Consultation Question 97

Showing comments and forms 1 to 30 of 36

Object

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

Representation ID: 3

Received: 08/02/2021

Respondent: George Holmes

Representation Summary:

The proposed developments in Nab Wood (SH4-6) are completely inappropriate. They would destroy significant green space, which is lacking in this area, including land in green corridors. The local infrastructure, particularly roads, cannot sustain new developments of this size

Object

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

Representation ID: 370

Received: 22/02/2021

Respondent: Mrs Claire Brown

Representation Summary:

There are limited green spaces in the Shipley area that contribute to the general environment. Having parks and sports fields is not enough.
The pollution levels in this area are high and removing green spaces is not going to improve this. Whilst I can see from the proposals there are projects to increase green spaces it is no good having everything crammed in the centre with green areas surrounding it.

The main road through Shipley apparently for many Bradford Hauliers is the main route to Scotland - how can this be right??? Sort out the pollution first /more green areas

Object

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

Representation ID: 377

Received: 22/02/2021

Respondent: Mrs Elaine Jones

Representation Summary:

Your building on a green site and there are plenty of brown sites in Bradford ans Shipley to use
Also the infrastructure is not place to accommodate this amount of new homes.

Object

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

Representation ID: 463

Received: 25/02/2021

Respondent: Mr Neil Collins

Representation Summary:

Bradford has a plentiful supply of brownfield sites that have not been developed.
In her judgement dated 8/6/2020 in Aireborough Neighbourhood Development Forum vs Leeds City Council, Mrs Justice Lieven found that it was wrong to leave Green Belt sites in a development plan solely because the Council wished to reduce the numbers around the district proportionately. Green belt should be removed from the plan and brownfield sites built on first.
This judgement is surely just as relevant to Bradford.
Our Prime Minister's "Build Build Build" announcement on 30/6/2020 said brownfield building would be made easier to protect Green Belt. This should be bourne in mind and our Green Belt not built on.

Object

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

Representation ID: 671

Received: 03/03/2021

Respondent: Ms Kierston Hunt

Representation Summary:

Green belt and any open land is a precious resource for people and wildlife. Building on such land is short sighted and reprehensible. There are surely enough sites in the district to build on which dont compromise the environment.
Bring back into use the derelict building sites and empty houses/buildings for a truly sound, far sighted plan

Object

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

Representation ID: 683

Received: 03/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Margaret Southerington

Representation Summary:

Environmental impact, removal of known green space. Considerable additional number of vehicles accessing this quiet, well established estate. Impact on local services, ie, schools, healthcare. Flooding - Nab Wood is noted for its natural springs.

Object

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

Representation ID: 751

Received: 04/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Alexandra Butler

Representation Summary:

Traffic generation
Noise and disturbance resulting from use
Loss of trees loss of nature conservation.
Effect on listed buildings and conservation areas
Road access

Object

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

Representation ID: 804

Received: 06/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Sybil Noble

Representation Summary:

.risk of increased flooding of nearby properties already with flooding issues due to proximity of river, ground saturation
.already antiquated drainage/sewage systems will not be able to cope with more usage
.damaging to take away agricultural land of meadows, the habitats of many species of creatures, especially including the bat colony
.hurtful to take away views of and interaction with countryside, plus loss of privacy and daylight, for nearby residents
.area cannot cope with added traffic as volume already high and will also have detrimental effect on walkers and cyclists
.added traffic would create more air pollution to the area which does not tally with present environmental issues being planned for Bradford, and where there is a proposal to close the cemetery because of its contribution to air pollution

Object

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

Representation ID: 1216

Received: 10/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Ciarán McInerney

Representation Summary:

Some of the proposed sites will have unacceptable ramifications on ground stability and drainage, will degrade habitats, result in loss of agricultural land and natural views, ignores viable brown-site alternatives, does not accommodate the resulting increase in traffic, and the plan generally does not respect the zero-carbon-future Council policy.

Object

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

Representation ID: 2149

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Eileen Hogg

Representation Summary:

a) How were these figures for housing need in Shipley arrived at? Do the figures come from central government, and not local council? If so, I'm extremely sceptical. And do they take into account increased deaths during the pandemic and possible change in population due to Brexit? Possible fall in birthrate due to lockdown? We're about to have a census. Why not wait? Wouldn't the census give a much better idea of future housing need?
b) Building on sites SH5/H & SH6/H will increase flooding. Please see this article by UK Construction: https://www.ukconstructionmedia.co.uk/features/flooding-uk-housing/
c) The government has pledged to 'build back better, greener, faster' https://www.gov.uk/government/news/pm-a-new-deal-for-britain How is building on the last Green Belt between Shipley and Bingley 'better and greener'? I can see developers may want to build 'faster' as a money-making exercise, but is this what you'd like your council to be remembered for?
(I've also emailed separately.)

Object

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

Representation ID: 2210

Received: 19/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Teska Chunara

Representation Summary:

once again developers have chosen to ignore the greenbelt and wild life that live there , it is their habitat and the continuation of that shoud carry on without threat from humans, we need them as much as they need us its all aboutl survival.
The loss of natural views and farmland never to be seen again is too high a price to pay for houses that can be built on brownbelt, and ex commercial areas, of which there are many available in this area.
An area of outstanding natural beauty should not be destroyed.
If Branksome Grove is used as an entrance to the site it will not cope with the extra traffic.
The enevitable loss in value to the existing houses in the area is not acceptable
Air polution which cannot be ignored due all the extra traffic in the area, goes against national and world wide policy.

Object

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

Representation ID: 2805

Received: 21/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Jessica Short

Representation Summary:

My objections to this planned proposal are as follows:
-More affordable brownfield sites must be considered first, greenbelt can only be used 'in exceptional circumstances', therefore not in line with national planning policy.
-Negative impacts on the local environment for plants and wildlife. Loss of habitat and food sources for bats, badgers, deer, bird life, moths, butterflies, amphibians and reptiles. Thus negatively impacting BMDC's Biodiversity Policy and Green Infrastructure Corridors.
-Loss of protected woodland means rise in carbon dioxide because not absorbed and stored by trees. Trees felled, plus high water tables means risk of flooding downhill/downstream.
-More traffic means harmful rises air and noise pollution to wildlife. Resident's physical and mental health negatively impacted.
-Rise in vehicles idling, whilst waiting to join already highly polluted roads aggravates asthma, COPD and all respiratory diseases.
-More pressure on already squeezed infrastructures eg school places, doctors, road maintenance, public transport, waste collection.

Object

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

Representation ID: 2847

Received: 21/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Catherine Hunter

Representation Summary:

Relates to SH5/H and SH6/H

The fields take a lot of surface water and help protect the already existing houses. Building on these sites would be disastrous for residents of Branksome Drive and Branksome Grove, re the already overloaded old drains due to many culverts which already run under the existing properties. We are already a flood risk area as flooded in 2000 and 2015, the latter when the water was over a metre high inside the Branksome Drive properties absolutely devastating for residents. Bradford Road already is level 3 air pollution so would definitely increase with the added traffic which will be detrimental to our health. Any extra traffic from proposed houses would make Bradford Road an even more dangerous and nightmare than it already is. The fields are a natural habitat for many wildlife ie. Deer, rabbits, squirrels, bat's and many birds nesting in hedges

Object

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

Representation ID: 3612

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Attiya Ahmed

Representation Summary:

Concerned about the impact on existing property values.
It would also reduce the open space for ecological purposes.

Object

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

Representation ID: 3808

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Steven Watson

Representation Summary:

SH4/H Infrastructure / Traffic

Bankfield Rd, Glenview Rd & Glenview Drive are not suitable to cope with the extra traffic 160+ houses will generate. The current rat-run through this area is already dreadful, especially at school-times.

Existing infill building and extension works in this area creates a sea of Contractor vehicles that are hard to navigate already.

Air and noise pollution from Cottingley New Rd and Bingley Rd is already a concern. They are basically blocked solid at busy times already.

Ground Drainage / Flooding

This area already suffers from existing water course issues. The existing flora in SH4/H slows and absorbs water, thus protecting the lower Aire around the river. If we continue removing this for new builds, infill and garden losses, the Aire Valley may resemble the Calder Valley.

Protection of Greenbelt

Greenbelt should not be considered until all brownfield and ex commercial opportunities have been exhausted.

Object

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

Representation ID: 3880

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Ms Jo Reynard

Representation Summary:

Water from Cottingley flows by the Becks and in Jan 2020 the school was flooded, the water was under the school coming through floor boards. The levels of water were very high, drains could not cope and becks were flooding finding spaces they could enter.

Object

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

Representation ID: 4203

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Louise Chapple

Representation Summary:

We have too much traffic cutting through the surrounding area already without adding to this. Bankfield Road is an accident black spot in winter
with regular accidents involving multiple vehicles.
We do not have the infrastructure to support all the extra houses that are planned for this area .
There are very few green spaces within walking distance and this open space has been an essential space to use in lockdown .
The deer which use/live in this area will loose their homes
This area does have flooding problems and this will only increase if houses are built here.
There are other brownfield sites which be used rather than this area

Object

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

Representation ID: 4211

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Laura Ashworth

Representation Summary:

Shipley is very congested. More houses mean more cars. Shipley’s open spaces are on the edges. People living near Wycliffe would have to go to Roberts Park or Northcliffe Park to get to green space. People think that usage of an open area means actually being on it, but many people value green space because they can just see it.

Object

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

Representation ID: 4516

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Andrew Feeny

Representation Summary:

Traffic - We are already surrounded by saturated roads inc one through Saltaire that cannot be changed.
Schools - How will the current infrastructure cope with a large number of extra houses and families. Concerns about catchment areas.
Flooding - In an area badly affected in the past by flooding how can building upon an area that was badly affected be justified? How can you guarantee that people will not suffer the impacts of severe flooding like in 2010 and 2015.
Infrastructure- It is already impossible to get a Doctor's appointment in our area. Registered with dentists outside of the area/Bradford in order to access treatment due to the lack of NHS dentists locally.

Object

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

Representation ID: 4536

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Ms Emma Feeny

Representation Summary:

Wildlife and green space- The space on which you plan to build have trees present that are thousands of yrs old and the space inhabits everything from Bats, Badgers and owls to Deer. How can you justify this when there are many Brownfield sites available as alternatives? Totally unacceptable.
Flooding - In an area badly affected in the past by flooding how can building upon an area that was badly affected be justified? How can you guarantee that people will not suffer the impacts of severe flooding like in 2010 and 2015.
Infrastructure- It is already impossible to get a Doctor's appointment and registered with Dentists outside of the area/bradford in order to access treatment due to the lack of NHS dentists locally.

Object

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

Representation ID: 4615

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Edward Convery

Representation Summary:

The proposal to change the Green Belt boundary contravenes the National Planning Policy Framework Paragraph 136 states that Green Belt Boundaries should only be altered where exceptional circumstances are fully evidenced and justified. All available brownfield sites must be considered first. Inappropriate development is by definition harmful to the Green Belt. The Council need to allocate housing developments to available brownfield sites across the Local Plan area (such as Valley Road) instead of releasing Green Belt Land.
The site is not sustainable owing to the negative environmental impact. These are strong reasons to oppose this allocation:
Increased flood risks.
Impact on water quality
Increased pollution.
Loss of Green Belt which is used by families for Mental & Physical wellbeing.
Impact on significant wildlife.
Historical importance.
Poor Public transport and amenities locally.
For these reasons I am in opposition to the proposed building plans.

Object

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

Representation ID: 4749

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Jayne Brown

Representation Summary:

Schools- children in Nabwood often fall between schools. Increasing houses in both cottingley and Shipley will only make this worse. Nabwood does not have a primary school. Increasing housing may mean these children need to be driven to school to find places.
Traffic- traffic around cottingley and saltaire remains horrendous. Pollution levels are high. Some sites proposed have no bus route even close.
Children walk to school through traffic and are exposed to unnecessary risks due to pollution because of queues and non moving traffic.
Flooding- Bradford areas have seen flooding yet houses are proposed close to the sites
Access to some of the proposed sites is restricted and will increase the volume heading through smaller routes via Nabwood.
There is no park or shops in Nabwood or local green space. Likely to increase traffic to access services due to the location
.

Object

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

Representation ID: 5105

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Miss Abigail Douglas

Representation Summary:

Traffic. Wildlife. noise and view. COVID-19 has show us that we need space from eachother.

Object

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

Representation ID: 5367

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Sara Bukumunhe

Representation Summary:

It is valued open space used by the whole community. Government and local policies show that recreation open space like this is supposed to be protected.
We will lose the benefits of our community’s local green space.
Children play regularly here and would have nowhere else to play. Many dwellings in the neighbourhood have no gardens and the local parks are a long way away involving main road crossings.
It's used for sport/exercise.
It's used for dog walking.
Green space helps protect us against local air pollution problems.
People travel via the green to work, or to the local nurseries and schools.
We are already an area that has been shown to be deprived of green space.
Why destroy the play/recreation space of this and future generations for the sake of meeting only 3.5% of the Shipley ‘quota’ of new housing?

Object

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

Representation ID: 5475

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: CPRE West Yorkshire

Representation Summary:

The sites proposed for Shipley, like many other sites Across the district, are proposed to be built within green belt land and at a density of around 26dpha, a figure much lower than the HO2 minimum of 35 dpha, and even more inconsistent with our position set out in policies SP4, SP5 and SP8. Moreover, site SH4/H is proposed for land which is expected to be within a Proposed Clean Air Zone. Whilst this site allocation mentions there are potential for some positive effects for the area, such as improvement to the local economy, there are some concerns.

Sites SH5/H and SH6/H are also proposed to be, at least in part, within the Proposed Clean Air Zone and both have elements of woodland along their boundary. There is the risk of flooding at these sites too as sections of the land is within flood Zone 2. As the last buffer of land between Cottingley and Shipley, it is important to maintain this open landscape.
Development on this land would result in the removal of a significant amount of woodland, which would be a major harmful impact.

Object

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

Representation ID: 5805

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Thomas Willis

Representation Summary:

* These proposals will destroy precious green spaces and have a substantial, negative impact upon local air pollution and traffic.
* Bingley Road (to take a single example) is already shown to have dangerous levels of air pollution, and this will be exacerbated by the increased traffic associated with these proposals.
* These plans will put overwhelming pressure upon local infrastructure and services.
* As a local resident, I know how congested these roads already are, as well as the huge importance of the local greenbelt. I am worried about the impact upon surrounding roads, in terms of raised pollution and increased danger to children, as traffic spills over from the main roads.

Comment

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

Representation ID: 6744

Received: 10/03/2021

Respondent: Ms Tamsin Treasure-Jones

Representation Summary:

Additional site suggested- Land between Salts Mill Road and Victoria Street (Map provided)

I support this development of a brownfield site and the conversion of what is currently a building in poor repair. I do wonder whether it would also be possible to also do something with the Works Site across the road (see highlighted area on the image that I have uploaded with this comment). This Works site looks unused to me. It has a nice location and a development here could complement both the proposed SH1/H development and the Victoria Mills development already done opposite it. There may be a good reason why this site has not been considered, but I am adding it here just in case it has been overlooked.

Comment

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

Representation ID: 6751

Received: 10/03/2021

Respondent: Ms Tamsin Treasure-Jones

Representation Summary:

Additional site suggested.

Another brownfield area which could be considered is shown in the area I have highlighted on the attached map of the SH14/H development. I may not have marked it correctly, but there are a number of disused shops or buildings (one of which appears to be owned by the Council) on the A657 (Saltaire Road). Some clever development here could not only provide housing, but could also open up another access to the bottom of Crowgill Park, a recreation area that is (in my opinion) currently under-used due to its isolated feel.

Comment

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

Representation ID: 15444

Received: 19/03/2021

Respondent: Highways England (Yorkshire & North East Team)

Representation Summary:

It is not considered that locating development within the
settlements within Shipley, on their own, will have a severe impact on the capacity, operation and safety of the SRN, and this will be identified through the transport evidence base being prepared by the Council / the individual assessment of the transport implications
of the sites by the sites’ promoters.
However, the quantum of sites forms part of a wider cumulative impact within Shipley and the rest of the development aspirations within the Plan could severely impact the SRN, and this cumulative impact will need to be established by the Council and considered by Highways England.

Object

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

Representation ID: 16742

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Shipley Town Council

Representation Summary:

A number of brownfield sites are proposed in the Plan in Shipley area which is welcomed.

The Council should increase the number (and the affordability) of the proposed residential units on these brownfield sites and limit its proposals to only develop/adapt existing brownfield and town centre sites for housing.

It should also consider the following additional sites which we propose for housing:
● Shipley Hospital – which is due to close
● Land that housed the Oddfellows Pub on Otley Road
● Land that housed the Branch Pub on the corner of Otley – which is owned by the Council
● Wharf Street Carpark
● Land behind the Aldi Supermarket
● Underutilised car park on St Paul’s Road, Shipley
● Underutilised office space on St Paul’s Road, Shipley
● Unused car dealership/garage on Saltaire Rd/John Street opposite Wycliffe flats.
● Land next to the new Fire Station on Canal Road

The draft Plan should also take into account the availability of ‘retail and office space’ in and around Shipley town centre in light of likely changes to working arrangements post Covid-19 and reflecting PD rights changes.

This would prevent need for losing Shipley’s Green Belt and greenfield land