Fri 13 Jan 2012 |
|
Developers try to overcome Council concern over homes bid |
|
One of Bradford’s longest-running planning sagas has taken a twist after developers submitted plans to improve access to the site. Redrow Homes and Bellway Homes Ltd have been locked in a battle with campaigners over plans to build up to 440 homes in Sty Lane, Micklethwaite, Bingley.
The plans were rejected by Bradford Council amid concerns about access. The applicants appealed the decision and an appeal hearing is due to start in February. However, the applicants have now submitted plans for a swing bridge over the Leeds-Liverpool Canal to replace the existing swing bridge. The scheme, which has been recommended for approval, is designed to improve access at the site and campaigners fear the amended plans could pave the way for a planning inspector to pass the plans.
Terry Brown, chairman of Greenhill Action Group, which has spent thousands of pounds fighting the development, said: “If the planning panel approves the swing bridge application it will give the wrong message to the planning inspector and will only add to the developers’ armoury. “I can’t see how Bradford Council can possibly go to the planning panel with the recommendation of approval. One of the reasons the panel voted six to one against the housing application before them in September was that a swing bridge was an unsuitable way to access such a large estate.”
Shipley Area Planning Panel will consider the latest plans at a meeting in Shipley Town Hall on Wednesday. Because the swing bridge application is part of the appeal, councillors will not be granting or refusing planning permission but their decision will be noted by the Government inspector.
The new proposals include replacing the single-lane swing bridge at Micklethwaite Lane with a larger two-way swing bridge. The developers say the new bridge would improve access but a number of complaints have already been lodged. One of those quoted in the report for panel members says: “The proposed new bridge will be three times wider than the original bridge and will destroy the conservation area.”
Others fear the infrastructure in Crossflatts and Bingley is “inadequate” to deal with the influx of new residents should the plans go ahead.
The council report states the application is for the replacement of the existing bridge and should be only considered on that basis. It urges councillors not to consider the bridge in terms of the associated housing site.
Redrow and Bellway declined to comment. |
Mon 14 Nov 2011 |
|
Bradford Council blunder could put hundreds of new homes in doubt |
|
The future of key housing sites across the district has been thrown into doubt after a blunder effectively left Bradford Council without any land earmarked to meet housing needs.
Fears are growing that the technicality could lead to an influx of legal challenges to the authority, particularly over planning bids at controversial sites, such as Sty Lane, at Micklethwaite, near Bingley, and Derry Hill and Bingley Road at Menston. And any judicial reviews called as a result of the mistake could be extremely costly to the Council.
Campaigners from one group fighting to prevent the development of up to 440 homes at Sty Lane now hope to use the admission from the Council as a key argument in their bid to stop planning permission being granted on appeal.
Terry Brown, chairman of Greenhill Action Group, told the Telegraph & Argus: “Whether the site has been actually allocated for housing or not will have a big impact on any appeal. “If there is no presumption for housing, it will help our case against planning permission being granted.”
It appears that after almost 300 sites were allocated for housing in the Replacement Unitary Development plan in 2005 there was an omission by the Council at its review three years ago and major housing sites were not properly protected in paperwork ratified by the Government.
The Council’s chief executive Tony Reeves said: “This is an error based on legal advice given at the time which has since been questioned. Planners are working hard to ensure that the status of previously-allocated housing sites is clarified. Our primary concern is to ensure that all our policies are robust. “This is a genuine mistake with unintended consequences but I am sure that our planning service can soon ensure that everything is in order.”
A special meeting of the Council’s decision-making executive will be held a week today at which senior councillors will be asked to back a resolution which it is hoped will clarify the issue.
The issue was due to be added to Friday’s executive agenda at short notice but the move was blocked by Tory group leader Glen Miller. Council leader Ian Greenwood (Lab, Little Horton) accused Coun Miller of behaving “like a baby throwing a dummy out of his pram”. He said: “Every time we turn over a stone from the Conservative administration we find another mistake or error which is down to their incompetent leadership of the Council. This clearly needs dealing with as soon as possible “It’s particularly ironic that this relates to a period when the Conservatives were in control. It demonstrates yet again their total hypocrisy in respect of their leadership of the Council.”
Coun Jeanette Sunderland, leader of the Liberal Democrat group, said she was concerned by the refusal of the Tories to allow the executive to take a decision as a matter of urgency. She said: “I am extremely concerned that this will leave the Council in a vulnerable position in relation to a number of sites including the appeal at Sty Lane, Derry Hill and Bingley Road, and other applications in the pipeline or delayed while Section 106 agreements are being organised. The delay could potentially lead to judicial review of decisions and considerable cost to the Council.”
Coun Miller said: “This leaves the Council open to legal challenge and it appears that this has already happened in relation to one site". “Whilst it is clear that the Council was intent on transferring land allocations across from the old policy to the new, it did not happen in accordance with the proper practice and in theory the Council currently has no major allocated housing sites. There is no land legitimately allocated to meet future housing demand.”
He said his group opposed the matter going straight to Friday’s executive as it required proper scrutiny, saying it was “a very serious mistake on the part of the planning department”.
But Coun Greenwood confirmed to the T&A that the matter would not be going to a scrutiny panel first under emergency powers, given the urgent nature of the decision required
|
Thu 13 Oct 2011 |
|
Give us funds to fight Micklethwaite homes appeal |
|
Campaigners against a proposed housing development on green fields near Bingley have made an urgent call for funds to help fight a planning appeal.
Bradford councillors overwhelmingly rejected an application to build up to 440 homes at Sty Lane in Micklethwaite at a planning committee meeting in Bingley last month.
They said access to the site, via a swing bridge over the Leeds-Liverpool Canal, was inadequate.
But developers Redrow and Bellway have lodged an appeal with the Government and a public inquiry is to start at Bradford City Hall on February 21.
Terry Brown, chairman of Greenhill Action Group (Gag), which has been fighting the proposals, said objectors now had two weeks to raise £60,000 to employ a barrister and consultants to represent them for the ten days of the inquiry.
“We have got to try to kill this appeal off once and for all,” he said. “If we don’t succeed in doing that the developers can keep coming back with applications until they wear everybody out.
“If all we do is go in and say the swing bridge is not suitable they can come back with a fixed bridge. That is why we need to spend as much as we are doing on professional help. We have got to have our experts there when the opposition are giving evidence so our experts can challenge it.” |
Mon 31 Jan 2011 |
|
We don't know how much land is rotting away unused |
|
Telegraph & Argus
Campaigners opposed to greenfield developments have blasted Bradford Council for its lack of up-to-date information on how much land is lying derelict across the district.
It has emerged that the last full survey of vacant land was done more than ten years ago, prompting strong calls for the local authority to assess potential brownfield development sites before allowing green sites to be destroyed.
As part of a Government-funded programme, surveys were carried out every four years until 1999, when the last survey revealed the total area of dereliction in the district amounted to 0.7sq miles, made up of 145 separate sites.
Elizabeth Hellmich, of Heaton Township Association, said: “Bradford Council need to get someone to work out how much derelict land they have got.
“They need to map it. I think they’d get quite a shock if they realised how much derelict land there was.
“Before they start building on the greenfield sites they need to build on these run-down areas.”
The report, put before a meeting of the Council’s regeneration and economy overview and scrutiny committee, said the Council looked at derelict sites on a case-by-case basis.
It stated that land had fallen into disrepair for a variety of reasons, including owners not being able to afford to maintain buildings, and in some cases buildings had been part-demolished to avoid paying business rates.
Terry Brown, chairman of Greenhill Action Group, which is fighting proposals to build 475 homes off Sty Lane, Micklethwaite, near Bingley, said: “Before we drive asunder all our green fields to build houses we should be checking on things like derelict land.” |
Mon 31 Jan 2011 |
|
No excuse for ignoring derelict sites |
|
Telegraph & Argus Editorial
The news that Bradford Council does not know how much derelict land there is across the district is something of a surprise, given the demand for sites for housing in the area.
At a time when communities are fighting to save greenfield land which is being earmarked for development, it must be frustrating for them to learn there are potentially dozens of disused buildings crying out to be utilised positively.
Last time anybody checked, there was a total of 145 sites considered derelict in the district – a total of 0.7sq miles of land.
That includes disused mills and former industrial buildings which would be ideal for housing development.
Given the pressure for land the Council is facing, it is time for its officers to be a lot more pro-active in working with people to develop these sites.
The first step would be to carry out a comprehensive survey to identify where the sites are and what potential uses they could have.
And it is important these locations are not simply designated as housing – the area needs proper family housing.
What it doesn’t need is more mills being converted into bachelor pads or craft centres, both of which we already have in abundance.
There can be little excuse for Council planners to be giving the go-ahead for developments on greenfield sites, which communities are rightly fighting to protect when there may be so many potential locations that are currently eyesores and, in some cases, possibly a danger to the public.
This is something they have to do quickly – and they have to do it properly. |
|
|