Proposed canalside housing, Bingley

[Josher]

Still making the headlines ...

 

Housing scheme would put off canal visitors say campaigners

 

Yorkshire Post

Published Date: 22 April 2010

By Fiona Evans

A controversial housing development would deter visitors to a West Yorkshire beauty spot, campaigners claim.

 

Research commissioned by Greenhill Action Group (GAG) has highlighted "strong concerns" about the environmental impact of the proposed 475 homes on green fields close to the Leeds-Liverpool canal, north of Laythorpe Farm on Sty Lane at Micklethwaite, near Bingley.

 

In a survey of those using the canal towpath at Micklethwaite, 97 per cent of respondents disapproved of the proposed development, with 98 per cent believing that it would also have a negative impact on their enjoyment of the area, said GAG.

 

The research – conducted by volunteers questioning 512 people – was commissioned by the campaign group to inform Bradford Council about the concerns of locals and visitors to the site,near Bingley's Five Rise Locks.

 

GAG chairman Terry Brown said: "The end of the housing is less than 300 yards from Bingley Five Rise Locks.

 

"People do not just stand at Five Rise Locks. They come to enjoy the canal and they walk along the canal. They go out along the towpath looking at the countryside and wildlife. The houses are going to totally spoil the aspect and character of the area.

 

"The survey demonstrates how popular this section of the canal is and its relevance as a leisure amenity, for both the local community and to visitors. The results clearly reflect a high level of disapproval for this housing development which will undoubtedly spoil future enjoyment of the area.

 

"A large number of people who we stopped were visitors to the area and they quite openly said that they came to the area for a day out to visit Five Rise Locks and maybe stop and have a coffee and have a walk along the canal. And they said if this was nothing but houses they would not come again because there would be no wildlife."

 

Mr Brown added that fewer visitors would affect the local economy.

 

Respondents were asked to rate their approval or disapproval of the proposed development and provide their assessment of its impact.

 

Of them, 41 per cent said they would visit the area less often if houses were built.

 

Towpath users expressed particular concerns about the potential loss of birdlife habitat along the canal bank, destruction of a green space and loss of a pleasant view.

 

Mr Brown has invited Bradford Council chief executive Tony Reeves and planning officers to attend a public meeting being organised by GAG at 7pm today at Bingley Grammar School.

 

Bradford Council development manager Peter Bridgman said: "We declined the request to attend the public meeting organised by the Greenhill Action Group because the invitation arrived at very short notice. However, I have offered to meet chairman Terry Brown at a subsequent time so he can put the group's points across to me.

 

"In order to give the issue as wide a public airing as possible we have also organised a special neighbourhood forum meeting at Bingley Grammar School on Wednesday, May 12, at 7pm. The meeting is open to anyone who has any concerns about the proposed development."

 

The proposal has attracted fierce opposition since Redrow Homes (Yorkshire) Ltd and Bellway Homes Ltd submitted a planning application for the dwellings as well as a new swing bridge over the canal and providing new access ways off Sty Lane and Micklethwaite Lane, access off Fairfax Road and off-site highway improvements.

 

Critics' concerns include increased traffic and the loss of green space.

[Josher]

These guys really don't like this proposal ...

 

Meeting tomorrow night on plans for 475 homes at Micklethwaite

 

4:44pm Tuesday 11th May 2010 Telegraph and Argus

 

* By Marc Meneaud »

 

More than 5,000 people have objected to plans for 475 homes on green fields near Bingley, ahead of a crunch meeting tomorrow night.

 

Campaigners from Greenhill Action Group (GAG) have mobilised massive support against plans by developers to build near Sty Lane, Micklethwaite.

 

They claim the area of natural beauty next to the Leeds-Liverpool canal will be unable to cope.

 

And they say the main access to the proposed homes – a swing bridge across the canal in Micklethwaite Lane – will cause major traffic disruption. By today two petitions gathered by the campaign group had 4,000 and 1,500 signatures respectively.

 

Bradford Council has also received more than 400 letters of opposition.

 

GAG chairman Terry Brown said he expected “substantially” more after tomorrow night’s meeting at Bingley Grammar School.

 

“It is great that there has been so many objections,” he said. “Now we have to encourage others to make their own objections because it is the weight of numbers that will help us show the Council and the developers how local people feel.”

 

Residents fought off efforts to build on the site in 2003, when 660 people opposed the plans. In March this year, they once again prepared to fight a new application by Redrow Homes (Yorkshire) Ltd and Bellway Homes.

 

The developers submitted the planning application along with plans for the new swing bridge and new accesses off Sty Lane and Micklethwaite Lane, and access off Fairfax Road.

 

Mr Brown said people would be able to show the “strength of feeling” against the latest plans at tomorrow's meeting.

 

John Eyles, Bradford Council’s major development manager, will give a short presentation about the planning process and residents will get a chance to inspect the plans and ask questions.

 

Mr Eyles will be part of a panel including Mr Brown and a senior traffic engineer from the Council.

 

Shipley area co-ordinator Chris Flecknoe, who will chair the meeting, said: “It is about people being well-informed about the planning process and asking questions about it if they so wish.”

 

e-mail: marc.meneaud@telegraphandargus.co.uk

[Josher]

Progress?

 

 

Show of opposition to Micklethwaite scheme leads to offer

 

11:10pm Wednesday 12th May 2010 Telegraph and Argus

 

Hundreds of objectors to a proposed new housing estate in Micklethwaite were promised a public meeting with the developers at a packed gathering tonight.

 

More than 5,000 people have signed petitions against plans for 475 homes on green fields near Bingley.

 

At a special neighbourhood forum meeting at Bingley Grammar School, a panel of Bradford Council planners spoke to concerned residents.

 

Shipley area co-ordinator Chris Flecknoe, who chaired the meeting, said Redrow Homes (Yorkshire) Ltd and Bellway Homes were prepared to discuss the scheme after learning of the significant strength of feeling in the community.

 

An outline planning application for the site, next to the Leeds-Liverpool Canal off Sty Lane, has been submitted to the Council.

 

John Eyles, the Council’s major development manager, said details about the site’s layout and the style of properties would be submitted in a secondary planning application if initial permission was granted by the Shipley Area Planning Committee.

 

That meeting, he said, was likely to take place in June, when the Council’s planning department will have compiled a report recommending whether to approve or refuse the scheme.

 

Residents expressed doubts over a proposal to increase the size of a swing bridge over Micklethwaite Lane to accommodate extra traffic.

 

Mr Eyles said: “The proposals are to put a two-lane swing bridge over the canal which will pivot to one side over the canal when it is open.

 

“There are questions that we have still got over the mechanics of how it is going to work and the associated maintenance.”

 

Mr Eyles said Council traffic engineers were still assessing the traffic situation. Residents expressed concerns about increased traffic volume and safety on narrow roads.

 

Speaking during an interval, Liz Brown, secretary of the Greenhill Action Group which was revived to fight the development, said: “Access is a big issue as are that number of houses in an area of natural beauty.”

 

Resident Tony Bradley, 52, said: “I moved to Micklethwaite and paid extra money because it is a village. If they build 475 houses it ceases to be a village.”

 

Jack Cahill, 71, said: “This would change the character of a rural hamlet and it’s unnecessary at a time when the town’s major employer has gone bust and its premises are up for sale.”

[Josher]

Latest:

 

Micklethwaite, Bingley, campaigners say plans must be deferred until Sty Lane bid is decided

 

7:10am Thursday 8th July 2010 Argus

 

 

Campaigners fighting plans for hundreds of houses are urging Bradford Council to have a re-think over proposals to build even more homes.

 

Greenhill Action Group (GAG) which is campaigning against a 475-home development in Sty Lane, Micklethwaite, Bingley, is calling for discussions over two more planning applications to be delayed.

 

Bradford Council has applied for permission for 14 homes at Errington House in Micklethwaite Lane. Meanwhile, developers have submitted outline planning permission for another 14 homes at Airedale Mills, Micklethwaite Lane. Both sites border the Sty Lane site.

 

Mick Meares, vice-chairman of GAG, said the Council would not be able to consider the two new applications’ impact on the area before a decision is made over whether to grant the 475-home application.

 

He said: “They cannot possibly understand what environmental, highway or conservation impact these new proposed developments will have until the Greenhill (Sty Lane) application is determined.”

 

A major issue is the swing bridge over the Leeds-Liverpool Canal in Micklethwaite Lane, which will provide access for all developments.

 

Under the Greenhill plans, the bridge will be replaced by a larger two-way bridge.

 

But Mr Meares said problems with how it will work needed to be addressed before allowing any homes to be built.

 

He said the coalition Government had urged council planners to take into account the impact of applications on others currently under consideration when it announced housing targets were to be scrapped.

 

Bradford Council was unavailable for comment yesterday.

[cotswoldsman]

"

 

Do you seriously think that its OK for developers to be given an effective green light to build anywhere they want provided they throw in some social housing?

 

Yes

[mayalld]

Yes

 

Well, we must be eternally thankful that you are not in charge of planning policy then.

 

Within 10 years, what green open space exists would have gone, and there would be nowhere for you to moor, because every inch of the canal would have flats alongside, demanding that boats don't moor outside them.

[Naughty Cal]

Well, we must be eternally thankful that you are not in charge of planning policy then.

 

Within 10 years, what green open space exists would have gone, and there would be nowhere for you to moor, because every inch of the canal would have flats alongside, demanding that boats don't moor outside them.

 

Thats ok as long as he is looking after the poor

[cotswoldsman]

Thats ok as long as he is looking after the poor

 

Thanks I try to do my bit!!

[Josher]

Latest:

 

Objectors call for Government to take Micklethwaite decision

 

9:40am Monday 26th July 2010 Argus.

 

A campaign group battling controversial plans for 475 new homes on green fields will press a Government Minister to back their fight.

 

MP Greg Clark will visit campaigners from Greenhill Action Group (GAG) which is fighting plans for the homes next to the Leeds-Liverpool Canal in Sty Lane, Micklethwaite, Bingley.

 

Group chairman Terry Brown said: “What we are really looking for is to see if there is some way that the authority can be taken away from the Council to use this area for housing sites.

 

“The site is unsuitable for housing. We want Mr Clark to see that for himself and help us in our fight to stop development.”

 

Mr Clark, Minister for the Department of Communities and Local Government, agreed to visit the area after Shipley Tory MP Philip Davies criticised housing targets set by the former Government.

 

Former Bradford Council leader Eric Pickles, now the Communities Secretary, has since announced the end of centralised home-building targets. The blueprint to deliver more than 50,000 houses across the Bradford district has been scrapped.

 

However, earlier this month Council planners wrote to the developers Redrow Homes (Yorkshire) and Bellway Homes Ltd, asking for more detailed information about the schemes.

 

In a letter, they said there was still a huge need for housing in the Bradford district and the scrapping of targets should make no difference to plans to build the developments in Sty Lane.

 

An application submitted by the developers will still be considered by Bradford Council.

 

Mr Brown said he hoped to persuade Mr Clark that if the Government had the final decision following a public inquiry the homes should not be built.

 

Mr Davies, who will join Mr Clark on the visit on Thursday, said: “I want him to see the area first hand and meet local residents so that he understands how important it is that the planning system is weighted in favour of the local community and that there is nothing done centrally to impose unwanted developments.”

 

As previously reported in the Telegraph & Argus, he will also visit campaigners fighting controversial plans for nearly 350 new homes in Menston. Mr Clark, the minister in charge of Government decentralisation, will visit Menston to look at the sites and talk

[Josher]

Following on from the previous post ... (looks like the protesters are in the ascendancy) ...

 

Menston could be first in UK to set own planning system

 

8:43am Friday 30th July 2010 ilkleygazette.

 

A Government minister yesterday told campaigners the power to stop hundreds of houses being built in Menston was in their own hands.

 

And Greg Clark, minister for decentralisation at the department of communities and local government, urged more than 200 villagers to become the first community in the country to take advantage of proposed new rules in planning to stop the 300 homes being constructed.

 

Mr Clark was speaking after spending the day in West Yorkshire to hear concerns about plans to build more than 750 new homes on sites next to the Leeds-Liverpool Canal in Sty Lane, Micklethwaite, Bingley, and at Derry Hill and Bingley Road in Menston.

 

He had been invited to the area by Shipley MP Philip Davies to see for himself the strength of local opposition to the plans.

 

After hearing villagers offer their opinions as to why the new homes should not be built in Menston, he told them to force the issue with Bradford Council.

 

He said although a new bill enabling communities to take the ultimate decisions on local plans could take up to a year to be forced through parliament, recent changes brought in by the Government mean the council has the immediate power to abandon old regional strategies.

 

Mr Clark said the community could lobby the council to turn down the proposals and then be ready with their own local plan when the new bill comes into force.

 

"There's no reason why you shouldn't be the first out of the starting blocks for that," he said.

 

"With the community spirit here I think what would be fantastic, and perhaps through Philip (Davies), you could sit down as a community and put in place your community plan.

 

"The council might even co-operate with this and say 'we'll go along with what the community decides here'. And if you want to do that you could be one of the first communities in Britain to be genuinely setting your own planning system."

 

Mr Davies said the minister could not fail to see the strength of opposition to all the housing plans.

 

"The minister is in absolutely no doubt to the strength of feeling from people both in Micklethwaite and in Menston about these developments and that is why I asked him to come to visit," he said.

 

"I knew the strength of feeling and I wanted him to come to see it too and I also wanted him to give some thought as to how government policy can ensure other communities never have to face what these local communities are facing."

 

Terry Brown, chairman of Greenhill Action Group (GAG) which is campaigning against the Micklethwaite proposal, said: "We were delighted to welcome the minister to the area and he seemed impressed with what we are doing to fight this development.

 

"Decentralisation is not just about putting planning in the hands of the local council, it is also about the community being involved."

 

Philip Moore, of the Menston Action Group (MAG) said: "It's really very encouraging to see the number of people that have turned up to show their support and opposition to these plans.

 

"There is tremendous opposition - everybody's against it."

[Josher]

Update with web link to the developer's site:

 

Details of proposed bid for more than 400 houses released ahead of meeting

 

8:10am Friday 11th February 2011

 

 

Developers behind a huge scheme of more than 400 homes on countryside say they will consult the public ahead of applying for planning permission next month. Redrow Homes and Bellway Homes will submit the application to Bradford Council in the next few weeks for the controversial scheme in Sty Lane, Mickethwaite, near Bingley.

 

But campaigners in Greenhill Action Group (GAG), who say the development will cover swathes of land by the Leeds-Liverpool Canal, have hit out at the consultation as “a sham”. A previous application was submitted in March last year. It is expected to be withdrawn when the new bid is lodged at the beginning of March.

 

Details of the plans were due to be available from today at stylane.co.uk and there will be a public exhibition at St Aidan’s Church Hall, Crossflatts, between 3pm and 8pm on Friday, February 18, and from 10am to 1pm on Saturday, February 19.

[RAP]

Redrow and Bellway along with their newly appointed architects held an exhibition on 18 and 19 February 2011 for the local community to view their latest plans before they re-submit their previous planning application (and any amendments to it following the exhibition/consultation with the public) in early March 2011.

 

At the exhibition it was revealed that Redrow and Bellway had approached BW to request a change to the cruising license to restrict the passage of boats through Micklethwaite swing bridge during peak road traffic times. This effectively means that boats will only be able to cruise that section of the canal between the hours of 10am and 4pm. I believe BW would refuse such a change, or would they if they were offered an incentive during these difficult times?

 

Another interesting piece of information was also raised - boat traffic (and swing bridges) has priority over road traffic. I'm not sure if this is true in that area, or whether specific moveable bridges on the Leeds and Liverpool enjoy this privilege.

 

Any thoughts?

 

Thanks.

[canaldrifter]

I was up there protesting last year.

 

 

Gallery at:

 

https://picasaweb.google.com/irishcanaldrifter/GreenhillProtestMay2010#5474365716322856482

 

Tone

[Pluto]

Redrow and Bellway along with their newly appointed architects held an exhibition on 18 and 19 February 2011 for the local community to view their latest plans before they re-submit their previous planning application (and any amendments to it following the exhibition/consultation with the public) in early March 2011.

 

At the exhibition it was revealed that Redrow and Bellway had approached BW to request a change to the cruising license to restrict the passage of boats through Micklethwaite swing bridge during peak road traffic times. This effectively means that boats will only be able to cruise that section of the canal between the hours of 10am and 4pm. I believe BW would refuse such a change, or would they if they were offered an incentive during these difficult times?

 

Another interesting piece of information was also raised - boat traffic (and swing bridges) has priority over road traffic. I'm not sure if this is true in that area, or whether specific moveable bridges on the Leeds and Liverpool enjoy this privilege.

 

Any thoughts?

 

Thanks.

I suspect that the canal Act gives boats legal precedence at swing bridges, though it is not mentioned specifically in the Byelaws. On road bridges, it was required that the bridge be shut after the boat passed. Handcocks Bridge at Aintree was often left open when the canal was first in use, and Lord Derby complained that he had been held up because the bridge was left open. The canal company then installed a bridge keeper to ensure that the bridge was shut after boats passed, the name of the keeper being Handcock, and hence the present name for the bridge. I think that the closure of this bridge would be arranged legally by the police during Grand National week, but at other bridges the canal has priority.

[Guest]

There is something very satisfying about operating the electric swing bridges on the L&L with your BW key.

 

All that power, sounders, barriers and red stop lights, the works!!! all at the turn of a key - (I think I should have been a railway signalman)

 

- Even when you operate as smoothly and efficiently as you can you still end up with a bit of a jam with one or two irritated drivers in it...

 

I normally just smile and wave a thankyou though.

[Josher]

Deadline for objections is fast approaching ...

 

Philip Davies joins campaigners to travel route traffic would take from proposed estate

9:46am Saturday 11th June 2011 Telegraph and Argus

 

Campaigners fighting to save a greenfield site near Bingley from development have warned a nearby village would be choked with traffic if plans are approved The Greenhill Action Group wants to stop developers Redrow and Bellway building more than 400 homes in Sty Lane, Micklethwaite. The site overlooks the Leeds-Liverpool canal and can only be accessed by a steep and narrow village road. A swing bridge at the bottom of the lane opens regularly for canal boats, causing queues of traffic on either side. Campaigner and Micklethwaite resident Richard Butler said the development would be disastrous for village residents. “The roads at some points are only 4 metres wide which is only wide enough for one car,” he said. “The developers are proposing the traffic from the new estate would go along Micklethwaite Lane. It doesn’t make any sense “Queues of traffic already build up when the swing bridge is open and it will be far worse if this development goes ahead.”

 

Shipley MP Philip Davies travelled the route traffic from the estate would take with campaigners. He said: “Building on this site would be an act of vandalism. I think it is wrong on every level. Anyone who sees this site will wonder why on earth it was ever proposed to destroy a beautiful part of the countryside. “It is a completely inappropriate location for any development and it is clear the travel plans are completely inadequate.” Mick Mears, vice chairman of the campaign group, urged objectors to respond to the planning application before the deadline of June 15 He said: “We want people to send in their objections to the Council. It is very important that we get as many quality objections as possible. The bottom line is anyone who wants to preserve this area for future generations needs to act now.”

 

 

 

For more information or to lodge an objection visit greenhillactiongroup.co.uk. Here

[Matthew Dowson]

There is something very satisfying about operating the electric swing bridges on the L&L with your BW key.

 

All that power, sounders, barriers and red stop lights, the works!!! all at the turn of a key - (I think I should have been a railway signalman)

 

- Even when you operate as smoothly and efficiently as you can you still end up with a bit of a jam with one or two irritated drivers in it...

 

I normally just smile and wave a thankyou though.

Its fun as long as they work, we got frozen in at Kildwick Dec/Jan as the big Kildwick bridge fritzed out and then the freeze happened. The Riddlesden Bridge by Granby Arms is also a bit temperamental, lost a key there before when it wouldn't close after much trying.

[boatyboy]

I started this topic to keep people informed about what was happening alongside the canal in Bingley, making no comment either way. I left the conclusion up to those reading the post. I always thought that what democracy was all about - being kept informed and having the ability to comment about things in which you are interested. Changes to the canal environment are certainly of interest to those on this forum.

Do you moor up permanantly at Bingley?

If not why the hell are you getting involved? We nearly all move around the system,and we should be the ones least affected by this proposed building site.Perhaps you would have an argument to fight for if it was next to your property.

I only add my ten penneth because of a Nimby who lived next door to me a few years ago.He had heard that a small one man garage 2 miles away was trying to get permission to increase his amount of cars for sale on his forcourt from 6 cars to 8.He told me he had written to Felsted parish council to put his reasons why the guy should not be given permission.

This neighbour of mine was bloody house bound,and never went out for christ sake!! How could this very good little village garage affect him in any way??? Far to many Nimbeys about today,and you are one of em mate.

[Pluto]

Do you moor up permanantly at Bingley?

If not why the hell are you getting involved? We nearly all move around the system,and we should be the ones least affected by this proposed building site.Perhaps you would have an argument to fight for if it was next to your property.

I only add my ten penneth because of a Nimby who lived next door to me a few years ago.He had heard that a small one man garage 2 miles away was trying to get permission to increase his amount of cars for sale on his forcourt from 6 cars to 8.He told me he had written to Felsted parish council to put his reasons why the guy should not be given permission.

This neighbour of mine was bloody house bound,and never went out for christ sake!! How could this very good little village garage affect him in any way??? Far to many Nimbeys about today,and you are one of em mate.

Canals are not just for those with boats, and as, at the moment, we all own the canal system, anyone should be able to have their say regarding developments which will affect the canal environment. This development will have a major effect on the number of cars using what is at the moment a small swing bridge. It is a problem that needs addressing at the planning stage, and not after the development has gone ahead. The best decision can only be made when planners know how many people the development will affect, both local and canal users. On a personal basis, I have promoted the use of the Leeds & Liverpool Canal and its environment for over forty years in both a professional and voluntary capacity, and by informing people as to what was happening at Bingley, neither for nor against the project, I was continuing my long involvement with the canal to the general benefit of all. In the 1960s and 1970s, the Leeds & Liverpool Canal came very close to being closed. Had we all had an attitude similar to yours, we would not now have the pleasure of using the canal.

[Guest]

Do you moor up permanantly at Bingley?

If not why the hell are you getting involved? We nearly all move around the system,and we should be the ones least affected by this proposed building site.Perhaps you would have an argument to fight for if it was next to your property.

I only add my ten penneth because of a Nimby who lived next door to me a few years ago.He had heard that a small one man garage 2 miles away was trying to get permission to increase his amount of cars for sale on his forcourt from 6 cars to 8.He told me he had written to Felsted parish council to put his reasons why the guy should not be given permission.

This neighbour of mine was bloody house bound,and never went out for christ sake!! How could this very good little village garage affect him in any way??? Far to many Nimbeys about today,and you are one of em mate.

 

Comparing the application from a garage to be able to put two more cars on their forecourt is hardly a valid comparison to what is being proposed here.

[carlt]

Do you moor up permanantly at Bingley?

If not why the hell are you getting involved?

Far to many Nimbeys about today,and you are one of em mate.

So if he doesn't moor at Bingley, it's none of his business and if he does, he's a Nimby...

 

So who do you think does have a valid interest in a housing development planning application?

[Pluto]

The Greenhill Action Group hav just sent out this newsletter:

 

GAG NEWSLETTER #83

About 10 days ago notification letters were received by residents who had raised an objection on the Sty Lane application advising that there was new information available and setting a new deadline for objections of 24th August. The Council have a legal obligation to advise you of any change in the application. Whilst they set a date of 24th August they will accept objection letters up to the date of the Planning panel. No date has yet been set for the Planning Panel.

 

The new information includes some detail on the new swing bridge and using the developers drawings the new bridge will be 3 (three) times the size of the existing bridge!! They also mention they will construct a pedestrian bridge which we assume will be linking the site to Canal Road but there are no details of this. You may wish to send additional objections on these points.

 

Today we learned that there are 2 new applications and notification letters have also been issued for these. 11/03769/FUL is a full application for a replacement swing bridge and 11/03775/CAC is for the removal of the existing swing bridge. (Note: I believe the letters CAC after the application number means Conservation Area Consent). Whilst the letters received state the date for objections is 8th September the site notices state the end date is 16th September. We have not had time to review this information yet and will advise further. Meantime objections should be lodged against these applications. This new bridge and road will destroy the Conservation Area.

 

Terry Brown (Chairman)

[Josher]

Wonder if the shift in Government policy will now be a factor?

 

Decision day on housing estate plan opposed by thousands Published on Tuesday 20 September 2011 06:00 Yorkshire Post

 

CAMPAIGNERS are urging councillors to turn down plans for up to 440 homes on green fields near Bingley. Members of the Shipley planning panel meet on Friday to discuss outline plans for a housing estate on land off Sty Lane, Micklethwaite. Dozens of objectors are expected to attend the meeting from 10am in the Bingley Arts Centre.

 

Members of the Greenhill Action Group will be among those urging councillors to reject the advice of council planners who believe the plans should be granted, subject to financial contributions from the developers towards local improvement schemes. The 40-hectare greenfield site is designated for housing use in the district’s planning blueprint but campaigners say it should never have been earmarked for future housing because of poor access. Yesterday Greenhill Action Group chairman Terry Brown said he wanted councillors to reject the plans, which would then result in a public inquiry. The action group has recruited two planning consultants who may be allowed to address Friday’s meeting.

 

Mr Brown said: “The land should never have been allocated to housing in the first place because of the accessibility. “We are not a Nimby group, this is not about our view being spoiled or something stupid like that. This site, as it stands, would be accessed over a swing bridge and would not be suitable for the 400-odd houses on it.” He is currently awaiting a decision from Bradford Council on who will be allowed to speak at the meeting on Friday and the time allowed for each speech. It may be that only one objector will be allowed just five minutes, he said.

 

A report by planning officers says the outline plans should be granted permission. Officers have acknowledged the extent of local opposition, saying: “There is substantial opposition to this development from the local community. It is clear from the letters of representation that one of the main concerns of this scheme is how traffic from this development will create highway difficulties due to the provision of a swing bridge over the canal. “It is, however, considered by the council’s highway engineers that the provision of a replacement swing bridge is acceptable, and in connection with other measures to provide a new traffic light junction on Keighley Road, improvements to the other junction of Oakwood Drive and Lady Lane, realignment of Micklethwaite Lane, provision of a turning head on Micklethwaite Lane adjacent to Airedale Mills, narrowing and realignment of Sty Lane and the provision of a no entry traffic regulation order onto Sty Lane and associated road markings, will ensure that highway and pedestrian safety into and out of the site is provided. “Furthermore, it is also considered that effective promotion of public transport initiatives will help encourage more sustainable transport choices.”

 

The report says that the land has been designated for housing use and this was backed by a planning inspector. “The harm from development would in my view be less than the benefits for an otherwise sustainable allocation which would be a substantial way towards meeting the housing requirements,” they said. “My opinion is that the need for housing land to be allocated outweighs the objection to allocation.” Members of the action group have argued that the swing bridge will cause problems if it suddenly breaks down, particularly during busy periods or when emergency vehicle access is required to the estate. Planning officers say that in the event of the new bridge not being operational, site traffic will leave via Oakwood Drive. A link will be created between the site and Oakwood Drive but this will be closed to general traffic use and only opened up when the bridge cannot be used.

[RAP]

Update from GAG

 

 

GAG NEWSLETTER #89

Today the Shipley Planning Panel REJECTED the Sty Lane application by a vote of 6 to 1.

 

Congratulations to all of you and a really big thank you for all your support and for your donations to enable us to fight this on your behalf.

 

Terry Brown (Chairman)

email: mailinglist@greenhill-action-group.co.uk

www: http://www.greenhill-action-group.co.uk

[Doorman]

I started this topic to keep people informed about what was happening alongside the canal in Bingley, making no comment either way. I left the conclusion up to those reading the post. I always thought that what democracy was all about - being kept informed and having the ability to comment about things in which you are interested. Changes to the canal environment are certainly of interest to those on this forum.

 

Hi Pluto,

 

After nearly three years on the forum, I would have thought that you were used to the 'attitude' of some members.

 

You could announce on here that every one in the British isles was about to get a £10,000 tax rebate and someone would still find fault with what you've said!

 

Mike

Edited September 24, 2011 by Doorman