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

Object

Representation ID: 19939

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Climate Action Ilkley

Number of people: 7

7. We are concerned that there is a commitment to “improve [car] parking provision” in Ilkley (paragraph 5.17.37), which we believe should not be taken to mean “increase car parking provision”. Wherever possible, there should be increased provision for alternatives to the use of private cars, for example through the use of car clubs, lockable cycle shelters, electric cargo bike sharing schemes, and active travel (walking and cycling). The term “parking” should not be solely car parking but be widened to include cycle parking.

Comment

Representation ID: 19940

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Climate Action Ilkley

Number of people: 7

8. We believe that it would be helpful if the Ilkley Local Area Strategy used the same structure and objectives as the Ilkley Neighbourhood Development Plan. This would make it more straightforward to see how the two plans fit together and avoid potential pitfalls where there is slightly different wording. It would also mean greater clarity as regards the link between policy and delivery.

Comment

Representation ID: 19941

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Climate Action Ilkley

Number of people: 7

Our response is provided in the context of both BMDC and Ilkley Town Councils’ resolutions acknowledging an ongoing climate emergency. An emergency requires radical and transformative solutions. New housing and other developments provide an opportunity to help address these crises with imaginative and forward-thinking solutions; otherwise, they literally fan the flames of global heating and necessitate costly remedial action in the short-medium term which could otherwise have been avoided (e.g. through extra insulation and installing non-fossil fuel heating).

We know such housing is possible because these high standards have been achieved at a number of projects in the UK with council involvement, for example in Exeter and Norwich.

Our aim is not to provide support or otherwise of particular sites for housing or other infrastructure. We accept that new houses and other developments are needed, although we ask that the council first assesses opportunities to exploit existing properties, particularly those vacant for a long period. We also ask that full details of all brownfield sites in the district are made available including any reasons why developers are not using these first.