WE NEED YOUR HELP
STOP DEVELOPERS BUILDING ON 40 ACRES OF GREEN FIELDS AT BINGLEY
I desperately need you to send in objections letters to Bradford Council before the 15th June. Now, in case you are wondering, YES it does affect you - no matter where you live. The constant erosion of valuable breathing spaces affects us all and actually there is no need for this private housing development other than greed.
You can see my article Trying to Save Greenhill One Photo at a Time over on HubPages with loads of photos of my feathered friends. At the bottom of that I have included details of a valid objection letter which I will copy here. No matter where you are in the world you can send in an objection email. PLEASE - we now have over 100 naturalized geese plus loads more wildlife that is going to be affected by this development even more than we humans are.
It will take you 5 minutes! Copy and Paste the letter below - put your name and address at the top and your name at the bottom and send it to: email@example.com
BEFORE 15TH JUNE - that is next Wednesday - so we are running out of time.
Valid Objection E-mail - you may change the phrasing it you want, just to make it look slightly different but these are the objections the Planning Department accept as valid - it's all in the phrasing! It's crucial the correct reference number is used and quoted at the top as here. For those who live in Baildon, Eldwick, Bingley, Bradford, Leeds and district you might emphasise the loss of the amenity provided by this greenfield in a sprawling urban landscape.
[put your name and address here]Planning Service, 3rd Floor,
Jacob’s Well, Bradford BD1 5RW – email: firstname.lastname@example.org
Planning Application No 11/01203/MAO
Construction of some 400 dwellings. Replacement vehicular and pedestrian swing bridge over the Leeds/Liverpool canal, provision of new accesses off Sty Lane and Micklethwaite Lane, emergency and limited access off Oakwood Drive, pedestrian and cycle access to Fairfax Road, off site highway improvements, laying out of public open space and landscaping
I strongly object to this planning application by Redrow and Bellway Homes on the following grounds:
· The development of the site for housing is not necessary to meet current housing requirements. There is in existence, outline planning permission for 1500 houses already in this area that have not been built.
· The traffic generated from up to 400+ dwellings (plus potentially an additional 26 dwellings on adjacent site Ref S/H2.10) cannot satisfactorily be accommodated in the local highway network.
· A two-lane swing bridge of the stated dimensions cannot satisfactorily serve a site of this size – queuing and disruption on both bridge approaches will be the result of:
o Inadequate bridge carriageway width of 4.8m (compared with a standard width of 5.5m) two SMALL cars would only be able to pass each side by side with great care.
o Mechanical breakdowns
o Planned maintenance
o Boat passage (approx 15 openings per day in season)
· There are insufficient design details for the bridge and its associated approach roads to enable a decision to be made.
· The development will cause irreparable harm to the attractive landscape and visual character of the area.
· The development will cause irreparable harm to the archaeology and cultural heritage of the locality.
· The development will remove habitat for a rich diversity of wildlife and many of the current pleasurable amenity aspects of the canal-side environment will be permanently lost.
· The upheaval caused by significant civil engineering works and the lengthy building programme is environmentally unacceptable.
· It has not been satisfactorily determined that there is sufficient capacity in the existing sewerage system to cope with the additional foul drainage discharge.
· The visibility at the junction of Oakwood Drive and lady lane is in adequate and substandard as required by the Manual for Streets recommendations.
· The design of the part-time signals proposed at Oakwood Drive/Lady Lane is inherently flawed from a safety aspect i.e. restricted footway facilities and an increased level of exposure resulting in consequential accidents/collisions involving pedestrians.
· Oakwood Drive is designed for a maximum of 200 dwellings (as demonstrated by the applicant’s additional 22 units). It is NOT suitable for the traffic that will be generated by an additional 400+ dwellings (plus the existing traffic from Airedale Mills and Micklethwaite), even in an emergency situation.
· Access to the site from Oakwood Drive depends on gaining control of privately owned land at the northern end of the development. The applicant has not demonstrated that he has acquired control over this land.
Yours sincerely, [put your name here]