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

Object

Representation ID: 7247

Received: 10/03/2021

Respondent: David Hill LLP

•The landowners are keen to develop the site (HR/001) and confirm that it is available.
•Under the revised methodology for calculating the housing requirement Bradford will need to provide more housing than shown in the draft plan. This site could contribute to this.
•Previous scheme submitted to show access is feasible and an illustrative layout to show how the open space to the south of the site could be linked to the park to the west. The site would be deliverable if allocated.

Object

Representation ID: 7410

Received: 10/03/2021

Respondent: David Hill LLP

KY/151 - Long Lee Lane
•The landowners are keen to progress with developing the site and confirm that it is available.
•Under the revised methodology for calculating the housing requirement Bradford will need to provide more housing than shown in the draft plan. This site could contribute to this and it is noted it is identified as an ‘Alternative’. The site will not require Green Belt land to be released.
•It is noted that the site is described as not being achievable due to topography and landscape impact. Previous scheme submitted to show access is feasible and an illustrative layout to show how housing could be developed. It shows that topography will not prevent development. A Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment for the site has assessed the landscape impact of the site. The site would be deliverable if allocated.

Object

Representation ID: 7483

Received: 10/03/2021

Respondent: David Hill LLP

•Objection to the failure to allocate site EM/004 - Street lane, East Morton
•The landowners are keen to progress with developing the site and confirm that it is available.
•Under the revised methodology for calculating the housing requirement Bradford will need to provide more housing than shown in the draft plan. This site could contribute to this and it is noted it is identified as an ‘Alternative’.
•It is noted in the SHLAA that the site is not suitable due to access and impact on conservation area. However, a design has been submitted which shows that access to the site is achievable and would not prevent delivery of the site. We would confirm that any proposed development would be designed with the setting of the conservation area as a primary consideration.