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

Object

Representation ID: 17155

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Bradford District Ward Councillor (Labour)

The site is in close proximity to the Judy Woods Local Wildlife Site. It is difficult to see how it could be possible to develop this site without significant damage to local wildlife and the ecosystems.

Development will have an adverse impact on the setting of Royds Hall and the approach to it.

The majority of the site lies within a 200m buffer zone of HT power lines to the south. The eastern part of the site, lies within the outer tier consultation zone for a HSE designated Major Hazard Site

There is also a high risk for former coal mining activities including possible mine entry shafts.

The local infrastructure is not capable of sustaining a development of this size. Meadway in particular is narrow and not suitable for even the current levels of traffic.

This site is neither suitable nor sustainable.

Object

Representation ID: 17156

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Bradford District Ward Councillor (Labour)

This site represents a further loss of countryside to the extent that it links the built-up areas of Low Moor more completely with those of Woodside.

All views of countryside will disappear from Abb Scott Lane.

In addition, the site lies within a 200m buffer zone of HT power lines to the south, and entirely within the middle tier consultation zone for a HSE designated Major Hazard Site (BASF and Solenis UK Industries).

Object

Representation ID: 17157

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Bradford District Ward Councillor (Labour)

This was on-site provision of recreation and open space by one of the developers engaged in new homes provision on Buttershaw as part of the SRB.

It is my understanding that the developer has paid a sum to the council for the adoption and maintenance of this open space.

Object

Representation ID: 17158

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Bradford District Ward Councillor (Labour)

It is difficult to imagine how this site can satisfy any question of sustainability without significant enabling works as the access is from an unmade and unadopted road.

Object

Representation ID: 17159

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Bradford District Ward Councillor (Labour)

The majority of the above comments regarding SW14/H also apply to SW34/H. It borders important woodland areas and is in close proximity to the Judy Woods Local Wildlife Site with the same impacts of development as above.

In addition, the site sits on Meadway, a narrow residential street unsuitable to carry further traffic.

Comment

Representation ID: 17527

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Bradford District Ward Councillor (Labour)

Concerned with total numbers allocated towards Bradford South – seems disproportionately high compared to other areas.

Concerned about taking away green space in Royds – a deprived area, which needs/relishes its green spaces.

Of particular concern is the number houses planning on Fenwick Drive. Bordered by the heritage area of Judy Woods - will impact on the natural environment and biodiversity of this area. Some of these fields are prone to flooding.

Concerned about the impact on traffic – already have many complaints/concerns from residents – critical due to location of the primary school. For the same reason, suggested developments off Abb Scott Lane also raise concerns.

Developing the Delf Hill site might not be so bad - is currently an eyesore/not looked after, but traffic impact on Abb Scott Lane and Common Road should not be underestimated - again there is a primary school on Common Road.

No particular concerns developing the sites highlighted in Buttershaw. Development welcomed at the Reevy Road West site.

Object

Representation ID: 18021

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Bradford District Ward Councillor (Labour)

Number of people: 3

-Consideration has not been given to wider impacts of this potential development.
-Houses should not be built on this site.
-The site plays a pivotal role in our districts and the world’s literary and cultural history.
-Developing on this site makes no economic or cultural sense.
-Proximity to the Bronte Stones walk.
-Detrimental impact on the views (of moorlands and Pinch Beck Valley) that people travel from all over the world to see / made famous by the Bronte sisters and by consequence negatively impact on the cultural economy of our district.
-Bradford’s economic recovery centres culture - proposals to build on this site clearly go against this plan.
-We should be protecting greenfield spaces especially when they hold such significant cultural and social value as this one.
-Part of this site is protected village greenspace in the RUDP.
-There are clearly no exceptional circumstances to build on this site.
-Consider alternative brownfield sites.

Object

Representation ID: 28552

Received: 09/04/2021

Respondent: Bradford District Ward Councillor (Labour)

Green belt sites – understand why these are on the plan, but ask that they be removed.

Comment

Representation ID: 28553

Received: 09/04/2021

Respondent: Bradford District Ward Councillor (Labour)

The proposed development above Waterside Fold (Carr Bank, green belt site) is marked as being in Keighley rather than East Morton. In terms of the consultation, this has been confusing and caused anger and mistrust among residents. People on Waterside Fold and Carr Bank consider themselves to be from East Morton, and their address is East Morton. There is also an issue regarding the suggestion of school boundaries and catchments.

The infrastructure of Swine Lane is unsuitable to take more traffic.

The two areas of East Morton and Riddlesden would further merge if the Carr Bank site remains on the plan. There is already no green boundary between Waterside Fold (East Morton) and Hospital Road, Riddlesden – there is no vehicular access between the two villages but they are effectively losing their distinct character and boundary.

Object

Representation ID: 28554

Received: 09/04/2021

Respondent: Bradford District Ward Councillor (Labour)

Constraint of bridges on Coney Lane/Park Lane, present in previous UDPs was removed for unknown/illogical reason.

Was subject of a committee discussion in 2019 - decided that further development should be put on hold until constraints are addressed.

Constraint remains and has not been improved. 1/3 of Keighley East housing sites would need to use Coney Lane for access into Keighley town centre. A new Aldi is being built off this route.

Urge removal of all development/sites in Long Lee and surrounding villages (Parkwood, Woodhouse, Hainworth Wood and Harden) until issue is addressed.

Statements regarding Long Lee's facilities/services are incorrect - no frequent bus service, no fish & chip shop, GP surgery struggling to accommodate existing residents.

Concerned about lack of green space provision and finances to support it as CIL is not easily obtained.

No mention of additional business opportunities on housing sites e.g. shops, parks, pubs, community centres.