Object

Representation ID: 11014

Received: 14/03/2021

Respondent: Iain Cotterill

Road access wasn't allowed onto Heights Lane when the estate was built 1985 as the Council didn't want extra traffic on Heights Lane.

Creating more traffic.

Residents promenade along Heights Lane to connect with footpaths to Micklethwaite and beyond.

Loss of views from the Prince of Wales park, Local residents enjoy looking at these flower meadows, both from the park and from Heights Lane.

Development would ruin/destroy habitat for rare hedgehogs.

Infrastructure is insufficient.

Sewage spews out of drain covers frequently.

A foot way with curb needs incorporating for pedestrians negotiating the present road traffic.

The roundabout is difficult to cross at peak rush hour.

Villagers do not want additional traffic when Britain is becoming carbon neutral.

Schools/doctors are overloaded.

I want Heights Lane to remain rural to access local footpaths.

Develop disused farmland such as the long derelict fields outside Bingley Grammar School.

Keep green spaces for future generations.

Object

Representation ID: 11247

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Julie Ramsden

B14/H and BH18/H Land adjoining Prince of Wales Park. This is green space & helps distinguish Bingley from Eldwick. I object to these sites being developed , to prevent urban sprawl and to prevent additional traffic on a busy and narrow local road.

Object

Representation ID: 11296

Received: 17/03/2021

Respondent: Mr & Mrs T Thomas

Number of people: 2

Significant increase on traffic volumes.

Development of 40 houses will generate not only approximately 80 more cars, but also on-line delivery vans, refuse collection trucks, trade vehicles etc

Heights Lane is a narrow country lane with no pavements.

It is dangerous for many walkers, cyclists and horse riders, using the Lane, majority of car drivers appear to be oblivious to the dangers and drive at inappropriate speeds.

Traffic through the village has increased dramatically in recent years, more drivers use the roads to avoid major routes.

The roundabout at the top of Park Road has already to be approached with caution. Traffic approaching the roundabout from Park Road is not visible from Warren Lane until they are on the roundabout. Traffic approaching from Heights Lane is not visible to those approaching the roundabout from Otley Road.

Accidents just waiting to happen!

The potential for additional levels of pollution, which all this additional traffic will create should be a huge consideration.

Object

Representation ID: 11309

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mark & Christine Turner

Number of people: 2

BI4/H & BI8/H - Heights Lane, Bingley

We strongly wish to object to the development plan for the first two fields in Heights Lane (references above). We have concerns about the impact the development would have on the ecology of this beautiful area and its extreme proximity to the tranquility of the Prince Of Wales Park . The first field is visible from the park and not only would the development spoil the view but it would also affect the wild life nearby .

Comment

Representation ID: 11374

Received: 17/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Norma Royston

I always thought Green Belt land was for farming and wildlife.

The lanes are too narrow for extra traffic, the roundabout too small, the school already overcrowded and the doctors lists.
There is a drainage overload and flooding in gardens and fields.

I am sure alternative sites could be found and let our wildlife, birds and animals stay where they should be and continue to bring such pleasure to people when they are out walking, running etc.

Object

Representation ID: 11752

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Carol Woodhead

I have walked our dogs in the beautiful Prince of Wales Park for many years and enjoyed the views and surrounding open countryside. The place is a haven for wildlife and enjoyed by many people.

Green Belt in the past was always looked on as being “untouchable” and I feel that there must be many brownfield sites that could be used to preserve this countryside.

I also have grave concerns concerning access on Heights Lane, which is a narrow and winding road and not conducive to an increase in traffic flow. The mini roundabout at the bottom of Heights Lane is always busy and I feel strongly that additional traffic could have an adverse effect here.

I further doubt whether Eldwick and its facilities, and in particular the First School, could cope with the additional families that the development would create.

Object

Representation ID: 11846

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Mr KWG Redmond

Site designated Green Belt, intended to prevent urban sprawl.

Development will erode/destroy the boundary of Eldwick.

No evidence for "exceptional circumstances" to justify proposal.

Loss of open gateway to the countryside.

Proposal not "sound" as required by NPPF.

Alternative non Green Belt sites are available.

Development will generate considerable traffic on a lane with poor visibility and bends, no pavements and limited width. The health and safety of pedestrians and road users will be at risk. Additional traffic will add to danger and pollution at roundabout.

Development will not meet environmental objective of protecting and enhancing the environment/valued landscapes.

Increase of pluvial flooding.

Heights Lane floods, drains are overloaded.

Damage to Prince of Wales Park, housing will inhibit and reduce the environment supporting wildlife.

Loss of carbon dioxide production, (asset for community) and the wealth of bio-diversity.

The WYCA Review, may result in further non-Green Belt land becoming available.

New ways of working/living in the "post-Covid" world and infrastructure developments in the wider city, will mean more options will open up.

Not required for house building targets.

Object

Representation ID: 11887

Received: 20/03/2021

Respondent: Annabel Holt

Eldwick at Heights Lane does not need housing , our schools , doctors and dentists are over subscribed . Their is no footpath nor room for one on an already dangerous stretch of country road where car users drive too fast and without care.

The land houses a huge amount of wildlife inc owls and hares both protected , any change to their habitat would be seen as wildlife crime.

Object

Representation ID: 11889

Received: 20/03/2021

Respondent: Anne Lockwood

I wish to object to the above plans to build on Heights Lane, Eldwick.

The land is designated as a greenbelt to prevent urban sprawl.

Development of these fields will produce considerable traffic on this country lane with no footpaths. How will this development meet the overarching environmental objective of protecting and enhancing valued landscapes?

Furthermore developing these fields so close to the Prince of Wales Park will will inhibit and reduce the environment that supports local wildlife.

Object

Representation ID: 11891

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Mr J Smith

Development will erode/destroy the boundary of Eldwick.

No evidence for "exceptional circumstances" to justify proposal.

Loss of open gateway to the countryside.

Proposal not "sound" as required by NPPF.

Alternative non Green Belt sites are available.

Development will generate considerable traffic on a lane with poor visibility and bends, no pavements and limited width. The health and safety of pedestrians and road users will be at risk. Additional traffic will add to danger and pollution at roundabout.

Development will not meet environmental objective of protecting and enhancing the environment/valued landscapes.

Increase of pluvial flooding.

Heights Lane floods, drains are overloaded.

Damage to Prince of Wales Park, housing will inhibit and reduce the environment supporting wildlife.

Loss of carbon dioxide production, (asset for community) and the wealth of bio-diversity.

The WYCA Review, may result in further non-Green Belt land becoming available.

New ways of working/living in the "post-Covid" world and infrastructure developments in the wider city, will mean more options will open up.

Not required for house building targets.

Object

Representation ID: 11893

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs C Redmond

Site designated Green Belt, intended to prevent urban sprawl.

Development will erode/destroy the boundary of Eldwick.

No evidence for "exceptional circumstances" to justify proposal.

Loss of open gateway to the countryside.

Proposal not "sound" as required by NPPF.

Alternative non Green Belt sites are available.

Development will generate considerable traffic on a lane with poor visibility and bends, no pavements and limited width. The health and safety of pedestrians and road users will be at risk. Additional traffic will add to danger and pollution at roundabout.

Development will not meet environmental objective of protecting and enhancing the environment/valued landscapes.

Increase of pluvial flooding.

Heights Lane floods, drains are overloaded.

Damage to Prince of Wales Park, housing will inhibit and reduce the environment supporting wildlife.

Loss of carbon dioxide production, (asset for community) and the wealth of bio-diversity.

The WYCA Review, may result in further non-Green Belt land becoming available.

New ways of working/living in the "post-Covid" world and infrastructure developments in the wider city, will mean more options will open up.

Not required for house building targets.

Object

Representation ID: 11895

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Mr M Smith

Site designated Green Belt, intended to prevent urban sprawl.

Development will erode/destroy the boundary of Eldwick.

No evidence for "exceptional circumstances" to justify proposal.

Loss of open gateway to the countryside.

Proposal not "sound" as required by NPPF.

Alternative non Green Belt sites are available.

Development will generate considerable traffic on a lane with poor visibility and bends, no pavements and limited width. The health and safety of pedestrians and road users will be at risk. Additional traffic will add to danger and pollution at roundabout.

Development will not meet environmental objective of protecting and enhancing the environment/valued landscapes.

Increase of pluvial flooding.

Heights Lane floods, drains are overloaded.

Damage to Prince of Wales Park, housing will inhibit and reduce the environment supporting wildlife.

Loss of carbon dioxide production, (asset for community) and the wealth of bio-diversity.

The WYCA Review, may result in further non-Green Belt land becoming available.

New ways of working/living in the "post-Covid" world and infrastructure developments in the wider city, will mean more options will open up.

Not required for house building targets.

Object

Representation ID: 11935

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs J M Illingworth

1. Green Belt Exceptional Circumstances
2. Brownfield sites are available which should be used before Green Belt
3. the council is part of the Leeds City Region LEP and West Yorkshire Combined Authority. through co-operation and new Mayoral powers it is reasonable that more brownfield sites will become available
4. Highway safety and unsuitable access- Heights Lane is not suitable for additional traffic resulting from the proposals
5. Highway safety impact- junction of Heights Lane and Otley
6. The need to protect open space and landscapes
7. impact on Prince of Wales Park- habitats and biodiversity
8. The proposals should be rejected

Object

Representation ID: 11980

Received: 20/03/2021

Respondent: Jane Stableford

Object to plans to remove fields BI4/H or BI8/H from the Green Belt.

Land is designated as Green Belt to prevent urban sprawl. What are the “exceptional circumstances” why the field have to be removed from the Green Belt? Many alternative (non-Green Belt) sites suitable for development in the Bingley area which have not been taken into consideration to meet house building needs.

Development will generate considerable traffic on a lane with poor visibility, no pavements and limited width, and generate considerable risk to the lives and health of pedestrians and motorists.

Proposed development will not meet the overarching environmental objective of protecting or enhancing the environment including valued landscapes.

Development will increase pollution in the area. Development close to Prince of Wales Park will inhibit and reduce the environment that supports local wildlife.

Infrastructure is at capacity with oversubscribed schools and GP surgeries. Expansion will spoil the village character.

Object

Representation ID: 12149

Received: 21/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Daniel Greenwood

Land designated as Green Belt to prevent urban sprawl. Council have not produced evidence to show “exceptional circumstances” why the fields have to be removed from Green Belt.

Proposal is not “sound”. Alternative (non-Green Belt) sites suitable for development in the Bingley area have not been taken into consideration.

Will generate considerable traffic on lane with poor visibility, limited width pavements thus generating considerable risks to lives/health of pedestrians/motorists. Increased numbers of vehicles will generate considerable standing traffic in the surrounding area.

Will not meet overarching environmental objective of protecting/enhancing the environment including valued landscapes.

Will increase pollution as well as generate pluvial flooding. Development close to Prince of Wales Park will inhibit and reduce the environment that supports local wildlife.

West Yorkshire Combined Authority Review likely to result in further parcels of (non-Green Belt) land becoming available. No need to remove the fields from Green Belt to meet targets.

Object

Representation ID: 12375

Received: 21/03/2021

Respondent: Alison Reid

Land designated Green Belt to prevent urban sprawl.
No evidence to show that there are “exceptional circumstances” for using Green Belt.
Fields should remain Green Belt.
The Council’s proposal is not “sound” as per requirements of the NPPF.
Many alternative sites (non-Green Belt) sites suitable for development which have not been taken into consideration.
Development will generate considerable traffic on a lane with poor visibility, no pavements and limited width creating risks to the lives/health .
Increased vehicles will generate considerable standing traffic on Heights Lane.
The development will not meet the overarching environmental objective of protecting or enhancing the environment including valued landscapes.

Cause increased pollution and generate pluvial flooding.

Development will inhibit/reduce the environment that supports local wildlife.
The West Yorkshire Combined Authority Review, is likely to result in further parcels of (non-Green Belt) land becoming available in the near future for development.
No need to remove the fields from the Green Belt to meet house building targets.

Object

Representation ID: 12501

Received: 19/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Tanif Catherine Hussain

I wish to object about the proposed plan to build houses at 2 sites near Heights Lane on B14/H and B18/H.

This is GREENBELT and it will ruin the village. Eldwick has already had massive housing developments built on every spare piece of land already! The village cannot take anymore traffic and the local schools cannot take anymore further children.
This will have a major impact on wildlife, pollution, congestion, surrounding house prices, I could go on. I believe there are other brownfield sites that can be built on, we must not build on GREENBELT.

Support

Representation ID: 13033

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.

Object

Representation ID: 13066

Received: 20/03/2021

Respondent: Sarah Brindle

Appear to be no exceptional circumstances or justification for removal green belt land.
The site is performing an important function as Green belt, conserving natural habitat and safeguarding the countryside..
There are brownfield sites in the Bingley area, removal of this green belt is not justified.
Release of green belt would not be sound.
Impact in wildlife - deer, fox, pheasant, deer and rabbit.
The unsuitability (narrowness, hilly and bends) of Heights Lane for any increased traffic, cyclists and walkers would have safety implications. There is no footpath or cycleway due to the narrowness of the road. Any development accessing from Heights Lane would add to the danger. The development should be refused on these grounds alone.
There are many alternative (brownfield) sites in the Bingley area for housing: nearer schools (just off the roundabout at Crossflatts opposite B&M), doctors (Kingsway Bingley) and on Bradford Road (old police station site).

Object

Representation ID: 13968

Received: 21/03/2021

Respondent: Haley Bevan

Object to development references BI4/H & BI8/H for the following reasons:

Green Belt/Loss of Pasture – do not consider removal of fields from the Green Belt fall into “exceptional circumstances” as there are several brownfield sites in/around Bingley. More sites will become available as a result of changes made to commercial properties since the pandemic. Removal of pasture land from Green Belt has a dramatic effect on local farming.

Drainage Issues – overpopulation of village has put pressure on frail infrastructure causing flooding from overflowing land and road drains. More houses would only add to the problem.

Increased Traffic – Heights Lane is one of the narrowest entries into the village. No footpaths. Little room for2 cars and pedestrians to pass each other safely.

SSSI Proximity – fields are within 2.5km buffer. Should be maintained to preserve habitats for moorland mammals and birds.

Object

Representation ID: 13995

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Richard Hurdman

1. No evidence hat there are “exceptional circumstances” to remove Green Belt
2. The proposal is not “sound” as there are many alternative (non-Green Belt) sites suitable for development in Bingley which are not taken into consideration to meet housing targets.
3. Impact on local highway network and safety- additional traffic on a lane with poor visibility, no pavements and limited width and considerable risks to pedestrians and motorists. Impact of additional traffic on on Heights Lane.
4. The proposed development will not meet the environmental objective of protecting or enhancing the environment including valued landscapes.
5. Increase in pollution and pluvial flooding. Development close to Prince of Wales Park impact on local environment and wildlife
6. he West Yorkshire Combined Authority Review. likely to result in further non-Green Belt land becoming available. There is no need to remove the fields from the Green Belt to meet house building targets.

Object

Representation ID: 14177

Received: 21/03/2021

Respondent: Victoria Leach

Object against proposed development on Heights Lane, Eldwick (refs: BI4/H & BI8/H)

Proposed location is Green belt. Further areas of brownfield land will become available due Bradford being part of West Yorkshire Combined Authority reviewed. No need to build on Green Belt land.

Access is a narrow country land with no pavements, which opens up onto a busy and often dangerous roundabout.

Residents are opposed to development. Will have detrimental effect on residents, the village, nature and the environment, and increase noise and transport.

Infrastructure cannot cope. Schools are oversubscribed and GP surgeries cannot cope.

Council has failed to show that there are ‘exceptional circumstances’ as to why development should be allowed on Green B. Without providing this information they should stay as Green Belt land.

Object

Representation ID: 14316

Received: 20/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Tom Duxbury

I object to the proposed housing development in Eldwick B18/H
- Impact of Eldwick’s historical, cultural and environmental importance
- Erasing the unique identity of Airedale by an increase of mass-housing will de-value the culture of this region.
- Impact on returning wildlife - red kite / palmate newt to the stoat returning in number, deer, owls, pheasant and many species of tree.
- Recent mass-developments (East Morton, Micklethwaite, Menston, Guiseley and Eldwick village. - Concerns about impact on services / a new primary school / widening of roads / extra trains?

Object

Representation ID: 14927

Received: 21/03/2021

Respondent: Janice Reid

Land is designated as Green Belt to prevent urban sprawl.
No evidence to show that there are “exceptional circumstances” to remove from Green Belt.
The proposal is not “sound” as per requirements of NPPF.
There are alternative (non-Green Belt) sites suitable for development in the Bingley area.
Increased traffic on a lane with poor visibility, no pavements and limited width and thus generate considerable risks to the lives and health of pedestrians and motorists. Increased considerable standing traffic on Heights Lane.
The development will not meet the overarching environmental objective of protecting or enhancing the environment including valued landscapes.
The development will increase pollution in the area as well as generate pluvial flooding . Development close to the Prince of Wales Park will inhibit and reduce the environment that supports local wildlife including deer, birds and bats.
Bradford Council is part of the WYCA Review. This is likely to result in further parcels of (non-Green Belt) land becoming available in the near future for development.

Object

Representation ID: 15487

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Claire Healey

Strongly object to plans to remove fields BI4/H & BI8/H in Eldwick from the Green Belt. Would have a massive, negative impact on the local area including:

1) The environment, wildlife & landscape - isn't this what the Green Belt status is supposed to protect?
2) Traffic & pollution - Eldwick is already becoming an extremely busy village with a lot of traffic. The road infrastructure would not cope with the extra traffic
3) Flooding to existing local house has been a big area of concern
4) Education - The school is already over-subscribed. Where would the extra children go to school?
5) Other services such as doctors would be impacted
6) Why not build on other non-green belt sites in the Bingley area to meet building targets?

Do not want to see Eldwick lose its beautiful Green Belt land to housing.

Object

Representation ID: 15702

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Rachel C Allen

The properties are situated in the Green Belt. Development would have a major potential for urban sprawl.
No exceptional circumstances.

There are alternative non Green Belt sites suitable within the Bingley area. Including the old police station/law courts on Bingley Main Street, the Old Church at Sandbeds, the land opposite Magnet at Crossflatts and the overflow car park area presently occupied by UKAR.

The Council's Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment is incomplete and not fit for purpose.
Traffic and Safety Issues


The proposed development B14/H and B18/H will not meet the overarching environmental objective of protecting or enhancing the environment including valued landscapes.

The proposed fields are a sensitive site due to their proximity to the woodland in Prince of Wales Park and the moorland at Rombalds Moor, only 2.5kms away.
Impact on wildlife and birdlife.
Development would cause light pollution, noise disturbance and would undoubtedly threaten wildlife with the introduction of domestic cats and dogs in the area.

B14/H and B18/H retains water and allows for slow drainage of the site. Development of the sites will increase pluvial flooding and will negatively impact the already stressed drainage systems

Employment assets can be used for residential conversion. WYCA will identify lots of alternative sites.

Proposals has all the appearances of them being included to "make up the numbers"

Object

Representation ID: 16101

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Margaret Reilly

1. Access via Heights Lane is unsuitable for the extra traffic 39 additional houses would bring, which has in the past, been judged unsuitable for access to developments. Impact on highway safety.

2. Detrimental Impact on Prince of Wales park, which is Historic Grade 2 listed.

3. climate change the fields protect Eldwick and lower down the valley Bingley from the risk of flooding, by absorbing huge amounts of rainfall and absorb enormous amounts of carbon and CO2 helping us on the way to achieving a low or zero emissions target

4. The fields form part of a green corridor between the moors at either side and the park. Impact on habitat networks using this green corridor and local ecology.

Object

Representation ID: 16115

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Glyn and Cathy Levis

Number of people: 2

1. All sites are served by inadequate road access. The inclusion of these sites will bring additional traffic to an already overcrowded road system in the Aire Valley.

2. None of these proposed sites are on public transport routes, which will lead to an increase in road traffic in all areas and is contrary to sustainability policies

3. None of the developments are within 15 minutes walk of a railway station or town centre, in contravention of the local authority sustainability policies

4. Flooding, all these sites are wet sites or contain standing water.

5. Safety – All sites will exit onto narrow lanes or a busy mini roundabout in the case of the Heights Lane developments

6. In the case of the B13/H, B14/H and B18/H, these sites encroach onto Green belt land .

7. Insufficient existing public services. Particularly with regard to B14/H and B18H, Eldwick Primary school is full.

Object

Representation ID: 16363

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Richard Armitstead

The proposed development will put an extra 80 vehicles onto a roundabout that is already substandard and has a high accident/near-miss record.

Additional traffic coming into Eldwick from Heights Lane will increase air pollution near the roundabout, with longer queues and waiting times for all traffic.

For access to the local bus-stops a pavement would be needed in Heights Lane. This would reduce the width of the road and the ease and safety of vehicle access to the new properties.

In heavy rainstorms, the existing drainage on Otley Road is already inadequate and results in several inches of flooding near the roundabout. This will obviously worsen if there is additional surface water coming from Heights Lane.

It is unacceptable to build on green-belt land when there is an abundance of brown-field sites in Bradford that should be developed first.

Object

Representation ID: 16626

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Alan Woodhead

Loss of views.

Impact on beautiful Prince of Wales Park and surrounding countryside.

The wildlife should be left undisturbed, these areas, are a haven for deer, bats, badgers etc.

Green Belt in the past was always looked on as being "untouchable".
There must be many brownfield sites that could be used to preserve this countryside.
issue of access on Heights Lane which is not conductive to an increase in traffic flow. The roads date back hundreds of years and not designed for the volume of modern traffic, which the proposed development would increase.
The mini roundabout is always busy and additional traffic could have and adverse effect here.
Inadequate facilities, in particular the First School.

The land is a prime building plot and the houses, which would be built, would fetch a premium price. Should put conservation above financial gain.
Surely an alternative more suitable site could be found.