Strategic Land Assessment (Jan 2021)

Showing comments and forms 1 to 3 of 3

Object

Supporting Documents of the Draft Bradford District Local Plan - Preferred Options (Feb 2021)

Representation ID: 16351

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Newett Homes

Agent: Quod

Representation:

Site WI/003

It is rejected in the SLA due to potential landscape impacts, but this is without any detailed assessment or consideration of the Site (other than on its Green Belt impacts) that, as noted below, do not correspond with the previously submitted information.

Reference is made to the supporting site promotion document SPD relating to landscape & green belt impact, deliverability.

Newett Homes disagree with the SLA’s unsubstantiated comments that are anticipated to be lined to the GBOP SSA’s assessment.

Full text:

Dear Sir / Madam
I write regarding the Draft Bradford District Local Plan (Regulation 18) Consultation.

On behalf of Newett Homes, please find enclosed Representations to specific policies and elements of the documentation being consulted on.

Object

Supporting Documents of the Draft Bradford District Local Plan - Preferred Options (Feb 2021)

Representation ID: 18407

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: The Emerson Group

Agent: Mrs Gen Kenington

Representation:

The Strategic Land Assessment (SLA), which forms part of the Evidence Base for the Preferred Options Local Plan, and replaces the Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) rejects the site and refers to the reasons for the rejection being: Impact on ancient woodland; Landscape impact; and Access over railway tunnel.

Site SE/126 is included in the SLA within a list of sites considered ‘Unsuitable / Not available / Not achievable for residential development – Rejects’. This is identified on the SLA plan extract overleaf.

We object to the rejection of this site, and the SLA rejection reasons.

(See submission document for details)

Full text:

Please find attached a response to the Draft Local Plan Preferred Options in relation to rejected site SE/126 Hudson View, Wyke on behalf of our client The Emerson Group.

On behalf of our client we object to the rejection of site SE/126 in the Draft Local Plan.

The Draft Local Plan needs to identify additional sites in order to plan for and meet the housing requirement of 2,300 dwellings per annum in the District.

An uplift to the housing requirement applies to the South East Bradford sub area, which is an important part of the District and Regional City of Bradford. Applying the 35% uplift in South East Bradford using the same proportional distribution as the adopted Core Strategy results in the requirement for an additional 3,012 dwellings to be distributed to Bradford South East.

The allocation of Site SE/126 will contribute to this significant shortfall of housing sites.

Given the acute and intense need for housing, exceptional circumstances exist in order to deliver the housing requirement, including Green Belt releases. Site SE/126 is a logical site for Green Belt release with low to moderate potential impact, located adjacent to the urban edge, in a location where the Green Belt is drawn tightly against the existing settlement edge. The site is well related to the adjacent urban form, even more so given the development of Appleton Academy which abuts the north eastern edge. The site is therefore contained by the well-established boundary of the woodland to the south west, Appleton Academy to the north east and existing residential development off Hudson View to the south east.

The site is located in Flood Zone 1, at lowest risk of flooding.

Site SE/126 has been rejected on the grounds of impact on an Ancient woodland; landscape impact; and due to access over a railway tunnel. It is not considered that any of these reasons either individually or in combination justify the rejection of this site. Appropriate design and landscaping can address the potential landscape impact and provide a buffer adjacent to the Ancient woodland, and suitable engineered design can ensure the access off Hudson View over a railway tunnel is appropriate. We are confident these rejection reasons can be mitigated through design and engineering layout.

The site has no ownership constraints and is deliverable. Jones Homes, which is part of the Emerson Group, have entered into a legal agreement with the landowner and both are keen to see this site come forward for development.

The site has no known viability issues and could deliver the full S106 requirements and other planning obligations in the Draft Local Plan.

There are no environmental constraints associated with the site, and the development of this site would fit with the current urban structure of Wyke and the wider South East Bradford sub area.

The site constitutes a logical extension to the well-served and well-located south western edge of Wyke, abutting the existing settlement edge.

The allocation of this site is needed to contribute to the identified significant shortfall of housing allocations in the Bradford South East sub area due to the lack of uplift having been applied to the District’s urban centres, which logically includes the edge of urban centres.

There is a strong case for the inclusion of site SE/126 in the Bradford Local Plan.

Object

Supporting Documents of the Draft Bradford District Local Plan - Preferred Options (Feb 2021)

Representation ID: 28163

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Hallam Land Management

Agent: Mrs Gen Kenington

Representation:

There are significant differences with the SLA estimated yield compared with the Draft Local Plan proposed yield. Further clarification relating to these yield discrepancies would be welcomed.

A number of detailed comments relating to yields and site boundaries are made in our detailed submission.

Full text:

Dear Sir or Madam,

Please find the attached representation to the Preferred Options Draft Local Plan in relation to the Holme Wood South Urban Extension, prepared on behalf of Hallam Land Management. For the avoidance of doubt this submission is in support of the following preferred sites:

SE19/H
SE46/H
SE47/H
SE48/H
SE37/E

Please could you acknowledge receipt of the attachment.

I look forward to hearing from you,