’s adopted Landscape Character SPD. We also welcome the evolution of the policy to address issues such as local distinctiveness, securing biodiversity net gains, and the need for landscape enhancement, particularly in the urban fringe.

Comment

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

Representation ID: 19870

Received: 01/04/2021

Respondent: Natural England

Representation Summary:

We note that there are no designated Protected Landscapes within the Local Authority boundaries, although the District abuts the Yorkshire Dales National Park and Nidderdale Area of Outstanding National Beauty to the north-east. We also note that MHCLG are currently consulting on proposed changes to NPPF Chapter 15: Conserving and enhancing the natural environment, including a new paragraph 175 which has been amended in response to the Glover Review of Protected Landscapes, to clarify that the scale and extent of development within the settings of National Parks and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty should be sensitively located and designed so as to avoid adverse impacts on the designated landscapes.

On this basis, Natural England welcomes the approach undertaken within the Sustainability Appraisal in assessing potential allocations for new development in Addingham, Burley in Wharfdale, and Ilkley for any potential impacts on Protected Landscapes outwith the District boundaries, including impacts on tranquillity which falls within the setting of the AONB

Support

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

Representation ID: 29075

Received: 29/03/2021

Respondent: Historic England

Representation Summary:

We support this Policy particularly Criterion B.2. It is
especially important given the character of the District that
the landscape setting of its settlements and heritage assets
is fully taken into account in determining the
appropriateness of development proposals.