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

Support

Representation ID: 30073

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Clive Brook Planning

Support for sites AD3/H and AD4/H.

A unifying master plan approach proposed for totality of the landholding (inc. remainder of land between sites) and the enhanced quality of the environment, place and design which can be achieved via the proposals including:

• Provision of on site habitat improvements, particularly in 4 southern fields, Other habitat/biodiversity enhancements will be included subject to consultation with local groups, who hold valuable expertise and survey information having closely monitored species within the village locality. Natural England and the Yorkshire Wildlife Trust will be consulted. Approach is to form a mosaic of habitats with appropriate after management plans.

• A network of tree and hedge planting improvements along existing and new lines are proposed with appropriate after management.

• The northern three fields which make up the designated Village Greenspace area will primarily be improved as a parkland area to provide certain on-site recreation facilities.

Support

Representation ID: 30074

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Clive Brook Planning

Support for sites AD3/H and AD4/H.

A unifying master plan approach proposed for totality of the landholding (inc. remainder of land between sites) and the enhanced quality of the environment, place and design which can be achieved via the proposals including:

• Provision of on site habitat improvements, particularly in 4 southern fields, Other habitat/biodiversity enhancements will be included subject to consultation with local groups, who hold valuable expertise and survey information having closely monitored species within the village locality. Natural England and the Yorkshire Wildlife Trust will be consulted. Approach is to form a mosaic of habitats with appropriate after management plans.

• A network of tree and hedge planting improvements along existing and new lines are proposed with appropriate after management.

• The northern three fields which make up the designated Village Greenspace area will primarily be improved as a parkland area to provide certain on-site recreation facilities.

Object

Representation ID: 30131

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Clive Brook Planning

Rejected Site IL/016.

Comprehensive proposals including a masterplan and other information has been prepared for the site as well as sites IL/011A, IL/011B & IL/032, as part of earlier consultations and discussions.

Concerned that there are a number of substantial mis-appraisals in the supported evidence, and that site has been treated as part of wider comprehensive approach. No logical reason for disaggregated approach.

Considered that the site (as part of comprehensive masterplan area) is connected with urban area.

Development could be achieved withouth significant impact on the functions of the Green Belt.

Proposals will create sustainable mixed use development, meeting all three sustainability objectives in the NPPF. No sites within the urban area are capable of delivering these benefits. The scale of the landholding enables the delivery of beneficial environmental enhancements.

Major positive opportunity to deliver market and affordable housing, meeting social objectives. Site can deliver integrated environmental benefits and recreation provision for the benefit of the community.

Request that the Council review their decision to exclude this site.

Object

Representation ID: 30219

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Clive Brook Planning

Rejected site TH/013

Site specific submission for land at Spring Holes Lane, Thornton. (TH/013) Considers that a residential allocation of this land for a development of circa 58 dwellings. Will contribute to towards an enhanced requirement in Thornton (800 to 825 dwellings).

Some of the proposed greenfield and brownfield sites are subject to a variety of constraints and/or environmental requirements to accommodate reducing their combined capacity by around 100 dwellings.

Disagree with the overall conclusion reached in this site specific Green Belt assessment that the site has a major potential impact on the Green Belt.

Relationship of the site with Thornton Recreation Ground to the south west and the sports fields to the west presents opportunities for environmental improvements and appropriate landscaping

Disagree with the SA assessment against criterion 3 -Land and Buildings as the loss of a relative small area of greenfield land does not justify a major adverse impact rating.