Consultation Question 99

Object

Representation ID: 466

Received: 25/02/2021

Respondent: Mr Neil Collins

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

Representation ID: 820

Received: 06/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Paula Taylor

Greenbelt needs to be protected we have ancient trees and wildlife on those sites.
We must protect our wild spaces and greenbelt sites

Object

Representation ID: 4426

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Lee Miller

The proposed plans would dramatically impact on the green belt and endanger wildlife in the area. Bats, red kites, owls are often seen in the area. The development would destroy the view of the valley and be a significant encroachment towards sites of scientific interest. The infrastructure is not in place the road leading to site is already very busy at school times and outside and another 60/70 cars would only increase traffic and be a danger. Other infrastructure is already under pressure such as schools, roads, doctors etc.The site isnt suitable due to drainage and run off could damage the area around the dam. There are numerous other brown sites in Baildon that could take 40 dwellings. This plot would seriously affect the local, green belt that is so precious in many ways.

Object

Representation ID: 6794

Received: 20/03/2021

Respondent: Pennythorn Limited

Summary provided by Local Plan Team
Flawed green belt methodology with the failure to allocate SLA site BA/004 as a preferred option housing site. Further information provided in the attachment

Comment

Representation ID: 12917

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Bradford Local Access Forum (Chair) BHS Access Officer. Chair WHOA.

The other parcel does not feature at present but would provide a development site, solve several problems and I know is backed by the present tenant. That is the land over which Footpath Baildon 64 runs from Esholt Lane to Otley Road.
It would site development next to the fuel station. It is unusable by the tenant, due to fly grazing and would make a good Multiuser link, it would also further support the opening of a route from a Buck Lane ( Ancient Highway/ Bridleway( Baildon 85/Bradford North 95) which is a proposed future intention.

Comment

Representation ID: 15446

Received: 19/03/2021

Respondent: Highways England (Yorkshire & North East Team)

It is not considered that locating development within the
settlements within Baildon, 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 Baildon 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.

Support

Representation ID: 16761

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Robbie Feather

Agent: ID Planning

The site appraisal provides a thorough assessment of the site and concludes that there are no significant constraints to development.
We support the development of the site which would comprise a sustainable extension to Baildon, in a highly accessible location.

These representations are accompanied by a Vision document which demonstrates that the proposed development of the site could deliver up to 60 dwellings in a landscape framework. There are no physical or technical development constraints and the site is suitable, deliverable and available.

The vision document has been informed by a suite of technical reports and assessments which conclude that there are no technical or other constraints that prevent development.

The site allocation plan for BA5/H needs to be amended to reflect the land registry plan enclosed which demonstrates the site adjoins the highway and benefits from direct access from Meadowside Road.

Object

Representation ID: 24905

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Bradford District Ward Councillor (Conservative)

Noted that, in addition to the unacceptably heavy weighting in Baildon to the use of Green Belt sites, there are no brownfield sites considered.

Within the time frame of the Local Plan there is one such ‘previously developed’ site omitted from consideration. It is not currently available, but will be, in all probability, before 2023 target date for submission/adoption of the Plan.

Ian Clough Hall (will become ‘previously developed’ on demolition) - is scheduled for demolition, with large part of the site (approximately 0.4ha, excepting the lower level car park area).

Potential for approximately 40 units on site of 0.4ha (1.0 acre). Would be an achievable target on the relevant portion of the site footprint.

Comment

Representation ID: 25316

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Jonathan Gill

Agent: ID Planning

Support the site allocation BA2/H – represents a logical and sustainable location for residential development due to its association with the existing built form of Baildon. Proposed allocation wraps around the south and west edges of Oakleigh House.

Inclusion of the western part of the garden to Oakleigh House as part of the allocation would represent a natural and logical extension to BA2/H. Could help to ensure a stronger boundary to the Green Belt to the north.

Oakleigh House and its garden curtilage is not considered to make a strong contribution to any of the five Green Belt purposes and any contribution would be further reduced through the future delivery of BA2/H.

Requested that the plot at Oakleigh House, West Lane, Baildon is included as part of the residential allocation as an extension to proposed allocation BA2/H (0.38ha).

Object

Representation ID: 25456

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Fleur Waugh

Regarding the Local Plan for Bradford I would like to object to the Plans being made for the building of housing in Baildon. There are too many houses for the road network as it is so additional housing with cause greater congestion, noise pollution and more.

In particular, the plan for any residential housing on the land below Stubbings Road is something that we strongly object to. The previous application for 14 houses was objected to by over 100 residents and many associations such as The Woodland Trust and World Heritage as the location is of nature importance and unfit for development. Reference to all objections made should be sought by the Council for clarity on this.

Any housing in this area should not be a consideration and we are very concerned that this is being.

I have more to add and forward a second email later today.