Draft Bradford District Local Plan - Preferred Options (Regulation 18) February 2021

Support

Representation ID: 13317

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mitre Residential LPP

Agent: DPP Planning

We support the allocation QB6/H but also object as we consider that the allocation should be extended to include the adjacent field as part of the Wider Site. i.e the full SHLAA site QB/011

Object

Representation ID: 13318

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mitre Residential LPP

Agent: DPP Planning

We support the allocation QB6/H but also object as we consider that the allocation should be extended to include the adjacent field as part of the Wider Site. i.e the full SHLAA site QB/011

Object

Representation ID: 13319

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mitre Residential LPP

Agent: DPP Planning

Whilst it is acknowledged that Policy SP4 primarily relates to transport and the related infrastructure, it is argued that ‘Locations for Development’ should not solely dictated by this. Just as important is the provision of other infrastructure such as drainage, sewage, and energy , and therefore priority to sites with this infrastructure in place should be given over those without. As drafted, we object to this policy.

Object

Representation ID: 13320

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mitre Residential LPP

Agent: DPP Planning

In the context of the acute and intense need for housing, it is considered that Policy SP5 is not fit for purpose and the Landowner objects to the proposed policy as it does not allocate enough housing to meet the needs of the District and the 35% uplift. We suggest that additional sites should be released from the Green Belt and allocated for housing and believe that this can be done without materially harming any of the five purposes of the Green Belt.

Object

Representation ID: 13321

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mitre Residential LPP

Agent: DPP Planning

Housing Need and Requirement

It is considered that Policy SP8 is not fit for purpose and is unsound. We object to the proposed policy as it does not include the 35% uplift in housing need set nationally. There is no reason why the housing requirement provided by the standard methodology cannot be met.

Object

Representation ID: 30056

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mitre Residential LPP

Agent: DPP Planning

Housing Distribution - Bradford City Centre & Queensbury

There is no reason why the housing requirement provided by the standard methodology cannot be met and this housing requirement should be distributed appropriately in accordance with the settlement hierarchy expect for Bradford City Centre.

We object to the housing distribution set out in Policy SP8 in respect of Bradford City Centre and suggest that the current provision should be decreased and dispersed across the District.