Consultation Question 100

Object

Representation ID: 333

Received: 20/02/2021

Respondent: Mr Jeremy Meer

I am in agreement with proposals to protect the viability of Bingley town centre, but am absolutely not in favour of plans to develop on Greenfield sites or release Green Belt land to be developed on as part of the plan. These were designated Green Belt for a reason and the environment should remain protected. There are enough empty brownfield sites to develop and the plan should focus on these primarily. In addition, the wider infrastructure in Bingley is at capacity (schools, healthcare, roads & transport links), and therefore development should be limited without further improvements to that infrastructure.

Object

Representation ID: 345

Received: 21/02/2021

Respondent: Mrs Susan Huntington

2 of these sites - B14/H and B18/H are not only within the Green Belt , but also part of the area designated as "green infrastructure corridor." I refer you to Figure 6, and your heading 5.9.28, Green Infrastructure, Ecology, Open Space and Flood Risk where you comment "Gilstead Moor and Prince of Wales Park Local Wildlife Site provide a corridor running north/south between Bingley and Eldwick." Developing these sites will block the northern end of this corridor.

Curlews, lapwings, goldfinch, skylarks, red kites & deer are often seen in these fields or in the skies above.

Object

Representation ID: 506

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: 1205

Received: 10/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Andrew Wilkinson

B14/H Heights Lane west side, Eldwick
Dear Sir, i feel it is very important to preserve our greenbelt areas, to stop urban sprawl, over population of a village area, traffic congestion on the narrow roads and over subscription to the local schools. It's greenbelt for a reason. Many local people use this area for walks, its important for nature and clearing woodland goes against all green policies. Eldwick and Gilstead are now very overcrowded and the traffic is ridiculous. Locals feel very strong about this.

Object

Representation ID: 1670

Received: 15/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Ian Smithson

You suggest that we have good Health and School access. But all of these are full and impossible to get in to.

Object

Representation ID: 2167

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Rosalind Dawson

I object to the development of the Sty Lane green fields. Access is difficult, over a swing canal bridge, and the local roads are very narrow. Also, concerned about Whitley St and loss of employment space. Ensuring the Crosley Wood site is affordable housing is essential. I really don't understand though why all this development and building on fields is needed when there is so much undeveloped land in Bradford city centre and derelict mills. They should be turned into housing first, then dig up green fields. Also, the plan says Bingley is a principal town yet Bradford Council spends no money on it. The pool is mentioned as an amenity, but it's going to shut. Myrtle Park is desperate for a make-over, yet is getting none of the £6.2 million being spent on playgrounds. Any progress in Bingley is thanks to Bingley Town Council.

Object

Representation ID: 3881

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Jenny Woodward

The housing allocation is too high for Bingley - it can't be delivered without adversely affecting green space and the character of the town.
One option to consider - given the number of empty shops and possible changes to town centres post Covid - is reducing the size of the town centre and some of that becoming housing. E.g. Chapel Walk could become a residential street - the shops that are currently there could re-locate to the shopping centre which has enough empty units. Or the North end of the high street could be reduced down slightly to become quality housing.
There needs to be more green space allocated in the centre of the town e.g. Priesthorpe area. There is no park within 5 minutes walking distance for many residents.

Object

Representation ID: 3954

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Dr William Lakin

I strongly oppose the proposal for new housing in Bingley, firstly because of the scale of the proposal and secondly to ensure Bingley's environmental and social priorities. The planned target of 850 new homes is in excess of what Bingley's community needs and is inconsistent with the stated sentiment "it will ensure that the housing needs and aspirations (of the Bingley community) will be met". It represents a 10% increase on the present 8,328 homes. It is ludicrously excessive and quite disproportionate to local need. The proposal to develop green field and Green Belt sites is an offence against the principles of socially responsible environmental management. There are clearly many brownfield sites in Bradford that can and should be developed. Bingley has experienced massive housing development in the last 20 years and Bradford Council should be adopting strategies that ensure harmonious community development for the already massively increased population.

Object

Representation ID: 4673

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Judith Wragg

Building more houses in Bingley area but nothing in plan for better infrastructure for the area. We pay higher council taxes but get less from the Council as all money goes into Bradford or wasting it on schemes that do not benefit this community. More houses means more people fighting for the limited services in the town. Council spent no money on our parks or recreation areas. Build on green belt areas cause Council gets more money. Council use restrictions on building to get things in Bradford and not in areas where the big builds occur. Just wrong.

Support

Representation ID: 13036

Received: 19/03/2021

Respondent: Miss Sophie Li

I am emailing to show my support for the proposal of removing green belt from sites B14/H and B18/H on Heights Lane, Eldwick. I can see that the deadline for support ends on the 24th of March, however I am just wondering when the decision regarding the green belt status will be made and published. If so, how will it be published?

I am very much in support of removing the green belt as it will help to solve Bingley’s housing crisis and there will be plenty green belt remaining.

Comment

Representation ID: 15489

Received: 19/03/2021

Respondent: Highways England (Yorkshire & North East Team)

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

Comment

Representation ID: 16977

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Bingley Town Council

Bingley Town Council regrets the decision by Bradford Metropolitan District Council to make the Local Plan Consultation of such a short duration and its refusal to extend the deadline for comments. For such an important proposal, surely all residents should be given the chance to participate. To extend the deadline beyond the Local Elections in May and to take into account the gradual easing of lockdown measures would give those who do not or cannot use technology, to engage fully in the process. It seems to be discriminatory to take this route which will not allow many voters to express their views.
As Bradford Metropolitan District Council are aware, Bingley Town Council is in the process of developing its own Neighbourhood Plan and expects to hold its own Regulation 14 and Regulation 16 consultation and referendum before the end of 2021.
There are aspects of the proposed options for housing development which contradict the policies and objectives of the Bingley Town Council Draft Neighbourhood Plan, which has been publicly available and shared with Iain Cunningham, Senior Planning Officer at Bradford Metropolitan District Council A response from Iain Cunningham re the necessity or not of an S.E.A. is awaited.

Object

Representation ID: 16978

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Bingley Town Council

Some sites which have been allocated for housing development lie within the Green Belt, namely:
•B/13 HC Greenhill Barn - major potential impact
•B14/H Heights Lane, Eldwick - moderate potential impact
•B18/H Land west of Heights Lane - major potential impact
•CO1/H Marchcote Lane -moderate potential impact
•SH/6 H Bankfield Farm (this lies within the Cottingley Rural Ward) – major potential impact
•SH5/H Bingley Road, Nab Wood -major potential impact
The five purposes of the Green Belt are:
1.To check unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas
2.Prevent neighbouring towns merging
3.Assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment
4.Preserve setting and special character of historic towns
5.Assist in urban regeneration by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land.
Bingley Town Council Draft Neighbourhood Plan - Chapter Natural Environment contains specific policies which seek to preserve and uphold National Green Belt policies and to preserve the environment for the benefit of all.
a)NE1 Green Belt
b)NE2 Protecting and enhancing locally important habitats
c)NE3 Landscape Character
d)NE 5 Green Infrastructure
It is the view of the Town Council that for each of the sites above, the constraints and development considerations which are highlighted in the Bradford Local Plan far outweigh the benefits in terms of housing numbers. These proposed developments will have a severe impact on the natural environment and increase pressure on road networks and infrastructure such as housing, education and health.

Comment

Representation ID: 16989

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Bingley Town Council

There are specific needs in Bingley for types and size of housing as well as for affordable and social housing and BMDC are urged to study the data contained in the Housing Needs assessment, to consult with Bingley Town Council and to put this data at the heart of the housing allocations for Bingley.

Object

Representation ID: 16990

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Bingley Town Council

The encroachment on the Green Belt directly contradicts National and Local Green Belt policies and these proposals do not meet the exception criteria. Public Health England document ‘Improving Access to Greenspace’ 2020 states, ‘local authorities play a vital role in improving, maintaining and protecting existing Greenspace.’ The National Planning Policy Framework is clear that Greenbelt boundaries should only be altered where exceptional circumstances are fully justified and evidenced. When reviewing Greenbelt boundaries, ‘the need to promote sustainable patterns of development should be taken into account’ (Para. 138) Specific areas of concern include the adverse impact on habitat, woodland, water quality and flood risk, and the lack of accessibility to public transport.

Object

Representation ID: 16991

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Bingley Town Council

Each of the proposed developments noted above will have an adverse impact, not only on the immediate area but on the whole of Bingley and Cottingley. It is essential that Bradford Metropolitan District Council meets its responsibilities to regenerate brownfield sites, before utilising Green Belt land.

Object

Representation ID: 18489

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Cllr David Hesletine

•No exceptional circumstances demonstrated for the release of Green Belt land in Bingley.
•Developments will have service impact on the natural environment, road network and local infrastructure.
•Education and GP services are already stretch with current householders unable to access their nearest facility.
•Topography of the area leads to car use to access basic services. Most trips even to local shops will see residents using their cars.
•No guarantee of continuing bus services as operated on a commercial basis and could be terminated at any time.
•With the significant number of concerns relating to these sites and no special circumstances for Green Belt release, there can be no argument for the inclusion of these sites. There is no exception need shown that outweighs the harm.