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

Comment

Representation ID: 13193

Received: 20/03/2021

Respondent: Silsden Town Council

See attachment for comments on specific paragraphs of the Local Area Strategy.

Object

Representation ID: 13194

Received: 20/03/2021

Respondent: Silsden Town Council

North Dene Rd not suitable, the only access is via an unadopted Rd.
The access to this site is un-adopted roads which are in extremely poor condition. Spencer Avenue is subsiding and cannot withstand any additional vehicular traffic. Sackville Road is riddled with deep potholes and Hillcrest Avenue particularly near the Co-op store is in a terrible state.
This particular site is another water logged field, covered in springs and culverts.

Object

Representation ID: 13195

Received: 20/03/2021

Respondent: Silsden Town Council

Strongly oppose building on this Greenfield site. The landscape impact of building on this site would be detrimental to the town and affect the rural aspect of Brown Bank Lane. The South Pennine Moors (Phase 2) SPA and SAC (and SSSI) are located around 2km to the east, placing this site within the 2.5km buffer zone.

Comment

Representation ID: 13197

Received: 20/03/2021

Respondent: Silsden Town Council

The inspector in the public enquiry ruled this site out for development because the Elliott St Keighley Rd junction was not capable of safely dealing with the increase in traffic this site would create. Impact on the Leeds Liverpool Canal Conservation Area.

Comment

Representation ID: 13198

Received: 20/03/2021

Respondent: Silsden Town Council

Concerns about the impact on the highway infrastructure as Keighley Road is already heavily congested.

Comment

Representation ID: 13199

Received: 20/03/2021

Respondent: Silsden Town Council

Would like to see a mix of ‘affordable’ housing to include a substantial amount of shared ownership with suitable starter homes to enable younger people to be able to get on the property ladder.
Concerns about the impact on the highway infrastructure as Keighley Road is already heavily congested.
Much closer for the railway station but safe access to it still remains a problem.

Comment

Representation ID: 13200

Received: 20/03/2021

Respondent: Silsden Town Council

SI6/H and SI7/H Aireview and Hothfield School Sites
Due to these two sites location close to Town Centre and Bus routes, should be allocated specifically for sheltered housing developments.

Comment

Representation ID: 13201

Received: 20/03/2021

Respondent: Silsden Town Council

SI6/H and SI7/H Aireview and Hothfield School Sites
Due to these two sites location close to Town Centre and Bus routes, should be allocated specifically for sheltered housing developments.
S17/H If this area were to be used for housing , this would mean that Silsden would lose it’s only swimming pool, where almost all the towns’ children are currently taught to swim

Object

Representation ID: 13202

Received: 20/03/2021

Respondent: Silsden Town Council

The planning application for 7 houses on this site has been superseded by a new one for 6 houses, Bradford Council Highways dept. have previously said that the access into the site is not of sufficient width for this site to be developed. Since they made that statement another home has been approved, and built adjacent to the access Rd, making the access even more restricted. Application number 20/01508. A planning application has already been rejected by Silsden Town for development on this area. It needs to be maintained as an amenity area

Support

Representation ID: 13203

Received: 20/03/2021

Respondent: Silsden Town Council

Housing Distribution - Silsden

The reduction in the housing numbers associated with Silsden are welcomed. We have we have a number of Brownfield sites which are focused on and are in suitable places for accessing the A.V.T.R.