Public Document Pack

Agenda for a meeting of the Regulatory and Appeals Committee to be held on Thursday, 5 December 2019 at 10.00 am in Council Chamber, City Hall - City Hall, Bradford

Members of the Committee – Councillors LABOUR CONSERVATIVE LIBERAL DEMOCRAT AND INDEPENDENT GROUP Warburton Ali Reid Wainwright Brown Amran Watson

Alternates: LABOUR CONSERVATIVE LIBERAL DEMOCRAT AND INDEPENDENT GROUP Azam Ellis R Ahmed Godwin Pollard S Hussain Lal Notes:  This agenda can be made available in Braille, large print or tape format on request by contacting the Agenda contact shown below.  The taking of photographs, filming and sound recording of the meeting is allowed except if Councillors vote to exclude the public to discuss confidential matters covered by Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972. Recording activity should be respectful to the conduct of the meeting and behaviour that disrupts the meeting (such as oral commentary) will not be permitted. Anyone attending the meeting who wishes to record or film the meeting's proceedings is advised to liaise with the Agenda Contact who will provide guidance and ensure that any necessary arrangements are in place. Those present who are invited to make spoken contributions to the meeting should be aware that they may be filmed or sound recorded.  If any further information is required about any item on this agenda, please contact the officer named at the foot of that agenda item.  A legal briefing for all Members will take place at 0915 in the Council Chamber on the day of the meeting.  Applicants, objectors, Ward Councillors and other interested persons are advised that the Committee may visit any of the sites that appear on this Agenda during the day of the meeting, without prior notification. The Committee will then reconvene in the meeting room after any visits in order to determine the matters concerned.  At the discretion of the Chair, representatives of both the applicant(s) and objector(s) may be allowed to speak on a particular application for a maximum of five minutes in total.

INTERESTED PARTIES ARE ASKED TO NOTE THAT ITEMS 9 & 10 WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED BEFORE 1PM. From: To: Parveen Akhtar City Solicitor Agenda Contact: Yusuf Patel Phone: 01274 434579 E-Mail: [email protected] A. PROCEDURAL ITEMS

1. ALTERNATE MEMBERS (Standing Order 34)

The City Solicitor will report the names of alternate Members who are attending the meeting in place of appointed Members.

2. DISCLOSURES OF INTEREST

(Members Code of Conduct - Part 4A of the Constitution)

To receive disclosures of interests from Members and co-opted members on matters to be considered at the meeting. The disclosure must include the nature of the interest.

An interest must also be disclosed in the meeting when it becomes apparent to the Member during the meeting.

Notes:

(1) Members may remain in the meeting and take part fully in discussion and voting unless the interest is a disclosable pecuniary interest or an interest which the Member feels would call into question their compliance with the wider principles set out in the Code of Conduct. Disclosable pecuniary interests relate to the Member concerned or their spouse/partner.

(2) Members in arrears of Council Tax by more than two months must not vote in decisions on, or which might affect, budget calculations, and must disclose at the meeting that this restriction applies to them. A failure to comply with these requirements is a criminal offence under section 106 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992.

(3) Members are also welcome to disclose interests which are not disclosable pecuniary interests but which they consider should be made in the interest of clarity.

(4) Officers must disclose interests in accordance with Council Standing Order 44.

3. INSPECTION OF REPORTS AND BACKGROUND PAPERS

(Access to Information Procedure Rules – Part 3B of the Constitution)

Reports and background papers for agenda items may be inspected by contacting the person shown after each agenda item. Certain reports and background papers may be restricted. Any request to remove the restriction on a report or background paper should be made to the relevant Strategic or Assistant Director whose name is shown on the front page of the report.

If that request is refused, there is a right of appeal to this meeting.

Please contact the officer shown below in advance of the meeting if you wish to appeal. (Yusuf Patel - 01274 434579)

B. BUSINESS ITEMS

4. MEMBERSHIP OF SUB-COMMITTEES

The Committee will be asked to consider recommendations, if any, to appoint Members to Sub-Committees of the Committee.

(Yusuf Patel – 01274 434579)

5. ANNUAL DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT REPORT FOR 1 - 20 PERFORMANCE AND KEY ACTIVITIES

The Assistant Director (Planning, Transportation & Highways) will submit a report (Document “T”) which seeks to inform the Regulatory & Appeals Committee about Development Management performance and key activities undertaken over the last year (1 April 2018 – 31 March 2019). The Service can report that it exceeds or meets all the targets set by Government or in regard to its own measures such as stated in the Council Plan.

Recommended –

That the report be noted. (Jenny Seaman - 01274 434195)

6. ANNUAL SECTION 106 AGREEMENT AND COMMUNITY 21 - 58 INFRASTRUCTURE LEVY (CIL) REPORT

The Assistant Director (Planning, Transportation and Highways) will submit a report (Document “U”) which informs Members of progress with Section 106 Agreements and the Community Infrastructure Levy since its adoption and implementation on 1st July 2017 to the end of the financial year 2018/2019.

Recommended –

That the report be noted. (Andrew Marshall - 01274 434050) 7. LAND TO THE SOUTH OF ROOLEY CRESCENT, STAITHGATE 59 - 90 LANE, BRADFORD

The Assistant Director (Planning Transportation and Highways) will submit a report (Document “V”) which sets out a full application for the demolition of an existing dwelling and construction of 150 dwellings with associated engineering, landscaping and access works, at land to the south of Rooley Crescent, Staithgate Lane, Bradford.

Recommended –

That the application be refused for the reasons set out in Appendix 1 to Document “V”. (John Eyles - 01274 434380)

8. LAND AT HOLLY FOLD, STEETON WITH EASTBURN, BRADFORD 91 - 120

The Assistant Director (Planning, Transportation & Highways) will submit a report (Document “W”) which sets out a full planning application for the construction of 11 dwellings on land at Holly Fold, Steeton with Eastburn, Bradford.

Recommended –

That the application be approved subject to the conditions set out in Appendix 1 to Document “W”. (John Eyles - 01274 434380)

NB: INTERESTED PARTIES ARE ASKED TO NOTE THAT THE FOLLOWING ITEMS WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED BEFORE 1PM

9. FORMER SITE OF OTTO HOUSE, INGLEBY ROAD, BRADFORD 121 - 150 The Assistant Director (Planning, Transportation & Highways) will submit a report (Document “X”) which sets out a full application for the construction of 167 two, three and four bedroomed, 2 storey traditional residential homes on the former site of Otto House, Ingleby Road, Bradford.

Recommended –

That the application be approved, subject to the conditions set out in Appendix 1 to Document “X”. (John Eyles – 01274 434380) 10. LAND AT HIGHGATE ROAD, QUEENSBURY, BRADFORD WITH 151 - ACCESS TAKEN FROM WOODLANDS GROVE 170

The Assistant Director (Planning, Transportation & Highways) will submit a report (Document “Y”) which sets out reserved matters application requesting consideration of access, appearance, landscaping, layout and scale for a residential development of 12 dwellings (pursuant to outline approval reference 18/01604/MAO).

Recommended –

That the reserved matters application be approved, subject to the conditions set out in Appendix 1 to Document “Y”.

(John Eyles - 01274 434380)

THIS AGENDA AND ACCOMPANYING DOCUMENTS HAVE BEEN PRODUCED, WHEREVER POSSIBLE, ON RECYCLED PAPER This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 5/

Report of the Assistant Director (Planning, Transportation & Highways) to the meeting of Regulatory and Appeals Committee to be held on 5 December 2019 T

Subject: Annual Development Management report for performance and key activities

Summary statement: This report seeks to inform the Regulatory & Appeals Committee about Development Management performance and key activities undertaken over the last year (1 April 2018 – 31 March 2019). The Service can report that it exceeds or meets all the targets set by Government or in regard to its own measures such as stated in the Council Plan.

Julian Jackson Portfolio: Assistant Director (Planning, Transportation & Highways) Change Programme, Housing, Planning and Transport Report Contact: Jenny Seaman Service Liaison Co-ordinator Overview & Scrutiny Area: Phone: (01274) 434195 E-mail: [email protected] Regeneration and Economy

Page 1 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

1. SUMMARY

1.1 This report sets out Development Management’s performance against the national planning performance criteria for planning applications, local performance indicators NI157a, b and c and local performance indicator BV204. It also provides information relating to other types of applications and enquiries dealt with by the service.

2. BACKGROUND

2.1 The planning service submits quarterly returns to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) in respect of planning applications received and planning applications determined by type.

2.2 Section 62A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 which came into effect in 2013 gives the Secretary of State the power to designate or de-designate of planning authorities as underperforming in their determination of major planning applications. This allows certain applications to be made directly to the Secretary of State. Section 62A was amended by section 153 of the Housing and Planning Act 2016 to include other non- major development which comprises of minor developments, changes of use and householder developments. MHCLG assesses local planning authorities performance against the thresholds set out in the related criteria document “Improving Planning Performance: Criteria for Designation” on an annual basis.

2.3 The 2018 thresholds for designation are as follows:

Speed of decisions - the assessment period is the two years up to and including the most recent quarter for which data on planning application decisions are available.

 For applications for major development: less than 60 per cent of an authority’s decisions made within the statutory determination period or such extended period as has been agreed in writing with the applicant.

 For applications for non-major development: less than 70 per cent of an authority’s decisions made within the statutory determination period or such extended period as has been agreed in writing with the applicant.

Quality of decisions - the assessment period is the two years up to and including the most recent quarter for which data on planning application decisions are available, once the nine months to be allowed for beyond the end of the assessment period is taken into account.

 Local authorities’ performance on the quality of their decisions on either major or non-major applications in the 2018 designation round: 10 per cent of an authority’s total number of decisions on applications made during the assessment period being overturned at appeal.

2.4 In addition the service has also set its own local targets for performance against these indicators which is measured on a monthly basis. The major application target is stated in the adopted Council Plan.

Page 2 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

The targets for 2018/19 are as follows:

NI157a - 80% of major applications should be determined within 13 weeks. (16 weeks for applications with Environmental Assessments).

NI157b – 80% of minor applications should be determined within 8 weeks.

NI157c – 90% of other application should be determined within 8 weeks.

2.5 The service also submits quarterly returns to MHCLG in respect of decisions on applications for prior approval and certificates of lawfulness which are measured separately to planning applications and enforcement action. In addition the service deals with a number of other applications such as works to trees protected under a Tree Preservation Order, the approval of details required to be submitted under a planning condition and non-material amendments to planning permissions. These applications are monitored to assess performance.

2.6 A number of key activities are carried out in conjunction with the determination of planning applications such as publicity and consultation and the decision making process under delegated powers or via Area Planning Panels/ Regulatory & Appeals Committee. These activities are measured to assess both performance and the quality of service provided.

2.7 The planning service has set a local indicator BV204 to measure the percentage of appeals allowed against the Authority’s decision to refuse on planning applications. The local target set by the Local Planning Authority for 2018/19 is not more than 27% of planning appeals should be allowed. Other types of appeal decisions are also monitored such as appeals against non- determinations and prior notification applications.

2.8 The planning service undertakes a pre-application service for both major and minor development proposals. Some monitoring is undertaken in relation to this in order to obtain information about service take up and the quality of service provided.

2.9 The report at Appendix 1 sets out the Development Management performance and key activities outlined above for the last year (1 April 2018 – 31 March 2019).

2.10 The planning service can report that it meets or exceeds the targets set it by Government and also its locally set targets, including that for the speed of major planning applications set if the Council Plan.

3. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS

3.1 None.

4. FINANCIAL & RESOURCE APPRAISAL

4.1 Not applicable.

Page 3 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

5. RISK MANAGEMENT & GOVERNANCE ISSUES

5.1 There are no significant risks or governance issues arising out of the implementation of the proposed recommendations.

6. LEGAL APPRAISAL

6.1 There are no legal implications arising from this report.

7. OTHER IMPLICATIONS

7.1 EQUALITY & DIVERSITY

7.1.1 There are no equality and diversity implications arising from this report.

7.2 SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS

7.2.1 There are no sustainability implications arising from this report.

7.3 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS IMPACTS

7.3.1 There are no greenhouse gas emissions impacts arising from this report.

7.4 COMMUNITY SAFETY IMPLICATIONS

7.4.1 There are no direct community safety implications arising from this report.

7.5 HUMAN RIGHTS ACT

7.5.1 There are no direct human rights implications arising from this report.

7.6 TRADE UNION

7.6.1 There are no trade union implications arising from this report.

7.7 WARD IMPLICATIONS

7.7.1 There are no ward implications arising from this report.

7.8 AREA COMMITTEE ACTION PLAN IMPLICATIONS

7.8.1 There are no committee action plan implications arising from this report.

7.9 IMPLICATIONS FOR CORPORATE PARENTING

7.9.1 There are no implications for corporate parenting arising from this report.

7.10 ISSUES ARISING FROM PRIVACY IMPACT ASSESMENT

7.10.1 There are no privacy impact assessment implications arising from this report.

Page 4 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

8. NOT FOR PUBLICATION DOCUMENTS

8.1 None.

9. OPTIONS

9.1 None.

10. RECOMMENDATIONS

10.1 It is recommended that the contents of this report be noted.

11. APPENDICES

11.1 Appendix 1: Development Management Performance and Key Activities.

12. BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS

12.1 None.

Page 5 This page is intentionally left blank Appendix 1: Development Management Performance and Key Activities

1.0 Planning Applications Received 1.1 The table below sets out the number of planning applications received by type in 2018/19. It also details other applications received such as prior approval and approval of details which are measured separately.

No of Planning No Portal % of online Application Type received submissions submissions NI57 Applications Major 84 74 88.10% Minor 866 702 81.06% Changes of Use 140 117 83.57% Householder 1896 1493 78.74% Advertisement Consent 128 119 92.97% Listed Building Consent 194 155 79.90% Listed Building Consent (Demolition) 2 1 50.00% Relevant Demolition 1 0 0.00% Total no of 157 applications received 3311 2661 80.37%

No of Planning No Portal % of online Other Applications received submissions submissions Minerals 7 5 71.43% Hazarduous Substances Consent 4 n/a n/a Prior Approval - Larger house Extension 331 n/a n/a Prior Approval - Agriculture 10 5 50.00% Prior Approval - Demolition 15 14 93.33% Prior Approval - Telecommunications 23 17 73.91% Prior Approval - Solar Panel 2 n/a n/a Prior Approval - Agriculture to Residential 15 1 6.67% Prior Approval - Offices to Residential 9 n/a n/a Prior Approval - Retail to Residential 3 n/a n/a Prior Approval - Retail to Cafes 7 1 14.29% Prior Approval - Various to School 2 n/a n/a Notifications 0 n/a n/a Certificate of Lawfulness - Existing 29 21 72.41% Certificate of Lawfulness - Proposed 158 127 80.38% Certificate of Lawfulness Listed Building - Proposed 12 n/a n/a Approval of Details 351 294 83.76% Compliance with conditions 10 n/a 0.00% Non Material Amendments 162 44 27.16% Total other applications received 1150 529 46.00% n/a – online application process not available

Page 7 2.0 Planning Applications Determined – National Planning Performance

2.1 The following table sets out Bradford’s performance against the thresholds set out in the national criteria document “Improving Planning Performance: Criteria for Designation.

Major Applications 2.2 During the assessment period April 2017 to March 2019, 170 major planning applications were determined.

2.3 83.5% of these applications were determined within 13 weeks or an agreed extension of time period which is above the national target of 60%.

Quarter Total Major PPA, PPA, Total % in Major Decisions Extension Extension of Major time in 13 of Time Time or EIA Decisions weeks or EIA Decisions in time Decisions within agreed time

Jun-17 15 7 7 6 13 86.7% Sep-17 21 4 16 14 18 85.7% Dec-17 25 14 10 10 24 96.0% Mar-18 23 5 18 17 22 95.7% Jun-18 31 13 17 11 24 77.4% Sep-18 22 6 15 10 16 72.7% Dec-18 19 3 13 12 15 78.9% Mar-19 14 5 7 5 10 71.4% Assessment Period Total 170 57 103 85 142 83.5%

Page 8 Non Major Applications 2.4 During the assessment period April 2017 to March 2019, 5504 non major planning applications (minor developments, changes of use and householder developments) were determined.

2.5 94.0% of these applications were determined within 8 weeks or an agreed extension of time period which is above the national target of 70%.

Non PPA, PPA, Major Extension Extension of Decisions of Time Time or EIA in 8 or EIA Decisions Total Total weeks Decisions within Non Non agreed time Major in % in Quarter Major time time Jun-17 764 622 115 108 730 95.5% Sep-17 693 564 96 89 653 94.2% Dec-17 711 587 100 97 684 96.2% Mar-18 628 490 101 93 583 92.8% Jun-18 689 562 101 97 659 95.6% Sep-18 761 620 87 82 702 92.2% Dec-18 663 547 71 64 611 92.2% Mar-19 595 443 62 53 496 83.4% Assessment Period Total 5504 4435 733 683 5118 93.0%

Page 9 3.0 Quality of Planning Decisions – National Performance

3.1 The following table sets out Bradford’s performance against the thresholds set out in the national criteria document “Improving Planning Performance: Criteria for Designation.

Major Applications 3.2 During the assessment period April 2016 to March 2018, 167 major planning applications were determined.

3.3 There were 4 major appeal decisions during this period of which 1 appeal decision was allowed. This equals 0.6% of the total number of major decisions made, which is within the national target of 10%.

Total Total Major Total Major Appeal % Major Majors not Total Appeal Decisions Allowed Quarter Decisions determined Decisions Decisions Allowed Overall Jun-16 23 0 23 0 0 0.0% Sep-16 15 0 15 0 0 0.0% Dec-16 26 0 26 0 0 0.0% Mar-17 19 0 19 1 0 0.0% Jun-17 15 0 15 0 0 0.0% Sep-17 21 0 21 0 0 0.0% Dec-17 25 0 25 1 0 0.0% Mar-18 23 0 23 2 1 4.3% Assessment Period Total 167 0 167 4 1 0.6%

Page 10 Non Major Applications 3.4 During the assessment period April 2016 to March 2018, 5699 non major planning applications were determined.

3.5 There were 147 non major appeal decisions during this period of which 42 appeal decisions were allowed. This equals 0.7% of the total number of non major decisions made, which is within the national target of 10%.

Total Total Non Total Non Major Non Non Majors Major Appeal % Major not Total Appeal Decisions Allowed Quarter Decisions determined Decisions Decisions Allowed Overall Jun-16 833 0 833 19 7 0.8% Sep-16 768 0 768 10 1 0.1% Dec-16 650 0 650 14 4 0.6% Mar-17 652 1 653 30 8 1.2% Jun-17 764 0 764 17 3 0.4% Sep-17 693 0 693 19 7 1.0% Dec-17 711 1 712 24 6 0.8% Mar-18 628 0 628 14 6 1.0% Assessment Period Total 5699 2 5701 147 42 0.7%

Page 11 4.0 Planning Applications Determined – Local Performance

4.1 The following tables set out Bradford’s performance in determining planning applications against local performance indicators NI157a b and c for 2018/19.

Major Applications (NI157a) 4.2 In 2018/19, 86 major applications were determined. This figure does not include those applications that were withdrawn, finally disposed of, declined to determine by the Local Planning Authority, called in for determination by the Secretary of State or non determined applications subject to appeal.

4.3 76.74% of these applications were determined within 13 weeks or an agreed extension of time period which is below the local target of 80%.

No Determined Determined No No Application Type Determined in time out of time granted refused Major Development Dwellings 54 37 17 48 6 Offices, research & development 0 0 0 0 0 & light industry General industry, storage & 11 11 0 11 0 warehousing Retail, Distribution & servicing 7 7 0 7 0 Gypsy & traveller pitches 0 0 0 0 0 All other largescale development 14 11 3 12 2 Total no of major applications determined 86 66 20 78 8

Minor Applications (NI157b)

4.4 In 2018/19, 790 minor applications were determined. 86.71% of these applications were determined within 8 weeks or an agreed extension of time period which is above the local target of 80%.

No Determined Determined No No Application Type Determined in time out of time granted refused Minor Development Dwellings 312 273 39 219 93 Offices, research & development 20 18 2 18 2 & light industry General industry, storage & 44 42 2 37 7 warehousing Retail, Distribution & servicing 130 115 15 86 44 Gypsy & traveller pitches 0 0 0 0 0 All other minor development 284 237 47 232 52 Total no of minor applications determined 790 685 105 592 198

Page 12 Other Applications (NI157c)

4.5 In 2018/19, 2220 other applications were determined. 93.29% of these applications were determined within 8 weeks or an agreed extension of time period which is above the local target of 90%.

No Determined Determined No No Application Type Determined in time out of time granted refused Other Development Changes of Use 140 116 24 99 41 Householder 1778 1681 97 1447 331 Advertisement Consent 132 122 10 113 19 Listed Building Consent 170 152 18 148 22 Listed Building Consent 0 0 0 0 0 (Demolition) Relevant Demolition 0 0 0 0 0 Total no of other applications determined 2220 2071 149 1807 413

Page 13 5.0 Other types of applications determined 5.1 The Service also determined a number of other applications not measured under national indicator NI157, including applications for prior approval and non material amendments. These applications are detailed in the tables below.

Prior approval No No No not Prior Approval Application Type Determined granted refused required Prior Approval - Larger house Extension 312 2 58 252 Prior Approval - Agriculture 8 0 1 7 Prior Approval - Demolition 11 0 0 11 Prior Approval - Telecommunications 23 13 1 9 Prior Approval - Solar Equipment 2 0 0 2 Prior Approval - Click & Collect 0 0 0 0 Prior Approval - Film Making 0 0 0 0 Prior Approval - Agriculture to Residential 10 4 2 4 Prior Approval - Agriculture to Flexible Use 0 0 0 0 Prior Approval - Agriculture to School & Nursery 0 0 0 0 Prior Approval - Offices to Residential 7 0 2 5 Prior Approval - Light Industrial to Residential 0 0 0 0 Prior Approval - Sui Generis to Residential 0 0 0 0 Prior Approval - Retail to Residential 3 0 0 0 Prior Approval - Retail to Cafe 5 1 3 1 Prior Approval - Retail to Assembly & Leisure 0 0 0 0 Prior Approval - Various to School & Nursery 1 1 0 0 Total no applications determined 382 21 67 291

No No No Partial Other Applications Determined Determined granted refused Granted Certificate of Lawfulness - Existing 24 14 10 n/a Certificate of Lawfulness - Proposed 156 124 32 n/a Certificate of Lawfulness Listed Building - Proposed 11 3 8 n/a Minerals 3 3 0 n/a Hazardous Substance consent 2 2 0 n/a Approval of Details 312 206 27 79 Non Material Amendments 154 128 26 n/a Compliance with conditions 10 10 0 n/a Total applications determined 672 490 103 79 n/a – decision process not applicable

Page 14 6.0 Decisionmaking

6.1 In 2018/19, 2973 planning applications were determined under delegated powers which equates to 96.01% of all applications determined. 89 applications were determined at planning panel; 57 minor and 32 other applications. A further 34 applications were determined at Regulatory & Appeals Committee; 31 major, 1 minor and 2 minor other applications.

6.2 The table below shows a breakdown of the number of meetings held in the 2018/19 committee year together with the number of items considered and time spent.

Av number No of No of of Av time Meetings meetings Total no of applications Total Time per Meeting held cancelled applications per meeting Spent meeting Regulatory 13 0 35 2.7 33:34:00 02:34 Bradford 7 4 52 7.4 19:05:00 02:43 Keighley/Ship 8 2 48 6.0 19:05:00 02:23 Total 28 6 135 4.8 71:44:00 02:33

Page 15 6.3 The tables below set out a breakdown of the applications considered by Area Planning Panels and Regulatory & Appeals Committee. It provides details of the number of site visits undertaken, deferrals to the next meeting, referrals to Regulatory & Appeals Committee and overturned decisions.

No of no of no of no of no of no of DATE PANEL items withdrawn visits retro deferrals referrals overturns 04-Jul-18 Bradford 12 3 0 7 0 0 1 01-Aug-18 Bradford Cancelled 05-Sep-18 Bradford 10 1 0 0 1 0 0 03-Oct-18 Bradford 6 1 0 1 0 0 2 14-Nov-18 Bradford Cancelled 0 19-Dec-18 Bradford 10 0 1 0 0 1 09-Jan-19 Bradford Cancelled 06-Feb-19 Bradford 4 0 0 0 0 0 1 06-Mar-19 Bradford Cancelled 03-Apr-19 Bradford 7 1 0 2 1 0 3 15-May- 19 Bradford 3 1 0 1 1 0 1 Total 52 7 0 12 3 0 9

13-Jun-18 Keighley/Shipley 4 0 0 0 0 0 1 11-Jul-18 Keighley/Shipley 9 0 0 0 0 0 2 29-Aug-18 Keighley/Shipley 7 0 0 0 1 0 1 26-Sep-18 Keighley/Shipley 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 31-Oct-18 Keighley/Shipley 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 12-Dec-18 Keighley/Shipley 4 0 0 0 1 0 0 23-Jan-19 Keighley/Shipley Cancelled 27-Feb-19 Keighley/Shipley 5 1 0 0 1 0 0 27-Mar-19 Keighley/Shipley 6 1 0 0 0 0 1 24-Apr-19 Keighley/Shipley Cancelled Total 48 3 0 0 3 0 5

31-May-18 Regulatory 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 21-Jun-18 Regulatory 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 19-Jul-18 Regulatory 8 0 0 0 0 0 1 22-Aug-18 Regulatory 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 13-Sep-18 Regulatory 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 04-Oct-18 Regulatory 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 15-Nov-18 Regulatory 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 06-Dec-19 Regulatory 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 10-Jan-19 Regulatory 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 07-Feb-19 Regulatory 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 07-Mar-19 Regulatory 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 11-Apr-19 Regulatory 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20-May-19 Regulatory 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 35 2 0 0 0 0 2

Page 16 6.0 Publicity & Consultation

7.1 In 2018/19, 660 Press Notices were published relating to planning and other applications. In addition 17,100 neighbour notification letters were sent out for planning and other applications.

7.2 In 2018/19, 5802 individual consultations to internal and external technical experts were undertaken relating to planning applications and 1026 consultations in relation to other applications.

7.0 Planning Enforcement

7.1 The table below details planning enforcement activity in 2018/19.

Nature of Enquiry No No of enquiries received regarding unauthorised development 960 No of cases closed following investigation and negotiation or no development 1101 No of enforcement notices authorised 122 No of prosecutions carried out 12 No of outstanding cases 1763

9.0 Tree Applications

Nature of Issue No No of planning consultations received 235 No of planning consultations responded to within 21 days 62 % of consultations determined in time 26.38% No of applications received for works to TPO trees 405 No of applications determined within 8 weeks 182 % of applications determined in time 44.50% No of appeals dismissed 4 No of appeals allowed 0 No of appeals outstanding 13 No of applications received for works to trees in conservation areas 228 No of applications determined within 6 weeks 116 % of applications determined in time 58.88% No of high hedge complaints received 0

Page 17 10.0 Planning Appeals

10.1 The table below sets out the Council’s performance for appeals against the refusal of planning permission in 2018/19. Bradford received a total of 89 appeal decisions of which 27 appeals were allowed. This equals 30.3% which is above the local target of 27% for 2018/19.

Total No of Total No of Appeal Appeals Percentage Application Type Decisions Allowed Allowed Major Dwellings 3 1 33.3% Dwellings 18 7 38.9% Offices, research & development & light industry 1 1 100.0% General industry, storage & warehousing 1 0 0.0% Retail, Distribution & servicing 6 2 33.3% Gypsy & traveller pitches 0 0 0.0% All other minor development 6 2 33.3% Changes of Use 3 0 0.0% Householder 43 13 30.2% Advertisement Consent 6 0 0.0% Listed Building Consent 2 1 50.0% Listed Building Consent (Demolition) 0 0 0.0% Relevant Demolition 0 0 0.0% Total no of appeals determined 89 27 30.3%

10.2 The Service also received appeal decisions for other types of application. These applications are detailed in the tables below.

Total No of Total No of Appeal Appeals Percentage Appeal Type Decisions Allowed Allowed Non determination 0 0 0.0% Certificates of Lawfulness 2 2 100.0% Approval of Details 1 1 100.0% Prior Notification 2 1 50.0% Total no of appeals determined 5 4 80.0%

Page 18 11.0 Pre Application Enquiries

11.1 The Planning Service has been operating a charging scheme for major pre application enquiries since 1 November 2009 and for minor pre application since 13 August 2012. The table below sets out the number of enquiries received in 2018/19.

No Type of Enquiry received Major Pre Application Enquiries 52 Minor Pre Application Enquiries 138 Screening Opinions 5 Scoping Opinions 2 Total No of Enquiries received 197

12.0 Bradford Local Plan Update

12.1 The Council is in the process of reviewing the strategic policies (contained in the Core Strategy adopted in 2017) which determine the scale and distribution of growth to 2037 as part of the Partial Review in light of changes to national policy. This will then inform the work on the site allocations to ensure we have the land to deliver the housing and jobs needs and associated infrastructure. These two Local Plan documents are progressing in tandem with the aim to submit to examination towards the end of 2020. These together would ensure an up to date set of policies and allocations to provide certainty to both decision makers, investors and the public.

Page 19 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 6/

Report of the Assistant Director (Planning, Transportation and Highways) to the meeting of Regulatory and Appeals Committee to be held on 5th December 2019 U

Subject:

Annual Section 106 Agreement and Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) report.

Summary statement:

Annual report to inform Members of progress with Section 106 Agreements and the Community Infrastructure Levy since its adoption and implementation on 1st July 2017 to the end of the financial year 2018/2019.

Julian Jackson Portfolio: Assistant Director (Planning, Transportation and Highways) Change Programme, Housing, Planning and Transport

Report Contact: Andrew Marshall Overview & Scrutiny Area: Planning and Transport Strategy Manager Regeneration and Economy Phone: (01274) 434050 E-mail: [email protected] Page 21 1. SUMMARY

Bradford Council became a Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) charging authority on 1st July 2017.

The Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) is intended as a means of contributing to the funding of infrastructure required to support the delivery of the Local Plan, including the adopted Core Strategy and other Development Plan Documents. It replaces part of the system of Planning Obligations (S106 Agreements), the scope of which has been restricted since 6 April 2015.

This report will summarise the allocation of the CIL monies received by Executive Committee and will provide an overview of the total number of CIL liable applications and Section 106 Agreements entered into since 1st July 2017.

2. BACKGROUND

The District CIL was adopted by Full Council on 21 March 2017, and the charges were implemented from 1st July 2017. The process for the collection, spending and reporting of CIL monies must be transparent and undertaken in line with the requirements set out in the CIL Regulations.

The collection and spending arrangements for funding secured through Section 106 Agreements has not altered and is still in line with previously agreed procedures.

3. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS

None

4. FINANCIAL & RESOURCE APPRAISAL

The Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 (as amended) require the Council to prepare a report for any financial year in which-:

a) It collects CIL, or CIL is collected on its behalf; or b) An amount of CIL collected by it or by another person on its behalf (whether in the reported year or any other) has not been spent.

CIL Regulation 62 sets out the specific requirements which must be covered by this Report, the first such annual CIL monitoring report and covers the financial year 6 April 2018 to 31 March 2019 and will be made available on the council’s website.

5. RISK MANAGEMENT AND GOVERNANCE ISSUES

None

6. LEGAL APPRAISAL

The exercise of S106 Agreements is carried out under the legal powers held by the Council and under strict guidance issued by central government and case law. The Council’s operation of CIL is summarily covered by statute and clear government

Page 22 guidance concerning how it should operate and be administered.

7. OTHER IMPLICATIONS

7.1 EQUALITY & DIVERSITY

Section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 states that the Council must, in the exercise of its functions “have due regard to the need to eliminate conduct that is prohibited by the Act, advancing equality of opportunity between people who share a protected characteristics and people who do not share it, and fostering good relations between people who share a protected characteristic and people who do not share it. For this purpose section 149 defines “relevant protected characteristics” as including a range of characteristics including disability, race and religion.

7.2 SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS

None

7.3 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS IMPACTS

None

7.4 COMMUNITY SAFETY IMPLICATIONS

None

7.5 HUMAN RIGHTS ACT

None

7.6 TRADE UNION

 None

7.7 WARD IMPLICATIONS

Ward Members are notified upon completion of a Section 106 Agreement for their ward.

In line with the CIL Regulations 2010 (as amended) 15% of CIL income will be passed directly to those parish and town councils where development has taken place (the neighbourhood proportion), subject to the cap set in national CIL regulations. This will increase to 25% in any areas with an adopted neighbourhood plan.

7.8 AREA COMMITTEE ACTION PLAN IMPLICATIONS (for reports to Area Committees only)

None

Page 23 7.9 IMPLICATIONS FOR CORPORATE PARENTING

None

7.10 ISSUES ARISING FROM PRIVACY IMPACT ASSESMENT

None

8. NOT FOR PUBLICATION DOCUMENTS

None

9. RECOMMENDATIONS

It is recommended that the contents of this report be noted.

10. APPENDICES

Appendix 1 – Section 106 Agreements signed Appendix 2 - Section 106 payments received Appendix 3 – CIL liability notices issued Appendix 4 – CIL payments received and neighbourhood payments

11. BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS

 Bradford District CIL Charging Schedule  Bradford CIL Regulation 123 List  Report ‘Governance Arrangements for the Bradford CIL Charging Schedule’ to the Governance and Audit Committee on 28 February 2017

Page 24 Officer Report

1. SUMMARY

Bradford Council became a Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) charging authority on 1st July 2017.

The Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) is intended as a means of contributing to the funding of infrastructure required to support the delivery of the Local Plan, including the adopted Core Strategy and other Development Plan Documents. It replaces part of the system of Planning Obligations (S106 Agreements), the scope of which has been restricted since 6 April 2015.

CIL was adopted by Full Council on 21 March 2017, and the charges were implemented from 1st July 2017. The process for the collection, spending and reporting of CIL monies must be transparent and undertaken in line with the requirements set out in the CIL Regulations.

The report to the Governance and Audit Committee on 28 February 2017 sets out the governance arrangements for allocating, spending and reporting on the Bradford CIL. This resolved that CIL receipts will be directed into two main funding streams; a CIL Strategic Fund and a Neighbourhood CIL Fund. The Council will retain 5% of the total CIL receipts collected to cover administration and implementation costs.

The allocation of the CIL Strategic Fund is decided upon by Executive Committee and the first allocation took place in July this year.

This report will summarise the allocations decided upon by Executive Committee.

SECTION 106 AGREEMENTS SINCE THE INTRODUCTION OF CIL

As CIL replaces part of the system of Planning Obligations secured through Section 106 Agreements, there has been a reduction in the number of Section 106 Agreements entered into.

The last monitoring report for Section 106 Agreements was presented to Members of this committee in November 2017 and was concerned with Agreements signed for the first six months of the financial year 2017/2018.

For consistency this report will detail the Agreements signed for the second half of financial year 2017/2018 up to the end of financial year 2019.

AGREEMENTS SIGNED

5 Section 106 Agreements were signed in the latter half of 2017/2018 and a further 15 signed between 1st April 2018 to 31st March 2019.

In total these 20 Agreements included 5 Deed of Variation Agreements. These Deed of Variations were entered into to amend the delivery of affordable housing

Page 25 units to Discount Market Sales units, to confirm the financial sums to be paid following the grant of reserved matters applications and to add the mortgagee exclusion clause to the original Section 106 Agreement.

Within the 20 Agreements completed, there were 33 clauses in total of which 11 had a financial obligation. The value of the 11 financial obligations is £1,668,828.00.

Of the 22 non financial clauses, 6 were for the provision of on site affordable housing units or the provision of Discount Market Sales units.

Appendix 1 details all the Agreements signed by ward, obligation type and obligation value.

Table 1 below shows the number and value 11 of clauses requiring financial contributions by type.

Table 1: Number and value of obligations by clause type

Obligation type No of clauses Total value of clauses Affordable housing 3 £644,530.00 Education 3 £791,298.00 Recreation 1 £108,000.00 Highways 1 £7,000.00 WYCA 3 £118,000.00 Total 11 £1,668,828.00

Table 2 below shows the number of non-financial contribution clauses by type.

Table 2: Number of non-financial obligations by clause type

Obligation type No of clauses Affordable housing – transfer of 6 dwellings to RP or provision of Discount Market Sale units On site public open space and 1 communal areas Car park spaces 1 Community facilities contribution 2 Highway works 2 Other 10 Total 22

SECTION 106 PAYMENTS RECEIVED

Financial contributions will normally be received when a particular trigger point has been reached. This is usually prior to the commencement of development and/or for large scale developments at another pre agreed stages based on occupation levels.

Since 1st January 2009 to the present day the total amount of Section 106 monies received is £18,429,907.05.

Page 26 Appendix 2 provides a breakdown of the monies received by Ward and obligation type.

COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE LEVY (CIL) APPLICATIONS

CIL was implemented 1st July 2017 and is payable for all CIL liable developments. The amount payable depends on the size and location of the development. The charging schedule for Bradford Council is:

Development type CIL rate (£ per square metre) Dwellings in residential zone 1* £100 Dwellings in residential zone 2* £50 Dwellings in residential zone 3* £20 Dwellings in residential zone 4* £0 Retail warehouses in Central Bradford only £85 Large supermarkets over 2000sqm £50 All other uses £0 *This charge applies to the creation of one or more dwellings and residential extensions or annexes over 100 sqm or more gross internal area. It does not apply to specialist older persons’ housing (also known as sheltered/retirement/extra care).

CIL INDEXATION

CIL payments must be index linked from the year CIL was introduced to the year that planning permissions are granted.

The index which must be used is the national All-in-Tender Index published by the Building Cost Information Service (BCIS).

The rate of indexation currently being charged is 11.2%. This amount will be reassessed and altered if necessary in January 2020.

CIL LIABILITIES

Since the introduction of CIL, 262 liability notices have been issued. A liability notice is the confirmation issued by Bradford Council of the amount of CIL to be paid when a development commences.

The 262 liability notices total £820,814.48. Appendix 3 details all CIL liability notices issued.

Table 3 provides a breakdown of the liability notices raised and the CIL zones in which they are located.

Page 27 Table 3: CIL liability notices by CIL zone/liable use

CIL zone/liable use Total number of liability Total value of liability notices notices Dwellings in residential zone 34 £318,134.40 1 Dwellings in residential zone 37 £451,172.92 2 Dwellings in residential zone 58 £633,525.96 3 Dwellings in residential zone 132 £0.00 4 Retail warehouses in 0 £0.00 Central Bradford only Large supermarkets over 1 £105,750.00 2000sqm

CIL EXEMPTIONS

There are a number of exemptions which may be applied for in order to reduce the CIL liability of a development.

These exemptions are:

Self build exemption: this can be granted to an applicant who is having a dwelling built that will be their main residence for a minimum period of three years from the date of completion. This exemption reduces the CIL liability to nil. If the applicant does not comply with either the commencement notice regulations or the occupation criteria post completion, financial penalties can be imposed.

Social housing exemption: this can be granted to an applicant who affordable housing units within their development. The floor space of the affordable housing units will be deducted from the overall floor space of the development and will reduce the CIL liability to be paid. If the applicant does not comply with the CIL regulations regarding commencement notices the exemption can be removed.

Charity exemption: this exemption can be granted to a registered charity and will reduce their CIL liability to nil. If the applicant does not comply with the CIL regulations regarding commencement notices the exemption can be removed.

A total of 44 exemptions were granted during the period 1st July 2017- 31st March 2019. Five were social housing exemptions and the remaining 39 were self build exemptions.

CIL PAYMENTS RECEIVED

CIL is payable upon the commencement of the development. Depending on the total CIL liability due, the sum can be paid in instalments.

Between the period 1st July 2017 and 31st March 2019, 12 CIL liable developments commenced and paid their liability. The total sum paid was £350,697.00. Appendix 4 provides a breakdown of the CIL monies paid.

Page 28 CIL NEIGHBOURHOOD FUND

In line with the CIL Regulations 2010 (as amended) 15% of CIL income will be passed directly to those parish and town councils where development has taken place (the neighbourhood proportion), subject to the cap set in national CIL regulations. This will increase to 25% in any areas with an adopted neighbourhood plan.

The neighbourhood proportion will be transferred annually by the 28th April each year.

In areas where there is no parish or town council communities will still benefit from the neighbourhood proportion, however the Council will retain and ring-fence the CIL receipts for these areas. The existing approach used for Planning Obligations (Section 106) will be used to direct spending of the CIL Neighbourhood Fund in areas without a parish or town council, in consultation with relevant ward councillors.

Appendix 4 provides a breakdown of those parish and town council and ward who received a CIL payment and the amount received.

In addition to the 15%/25% transferred to the parish, town councils and wards, Bradford Council are able to retain a maximum of 5% of the CIL receipts to be used towards the costs of monitoring and administering CIL. It has been decided that Bradford Council will retain the maximum 5% and the sum retained can be found at appendix 4.

ALLOCATING THE CIL SPEND

CIL is a key part of the delivery of the Council Plan priorities and can be spent on any infrastructure item set out on the Regulation 123 list.

Executive Committee were presented with a report on 9th July 2019 detailing the CIL receipts up to the 31st March 2019. The Executive Committee resolved to allocate CIL as follows:

Regulation 123 List Allocation of CIL Reason for allocation Infrastructure Type Strategic Fund (July 2017 to March 2018) Education including 40% of £225,686.90 There is a proven link primary and secondary balance after Strategic between the provision of provision CIL pot deposit new houses in a given £90,274.76 area and increased pressure for additional school places. Recreation and open 30% of £225,686.90 There is a proven link space balance after Strategic between the provision of CIL pot deposit new houses in a given £67,706.07 area and increased pressure on existing recreational facilities. Green infrastructure, 15% of £225,686.90 It is a Council priority to public realm and air balance after Strategic mitigate the adverse quality CIL pot deposit impacts on air quality

Page 29 £33,853.04 created by new development. Habitat mitigation 15% of £225,686.90 Required by European schemes including balance after Strategic legislation see paragraph Suitable Alternative CIL pot deposit 3.4. Natural Greenspace £33,853.04

The allocations above resulted in a remaining balance of £56,421.72. It was resolved that this sum would be retained and would be the first deposit in a Strategic CIL pot.

Collection period Total CIL receipts Minimum 20% to Pot total less be retained Neighbourhood funds and 5% admin July 2017- March £282,108.62 £56,421.72 £56,421.72 2019

As the intention of CIL is a means to fund infrastructure required to support the delivery of the Local Plan, the Council is able to set aside a percentage of each year’s CIL receipts into a Strategic CIL pot.

The aim of this funding pot would be to support the delivery of future strategic infrastructure projects which may come forward in the future.

CIL funds can be used for match funding for any project which will fall within the remit of the infrastructure listed on the Regulation 123 list.

This funding pot would be separate to any CIL funds allocated to internal infrastructure providers such as education, recreation and green infrastructure.

AMENDED CIL REGULATIONS

The seventh amendment to the original CIL Regulations (2010) came into force on 1 September 2019. The Government’s stated purpose in introducing the revised Regulations is to make developer contributions through CIL and Planning Obligations fairer and more effective, as well as to make their application more transparent.

Key changes introduced in the amended regulations included the following:

 the removal of Regulation 123 Lists and lifting of the pooling restrictions for planning obligations;  placing monitoring fees on a statutory footing and the introduction of annual Infrastructure Funding Statements (IFS) for monitoring and reporting on CIL and Planning obligations;  reducing the penalties for failure to submit a notice before commencing building;  and simplify the process for adopting or amending CIL charging schedules.

Page 30 These changes will require changes in the way the Council operate and administer CIL and officers are making the necessary changes in compliance with the new regulations.

Page 31 This page is intentionally left blank Application Contribution Ward Address Proposal Date signed Clause number Clause summary number value Bingley 18/02085/MAF Bingley Auction Mart Keighley Road Construction of retirement living (category II type 29/03/2019 1 Affordable housing £ 245,091.00 Bingley West Yorkshire sheltered housing) and retirement plus (extra contribtion care) accommodation, together with communal facilities, landscaping and car parking

Bingley Rural 18/03868/MAR Land At Harden Road And Keighley Reserved matters application for the approval of 30/01/2019 1 Allotments contribution Road Harden Road Harden Bingley layout, scale, appearance and landscaping for payment terms West Yorkshire residential development of 28 dwellings (pursuant to outline approval 15/01039/MAO). 2 Education contribution £ 46,708.00

3 Harden Memorial Hall Contribution payment terms 4 Public Open Space Bolton and 12/03708/MAF Land At Poplars Park Road Bradford Residential development of 26 open market 25/06/2018 14 Deed of Release Undercliffe West Yorkshire dwellings, 20 affordable units, associated access, Page 33 Page car parking and landscaping and outline for up to 93 dwellings with ecology and landscape enhancements to the woodland

Bradford 17/02423/FUL 725 Leeds Road Bradford West Retrospective change of use from retail to ice 01/05/2018 1 Car parking Moor Yorkshire BD3 8DG cream parlour including off site additional car parking Clayton and 17/05251/MAF Land At Holts Lane Bradford West Residential development of 99 dwellings with 20/03/2019 2 DoV - Affordable housing 20 x units Fairweather Yorkshire associated works Green Craven 16/03804/MAO Former Riverside Works Keighley Demolition of buildings and outline permission 13/11/2018 1 Affordable housing £ 349,439.00 Road Silsden West Yorkshire BD20 (access only) for residential development (Use 2 Highway works 0EH Class C3) - (submission of amended plans and 3 Safeguarded land Heaton 17/06647/MAF Ashwell Farm 47 - 49 Ashwell Road Constructionaddendum flood of twenty risk assessment) seven dwellings 31/07/2018 1 Affordable housing 5 x units Heaton Bradford West Yorkshire BD9 2 Estate roads Idle and 14/00255/MAF Land4AX At Simpsons Green Apperley Construction of 267 dwellings and integral public 07/11/2017 11 DoV - variation Thackley Road Apperley Bridge Bradford West open space, with associated access, parking and permission and Yorkshire landscaping obligations Idle and 17/04718/MAF Thackley Grange Booth Royd Drive Demolition of care home and redevelopment of 14/02/2018 1 Compensation Payment £ 116,590.00 Thackley Bradford West Yorkshire BD10 8LW land for fourteen dwellings Idle and 16/02062/MAF 1023 Harrogate Road Bradford West Construction of five-storey building containing 28 23/02/2018 1 TRO contribution £ 7,000.00 Thackley Yorkshire BD10 0NG dwellings together with associated car park, landscaping and access Idle and 13/04148/MAF Land At Cote Farm Leeds Road Hybrid application for up to 220 dwellings with 09/08/2018 8 DoV - affordable housing 30 x units Thackley Thackley Bradford West Yorkshire full permission for 60 dwellings, with partial means of access and open space included within 9 DoV - bus stop £ 38,000.00 the outline improvement contribution 10 DoV - education £ 628,000.00 contribution 11 DoV - Harrogate Road/New Line junction

12 DoV - sports and £ 108,000.00 recreation contribution

Idle and 18/02325/MAF Land South East Of 55 Westfield Lane Construction of 26 residential dwellings. 12/12/2018 1 Affordable housing 5 x units Thackley Idle Bradford West Yorkshire Page 34 Page Idle and 10/06124/VOC Former Moorview Business Park 628 Variation of Condition 2 of permission 20/03/2019 4 Dov - Mortgagee Thackley Leeds Road Thackley Bradford West 08/00534/FUL dated 11.07.2008: Demolition of exclusion clause Yorkshire existing commercial premises and construction of 32 dwellings Ilkley 15/00575/VOC Craiglands Hotel Cowpasture Road Removal of condition 2 on planning application 26/02/2019 3 DoV - Spa facilities Ilkley West Yorkshire LS29 8RG 13/04578/FUL which relates to: The proposed spa facility to be created in the basement of Craiglands Hotel shall only be operated or used in connection with the occupation and operation of the existing hotel use at the site and only used by guests staying at the hotel. It shall at no time be severed and operated as a separate unit.

Keighley 18/03198/MAF Land South Occupation Lane Keighley Construction of seven dwellings (Plots 118-123a 23/10/2018 1 DoV - Mortgagee West West Yorkshire inclusive), with associated access and alteration to exclusion clause approved floor levels of Plots 92-94 (inclusive) 2 Affordable housing plots 8 x units pursuant to previously approved application ref: Shipley 17/01313/MAF Former Site Of Bankside Dock Lane Residential14/02541/MAF development of 81 units 07/11/2017 1 Affordable housing 5 x units Shipley West Yorkshire BD17 7BJ 3 Bus stop contribution £ 40,000.00 Shipley 18/01542/MAF Swanside Development Dock Lane Construction of 74 dwellings 29/11/2018 1 Affordable housing £ 50,000.00 Shipley West Yorkshire contribution Shipley 18/01542/MAF Swanside Development Dock Lane Construction of 74 dwellings 29/11/2018 Shipley West Yorkshire 2 Bus stop contribution £ 40,000.00 Thornton and 16/09318/MAF Former Site Of Avenel Club Whitburn Development of 23 two and four bedroom 21/12/2017 1 Affordable housing 5 x dwellings Allerton Way Bradford West Yorkshire BD15 properties 7PE Wharfedale 18/01556/MAF Hare And Hounds 47 Bradford Road Demolition of public house and creation of 27/11/2018 1 Approved occupier Menston Ilkley West Yorkshire LS29 specialist accommodation for the elderly 6BU comprising of apartments with care, communal facilities, parking and associated private amenity space for persons aged 60 and over

Worth Valley 97/03149/FUL New Westfield Farm Moorside Lane Barn conversion and extension to provide 06/12/2018 1 Permitted development Oxenhope Keighley West Yorkshire bunkhouse accommodation rights BD22 9RH Page 35 Page This page is intentionally left blank Parliamentary Application Date received Obligation Ward Amount Constituency 13/00377/MAO 07/04/2016 Affordable Housing Idle and Thackley Bradford East £ 315,000.00 16/09142/MAF 18/03/2019 Drainage Idle and Thackley Bradford East £ 7,172.10 10/06124/VOC 04/03/2014 Education Idle and Thackley Bradford East £ 12,544.00 13/00377/MAO 07/04/2016 Education Idle and Thackley Bradford East £ 122,520.00 14/05285/MAO 05/04/2018 Education Idle and Thackley Bradford East £ 112,389.37 14/05285/MAO 04/07/2018 Education Idle and Thackley Bradford East £ 112,389.38 14/05285/MAO 14/02/2019 Education Idle and Thackley Bradford East £ 112,389.38 14/00255/MAF 01/03/2019 Education Idle and Thackley Bradford East £ 352,946.66 16/09142/MAF 02/05/2019 Education Idle and Thackley Bradford East £ 33,185.18 14/01727/MAO 09/09/2019 Education Idle and Thackley Bradford East £ 109,859.93 14/03838/FUL 30/08/2016 Highways Bradford Moor Bradford East £ 7,000.00 12/05134/FUL 22/10/2013 Highways Eccleshill Bradford East £ 7,000.00 09/05887/FUL 19/02/2013 Highways Idle and Thackley Bradford East £ 5,305.00 13/01365/FUL 01/11/2013 Highways Idle and Thackley Bradford East £ 7,000.00 14/00255/MAF 29/12/2015 Highways Idle and Thackley Bradford East £ 300,000.00 14/00255/MAF 29/12/2015 Highways Idle and Thackley Bradford East £ 200,000.00 14/00255/MAF 27/01/2017 Highways Idle and Thackley Bradford East £ 426,006.00 14/00255/MAF 22/12/2017 Highways Idle and Thackley Bradford East £ 1,000,000.00 14/00255/MAF 01/03/2019 Highways Idle and Thackley Bradford East £ 14,000.00 13/00377/MAO 29/04/2016 Highways/Culvert Idle and Thackley Bradford East £ 273,524.74 14/05285/MAO 04/07/2018 Metro Idle and Thackley Bradford East £ 20,000.00 16/09142/MAF 02/05/2019 Metro Idle and Thackley Bradford East £ 15,705.00 14/00255/MAF 01/03/2019 Metro-Transport infrastructureIdle and Thackley Bradford East £ 20,000.00 05/09173/OUT 02/12/2015 Recreation Bolton and Undercliffe Bradford East £ 12,600.00 08/06080/FUL 22/04/2009 Recreation Bowling and Barkerend Bradford East £ 15,500.00 03/00337/OUT 28/06/2010 Recreation Bowling and Barkerend Bradford East £ 10,200.00 11/00317/MAF 11/05/2011 Recreation Bowling and Barkerend Bradford East £ 18,500.00 03/00337/OUT 29/12/2015 Recreation Bowling and Barkerend Bradford East £ 99,960.00 03/00337/OUT 29/03/2019 Recreation Bowling and Barkerend Bradford East £ 54,936.00 03/00368/OUT 27/02/2013 Recreation Bradford Moor Bradford East £ 25,000.00 04/02150/FUL 30/12/2009 Recreation Eccleshill Bradford East £ 25,000.00 10/06124/VOC 04/03/2014 Recreation Idle and Thackley Bradford East £ 18,000.00 14/05285/MAO 04/07/2018 Recreation Idle and Thackley Bradford East £ 12,488.44 14/05285/MAO 14/02/2019 Recreation Idle and Thackley Bradford East £ 12,488.44 14/00255/MAF 01/03/2019 Recreation Idle and Thackley Bradford East £ 5,250.00 16/09142/MAF 18/03/2019 Recreation Idle and Thackley Bradford East £ 13,000.00 14/00255/MAF 01/03/2019 RoW -Transport infrastructureIdle and Thackley Bradford East £ 13,500.00 14/05285/MAO 14/02/2019 Sports & Recreation Idle and Thackley Bradford East £ 10,000.00 07/05860/OUT 08/02/2011 Affordable Housing Tong Bradford South £ 267,326.73 13/04941/MAF 15/02/2016 Affordable Housing Wyke Bradford South £ 139,390.14 10/01302/FUL 15/08/2013 Education Queensbury Bradford South £ 38,519.20 12/02183/MAF 02/05/2014 Education Queensbury Bradford South £ 215,828.88 13/00420/MAF 22/05/2015 Education Queensbury Bradford South £ 110,750.01 12/04065/VOC 21/01/2016 Education Queensbury Bradford South £ 8,618.24 12/04065/VOC 14/03/2016 Education Queensbury Bradford South £ 8,585.63 13/03817/MAF 18/03/2016 Education Queensbury Bradford South £ 98,912.50 12/00049/FUL 18/11/2016 Education Queensbury Bradford South £ 18,888.00 15/03599/MAF 02/10/2019 Education Queensbury Bradford South £ 35,422.97 07/05860/OUT 08/02/2011 Education Tong Bradford South £ 303,897.03 10/04191/FUL 08/12/2011 Education Tong Bradford South £ 43,000.00 12/02924/MAF 15/04/2014 Education Tong Bradford South £ 80,000.00 13/00308/FUL 17/04/2014 Education Wyke Bradford South £ 110,030.25 13/04941/MAF 15/02/2016 Education Wyke Bradford South £ 70,714.56 13/00308/FUL 18/04/2016 Education Wyke Bradford South £ 108,029.70 15/01530/MAF 27/09/2017 Education Wyke Bradford South £ 48,395.59 15/01530/MAF 04/03/2019 Education Wyke Bradford South £ 50,570.72 09/05692/FUL 04/04/2011 Highways Great Horton Bradford South £ 10,000.00 09/05692/FUL 04/04/2011 Highways Great Horton Bradford South £ 10,000.00 11/04960/FUL 18/07/2012 Highways Great Horton Bradford South £ 104,384.80 11/05593/VOC 26/07/2012 Highways Great Horton Bradford South £ 135,945.00 11/05593/VOC 26/07/2012 Highways Great Horton Bradford South £ 100,700.00 17/02462/MAF 04/04/2018 Highways Great Horton Bradford South £ 63,125.00 09/01355/FUL 13/12/2010 Highways Queensbury Bradford South £ 50,000.00

Page 37 12/03858/VOC 12/03/2013 Highways Queensbury Bradford South £ 5,440.00 11/01309/MAF 10/05/2013 Highways Queensbury Bradford South £ 39,300.00 07/08687/FUL 29/06/2011 Highways Tong Bradford South £ 250,000.00 05/02958/FUL 16/06/2016 Highways Wibsey Bradford South £ 14,263.86 13/00308/FUL 18/09/2015 Highways Wyke Bradford South £ 110,584.10 13/00308/FUL 01/12/2016 Highways Wyke Bradford South £ 7,000.00 13/00308/FUL 01/06/2017 Highways Wyke Bradford South £ 216,059.40 11/05593/VOC 17/09/2012 Metro Great Horton Bradford South £ 40,160.00 13/00420/MAF 23/04/2014 Metro Queensbury Bradford South £ 28,901.80 13/04941/MAF 15/02/2016 Metro Wyke Bradford South £ 20,400.00 13/04941/MAF 15/02/2016 Metro Wyke Bradford South £ 23,562.00 10/01302/FUL 15/08/2013 Recreation Queensbury Bradford South £ 12,334.80 12/02183/MAF 02/05/2014 Recreation Queensbury Bradford South £ 139,166.06 13/00420/MAF 22/05/2015 Recreation Queensbury Bradford South £ 73,141.27 12/04065/VOC 21/01/2016 Recreation Queensbury Bradford South £ 6,590.39 12/04065/VOC 14/03/2016 Recreation Queensbury Bradford South £ 6,565.45 13/03817/MAF 18/03/2016 Recreation Queensbury Bradford South £ 30,750.00 15/03599/MAF 02/10/2019 Recreation Queensbury Bradford South £ 5,530.00 07/07601/FUL 10/11/2009 Recreation Royds Bradford South £ 10,550.00 02/02661/REM 08/02/2010 Recreation Royds Bradford South £ 28,775.00 07/09220/FUL 13/10/2010 Recreation Royds Bradford South £ 44,496.00 07/04289/FUL 06/09/2011 Recreation Royds Bradford South £ 24,046.00 04/05171/FUL 09/03/2017 Recreation Royds Bradford South £ 119,540.00 94/03013/OUT 19/03/2010 Recreation Tong Bradford South £ 91,756.00 07/05860/OUT 08/02/2011 Recreation Tong Bradford South £ 141,148.51 10/04191/FUL 08/12/2011 Recreation Tong Bradford South £ 24,326.00 09/03812/FUL 26/02/2013 Recreation Tong Bradford South £ 15,250.00 08/00316/REM 26/01/2010 Recreation Wibsey Bradford South £ 11,500.00 15/01530/MAF 27/09/2017 Recreation Wyke Bradford South £ 11,630.10 15/01530/MAF 04/03/2019 Recreation Wyke Bradford South £ 12,196.15 09/01355/FUL 13/12/2010 Trees and Landscaping Queensbury Bradford South £ 65,250.00 13/04941/MAF 15/02/2016 Woodland Wyke Bradford South £ 15,300.00 03/02886/FUL 03/12/2009 Affordable Housing City Bradford West £ 10,000.00 03/02886/FUL 03/03/2010 Affordable Housing City Bradford West £ 10,000.00 03/02886/FUL 08/04/2010 Affordable Housing City Bradford West £ 10,000.00 03/02886/FUL 05/05/2010 Affordable Housing City Bradford West £ 10,000.00 03/02886/FUL 03/06/2010 Affordable Housing City Bradford West £ 10,000.00 03/02886/FUL 05/07/2010 Affordable Housing City Bradford West £ 10,000.00 08/01975/FUL 09/04/2013 Affordable Housing Heaton Bradford West £ 431,250.00 05/05083/FUL 11/03/2011 Affordable Housing Manningham Bradford West £ 119,300.00 08/02667/FUL 24/01/2012 Education Clayton and Fairweather GreenBradford West £ 47,204.64 08/01975/FUL 09/04/2013 Education Heaton Bradford West £ 143,750.00 10/02398/OUT 15/03/2013 Education Thornton and Allerton Bradford West £ 227,471.31 11/04096/OUT 01/03/2018 Education Thornton and Allerton Bradford West £ 393,050.00 11/02570/FUL 11/08/2011 Highways City Bradford West £ 5,000.00 11/02238/FUL 11/10/2011 Highways City Bradford West £ 5,000.00 14/02891/MAF 13/03/2015 Highways City Bradford West £ 7,000.00 12/01640/FUL 01/07/2013 Highways Clayton and Fairweather GreenBradford West £ 8,000.00 07/08007/COU 02/02/2010 Highways Heaton Bradford West £ 5,030.00 13/04679/MAF 25/11/2014 Highways Manningham Bradford West £ 25,150.00 13/04679/MAF 25/11/2014 Highways Manningham Bradford West £ 10,060.00 08/07115/FUL 16/08/2010 Metro City Bradford West £ 70,000.00 06/05694/FUL 01/09/2010 Metro City Bradford West £ 10,373.00 08/07010/FUL 08/09/2010 Metro City Bradford West £ 20,940.00 11/02570/FUL 11/08/2011 Metro City Bradford West £ 3,000.00 05/07483/FUL 09/01/2013 Metro City Bradford West £ 16,000.00 11/02570/FUL 11/08/2011 Recreation City Bradford West £ 6,245.00 05/07483/FUL 09/01/2013 Recreation City Bradford West £ 21,525.00 07/02376/COU 02/04/2013 Recreation City Bradford West £ 27,630.22 13/00278/FUL 17/01/2014 Recreation City Bradford West £ 21,297.97 13/04145/FUL 23/04/2014 Recreation City Bradford West £ 10,270.00 14/02922/FUL 04/09/2015 Recreation City Bradford West £ 10,852.84 10/02369/FUL 15/05/2012 Recreation City Bradford West £ 12,470.00 Clayton and Fairweather 06/04805/FUL 09/04/2010 Recreation Green Bradford West £ 10,500.00

Page 38 08/02667/FUL 24/01/2012 Recreation Clayton and Fairweather GreenBradford West £ 20,432.37 10/02398/OUT 15/03/2013 Recreation Thornton and Allerton Bradford West £ 113,863.27 14/00411/FUL 04/03/2015 Trees Heaton Bradford West £ 5,528.00 13/02588/MAF 06/10/2015 Affordable Housing Craven Keighley £ 800,000.00 05/04269/FUL 09/01/2012 Affordable Housing Ilkley Keighley £ 135,275.00 15/07583/MAF 24/07/2018 Affordable Housing Ilkley Keighley £ 147,691.96 15/07583/MAF 14/09/2018 Affordable Housing Ilkley Keighley £ 148,116.70 14/02541/MAF 01/06/2017 Drainage Keighley West Keighley £ 3,743.25 13/02487/MAF 12/05/2015 Education Craven Keighley £ 46,211.09 15/02772/FUL 03/12/2015 Education Craven Keighley £ 12,811.00 12/04547/VOC 27/05/2016 Education Craven Keighley £ 13,799.10 16/01784/MAF 08/06/2016 Education Craven Keighley £ 10,000.00 13/02588/MAF 21/06/2016 Education Craven Keighley £ 103,100.00 14/01233/OUT 28/09/2016 Education Craven Keighley £ 47,463.12 13/05300/OUT 27/10/2016 Education Craven Keighley £ 22,529.65 12/04547/VOC 22/05/2017 Education Craven Keighley £ 14,088.22 13/02588/MAF 05/06/2017 Education Craven Keighley £ 244,383.84 15/03305/MAF 10/10/2017 Education Craven Keighley £ 136,809.31 14/02638/MAF 01/12/2017 Education Craven Keighley £ 12,583.26 14/02638/MAF 01/05/2018 Education Craven Keighley £ 12,844.42 15/05875/MAO 18/09/2019 Education Craven Keighley £ 138,331.59 09/03062/OUT 24/06/2013 Education Keighley West Keighley £ 87,296.57 09/03062/OUT 20/06/2018 Education Keighley West Keighley £ 91,668.31 09/03062/OUT 20/06/2018 Education Keighley West Keighley £ 91,668.31 12/03905/MAF 15/05/2014 Education Worth Valley Keighley £ 33,669.00 12/03905/MAF 18/08/2014 Education Worth Valley Keighley £ 33,930.00 12/03938/VOC 09/01/2015 Education Worth Valley Keighley £ 21,998.11 09/03062/OUT 20/02/2013 Footpath Keighley West Keighley £ 5,490.00 16/01784/MAF 08/06/2016 Habitat mitigation Craven Keighley £ 4,021.00 13/05300/OUT 27/10/2016 Habitat mitigation Craven Keighley £ 15,420.00 15/03305/MAF 21/12/2016 Habitat mitigation Craven Keighley £ 24,871.75 15/03871/MAF 22/03/2019 Habitat mitigation Craven Keighley £ 10,820.00 15/05875/MAO 18/09/2019 Habitat mitigation Craven Keighley £ 20,100.00 15/07583/MAF 06/03/2017 Habitat mitigation Ilkley Keighley £ 28,000.00 15/00575/VOC 29/01/2019 Habitat mitigation Ilkley Keighley £ 6,000.00 13/02487/MAF 18/02/2014 Highways Craven Keighley £ 20,100.00 12/04547/VOC 01/06/2015 Highways Craven Keighley £ 5,155.00 13/03716/FUL 11/08/2015 Highways Craven Keighley £ 7,500.00 15/02772/FUL 03/12/2015 Highways Craven Keighley £ 7,000.00 15/03871/MAF 13/03/2017 Highways Craven Keighley £ 201,800.00 14/00450/MAO 24/03/2017 Highways Craven Keighley £ 10,240.00 14/00450/MAO 24/03/2017 Highways Craven Keighley £ 7,168.00 14/00450/MAO 24/03/2017 Highways Craven Keighley £ 25,600.00 10/02832/VOC 11/05/2011 Highways Ilkley Keighley £ 2,000.00 09/03175/FUL 27/05/2011 Highways Ilkley Keighley £ 6,204.00 09/03175/FUL 27/05/2011 Highways Ilkley Keighley £ 6,204.00 15/07583/MAF 02/03/2017 Highways Ilkley Keighley £ 12,000.00 15/00575/VOC 18/09/2017 Highways Ilkley Keighley £ 15,705.00 09/02304/FUL 08/11/2010 Highways Keighley East Keighley £ 5,000.00 11/00676/FUL 17/01/2011 Highways Keighley East Keighley £ 7,000.00 09/03062/OUT 20/02/2013 Highways Keighley West Keighley £ 6,786.00 11/03373/FUL 23/04/2012 Highways Worth Valley Keighley £ 5,000.00 15/05875/MAO 18/09/2019 Highways footbridge Craven Keighley £ 70,000.00 13/04193/MAF 12/06/2015 Metro Craven Keighley £ 10,080.00 13/05300/OUT 27/10/2016 Metro Craven Keighley £ 5,699.23 14/00450/MAO 24/03/2017 Metro Craven Keighley £ 20,000.00 15/05875/MAO 18/09/2019 Metro Craven Keighley £ 20,100.00 05/04269/FUL 04/02/2010 Metro Ilkley Keighley £ 4,961.00 05/04269/FUL 19/07/2010 Metro Ilkley Keighley £ 451.00 05/04269/FUL 19/07/2010 Metro Ilkley Keighley £ 451.00 05/04269/FUL 04/04/2011 Metro Ilkley Keighley £ 495.00 05/04269/FUL 04/04/2011 Metro Ilkley Keighley £ 495.00 05/04269/FUL 04/04/2011 Metro Ilkley Keighley £ 495.00 10/00139/FUL 04/08/2011 Metro Ilkley Keighley £ 6,523.54 05/04269/FUL 16/01/2012 Metro Ilkley Keighley £ 495.00

Page 39 15/07583/MAF 06/03/2017 Metro Ilkley Keighley £ 10,000.00 01/00903/OUT 12/06/2009 Metro Keighley Central Keighley £ 150,000.00 01/00903/OUT 10/05/2010 Metro Keighley Central Keighley £ 650,000.00 01/00903/OUT 12/05/2010 Metro Keighley Central Keighley £ 8,100.00 09/03062/OUT 20/02/2013 Metro Keighley West Keighley £ 6,588.00 09/03062/OUT 07/09/2015 Metro Keighley West Keighley £ 2,162.50 09/03062/OUT 05/11/2015 Metro Keighley West Keighley £ 1,297.50 09/03062/OUT 05/11/2015 Metro Keighley West Keighley £ 865.00 09/03062/OUT 08/03/2016 Metro Keighley West Keighley £ 437.50 09/03062/OUT 08/03/2016 Metro Keighley West Keighley £ 437.50 09/03062/OUT 19/08/2016 Metro Keighley West Keighley £ 5,000.00 09/03062/OUT 05/12/2016 Metro Keighley West Keighley £ 5,000.00 09/03062/OUT 19/01/2017 Metro Keighley West Keighley £ 5,000.00 09/03062/OUT 18/05/2017 Metro Keighley West Keighley £ 5,000.00 09/03062/OUT 20/06/2018 Metro Keighley West Keighley £ 5,000.00 09/03062/OUT 07/11/2014 Metro Keighley West Keighley £ 1,260.00 13/02487/MAF 12/05/2015 Recreation Craven Keighley £ 20,693.90 15/02772/FUL 03/12/2015 Recreation Craven Keighley £ 16,857.00 12/04547/VOC 27/05/2016 Recreation Craven Keighley £ 7,817.25 16/01784/MAF 08/06/2016 Recreation Craven Keighley £ 10,000.00 14/01233/OUT 28/09/2016 Recreation Craven Keighley £ 14,869.08 13/05300/OUT 27/10/2016 Recreation Craven Keighley £ 14,970.76 12/04547/VOC 22/05/2017 Recreation Craven Keighley £ 7,981.04 13/02588/MAF 20/06/2017 Recreation Craven Keighley £ 30,720.00 14/02638/MAF 01/12/2017 Recreation Craven Keighley £ 8,040.10 14/02638/MAF 01/05/2018 Recreation Craven Keighley £ 8,206.97 15/05875/MAO 18/09/2019 Recreation Craven Keighley £ 81,336.16 05/04269/FUL 27/02/2008 Recreation Ilkley Keighley £ 17,870.00 05/07882/FUL 23/07/2009 Recreation Ilkley Keighley £ 13,405.00 10/02832/VOC 11/05/2011 Recreation Ilkley Keighley £ 14,500.00 09/03175/FUL 27/05/2011 Recreation Ilkley Keighley £ 8,297.85 15/07583/MAF 06/03/2017 Recreation Ilkley Keighley £ 7,201.63 98/00409/OUT 15/06/2012 Recreation Keighley East Keighley £ 87,584.00 09/03062/OUT 07/09/2015 Recreation Keighley West Keighley £ 60,000.00 12/03905/MAF 15/05/2014 Recreation Worth Valley Keighley £ 11,074.90 12/03905/MAF 18/08/2014 Recreation Worth Valley Keighley £ 11,160.76 12/03938/VOC 09/01/2015 Recreation Worth Valley Keighley £ 14,342.74 09/03062/OUT 02/09/2019 Recreation/playing pitch Keighley West Keighley £ 28,250.00 98/00409/OUT 22/05/2012 Woodland Keighley East Keighley £ 42,000.00 05/04806/FUL 18/08/2009 Affordable Housing Shipley Shipley £ 125,000.00 04/00562/COU 12/10/2011 Affordable Housing Shipley Shipley £ 1,734,170.00 10/02064/FUL 15/06/2012 Affordable Housing Windhill and Wrose Shipley £ 62,357.98 10/05475/FUL 23/08/2013 Affordable Housing Windhill and Wrose Shipley £ 111,615.00 14/01120/MAF 09/12/2014 Comm facilities Bingley Rural Shipley £ 10,000.00 14/01120/MAF 05/12/2017 Community Facilities Bingley Rural Shipley £ 38,271.16 14/01120/MAF 05/12/2017 Community Facilities Bingley Rural Shipley £ 266,000.00 07/01356/FUL 05/11/2010 Education Baildon Shipley £ 96,667.00 13/02782/MAF 02/03/2016 Education Baildon Shipley £ 70,059.57 10/06048/RG6 27/06/2013 Education Bingley Shipley £ 23,022.14 11/05543/MAR 29/08/2013 Education Bingley Shipley £ 23,706.40 11/01491/MAF 10/06/2014 Education Bingley Shipley £ 89,565.17 13/00093/FUL 01/12/2014 Education Bingley Rural Shipley £ 169,294.44 13/00093/FUL 17/03/2016 Education Bingley Rural Shipley £ 170,770.84 14/01120/MAF 05/12/2017 Education Bingley Rural Shipley £ 59,046.00 13/01241/MAF 02/07/2015 Education Wharefedale Shipley £ 150,094.94 12/03680/FUL 20/08/2014 Education Wharfedale Shipley £ 13,869.27 12/03680/FUL 28/12/2016 Education Wharfedale Shipley £ 14,342.86 14/02495/MAF 16/02/2018 Education Wharfedale Shipley £ 43,296.46 13/04451/MAF 01/08/2018 Education Wharfedale Shipley £ 29,135.11 13/04451/MAF 20/08/2018 Education Wharfedale Shipley £ 29,215.15 10/05475/FUL 23/08/2013 Education Windhill and Wrose Shipley £ 150,836.51 13/02782/MAF 02/03/2016 Footpaths/bench Baildon Shipley £ 618.00 14/04295/MAF 21/12/2016 Habitat mitigation Bingley Rural Shipley £ 10,070.00 13/01241/MAF 02/07/2015 Habitat mitigation Wharfedale Shipley £ 23,706.17 12/00783/FUL 26/09/2013 Highways Baildon Shipley £ 5,085.00

Page 40 11/04054/FUL 05/11/2013 Highways Baildon Shipley £ 7,000.00 13/02368/VOC 11/03/2014 Highways Baildon Shipley £ 7,021.00 12/04659/FUL 23/07/2014 Highways Baildon Shipley £ 7,140.00 08/07436/FUL 14/04/2010 Highways Bingley Shipley £ 5,150.00 10/06048/RG4 27/06/2012 Highways Bingley Shipley £ 5,215.00 13/04347/MAF 06/07/2015 Highways Bingley Shipley £ 10,010.00 15/05801/FUL 30/05/2019 Highways Bingley Shipley £ 7,651.00 13/01113/MAF 08/12/2014 Highways Bingley Rural Shipley £ 1,500.00 13/01113/MAF 08/12/2014 Highways Bingley Rural Shipley £ 7,000.00 14/01120/MAF 09/12/2014 Highways Bingley Rural Shipley £ 5,000.00 14/01120/MAF 09/12/2014 Highways Bingley Rural Shipley £ 7,000.00 14/01120/MAF 09/12/2014 Highways Bingley Rural Shipley £ 22,000.00 14/04295/MAF 21/12/2016 Highways Bingley Rural Shipley £ 18,126.00 14/01827/FUL 15/03/2018 Highways Bingley Rural Shipley £ 21,500.00 14/01827/FUL 15/03/2018 Highways Bingley Rural Shipley £ 10,750.00 10/01538/FUL 15/04/2011 Highways Shipley Shipley £ 3,102.00 14/04337/FUL 27/06/2018 Highways Shipley Shipley £ 7,000.00 10/02064/FUL 22/12/2010 Highways Windhill and Wrose Shipley £ 48,000.00 14/01120/MAF 07/09/2016 Highways/Sustran Bingley Rural Shipley £ 20,000.00 04/00562/COU 12/10/2011 Landscape Shipley Shipley £ 148,642.00 07/01356/FUL 05/11/2010 Metro Baildon Shipley £ 8,536.00 07/08080/FUL 27/01/2010 Metro Bingley Shipley £ 12,000.00 11/05543/MAR 29/08/2013 Metro Bingley Shipley £ 6,572.88 14/01120/MAF 09/12/2014 Metro Bingley Rural Shipley £ 46,000.00 14/04295/MAF 21/12/2016 Metro Bingley Rural Shipley £ 20,140.00 17/01313/MAF 28/06/2018 Metro Shipley Shipley £ 40,320.00 11/00450/FUL 12/07/2011 Metro Whafedale Shipley £ 1,496.55 11/00450/FUL 03/08/2011 Metro Whafedale Shipley £ 1,995.40 11/00450/FUL 28/06/2011 Metro Wharefdale Shipley £ 3,990.80 11/00450/FUL 23/08/2011 Metro Wharfedale Shipley £ 997.70 11/00450/FUL 17/01/2012 Metro Wharfedale Shipley £ 997.70 13/01241/MAF 02/09/2014 Metro Wharfedale Shipley £ 17,264.94 07/01356/FUL 05/11/2010 Recreation Baildon Shipley £ 96,030.00 13/02782/MAF 02/03/2016 Recreation Baildon Shipley £ 17,469.83 06/05097/COU 10/11/2009 Recreation Bingley Shipley £ 2,445.84 06/05097/COU 11/01/2010 Recreation Bingley Shipley £ 2,445.84 07/08080/FUL 27/01/2010 Recreation Bingley Shipley £ 13,120.00 06/05097/COU 12/02/2010 Recreation Bingley Shipley £ 2,445.84 06/05097/COU 09/03/2010 Recreation Bingley Shipley £ 2,445.84 06/05097/COU 09/04/2010 Recreation Bingley Shipley £ 2,445.84 08/03031/FUL 30/01/2012 Recreation Bingley Shipley £ 1,000.00 08/03031/FUL 15/05/2012 Recreation Bingley Shipley £ 1,000.00 08/03031/FUL 15/05/2012 Recreation Bingley Shipley £ 1,000.00 08/03031/FUL 15/06/2012 Recreation Bingley Shipley £ 1,000.00 08/03031/FUL 15/06/2012 Recreation Bingley Shipley £ 1,000.00 08/03031/FUL 24/07/2012 Recreation Bingley Shipley £ 1,000.00 08/03031/FUL 17/10/2012 Recreation Bingley Shipley £ 1,000.00 08/03031/FUL 08/01/2013 Recreation Bingley Shipley £ 1,000.00 08/03031/FUL 18/01/2013 Recreation Bingley Shipley £ 1,000.00 10/06048/RG5 27/06/2013 Recreation Bingley Shipley £ 7,249.89 11/05543/MAR 29/08/2013 Recreation Bingley Shipley £ 7,465.37 13/00093/FUL 01/12/2014 Recreation Bingley Rural Shipley £ 37,257.78 13/00093/FUL 17/03/2016 Recreation Bingley Rural Shipley £ 37,582.70 13/04451/MAF 01/08/2018 Recreation Wharfedale Shipley £ 7,951.40 13/04451/MAF 20/08/2018 Recreation Wharfedale Shipley £ 7,973.24 04/00259/FUL 15/01/2010 Recreation Windhill and Wrose Shipley £ 23,457.00 10/02064/FUL 15/06/2012 Recreation Windhill and Wrose Shipley £ 17,815.95 11/04054/FUL 05/11/2013 Trees Baildon Shipley £ 500.00 £ 18,429,907.05

Page 41 This page is intentionally left blank Appendix 3 - CIL Liability notices issued

Exemption Application number Date sent Site address CIL zone Liability Parish/Town Council Ward granted Addingham Parish 17/00570/MAF 01/11/2017 Darkwood House, Addingham 1 £ 105,974.00 Council Craven Addingham Parish 18/03209/FUL 08/02/2019 127 Main Street, Addingham 1 £ - Council Craven Ye Old Stone House, Moorside Lane, Addingham Parish 18/04069/FUL 25/03/2019 Addingham 1 Self build £ - Council Craven Addingham Parish 18/00836/FUL 04/07/2018 10 Bark Lane, Addingham 1 £ 17,490.00 Council Craven

16/06606/MAF 23/01/2018 Baildon Mills, Baildon 2 £ 35,400.00 Baildon Parish Council Baildon

17/00921/MAF 23/01/2018 Baildon Mills, Baildon 2 £ 94,950.00 Baildon Parish Council Baildon 18/03068/FUL 05/12/2018 50 Hope Lane, Baildon 2 £ 13,200.00 Baildon Parish Council Baildon Page 43 Page 18/04145/FUL 09/01/2019 Little Blue Orange, Baildon 3 £ 5,520.00 Baildon Parish Council Baildon Former Yorkshire Water Reservoir, 18/04561/FUL 14/02/2019 West Lane, Baildon 2 £ 13,650.00 Baildon Parish Council Baildon Former Yorkshire Water Reservoir, 18/04562/FUL 14/02/2019 West Lane, Baildon 2 £ 14,750.00 Baildon Parish Council Baildon Former Yorkshire Water Reservoir, 18/04563/FUL 14/02/2019 West Lane, Baildon 2 £ 15,000.00 Baildon Parish Council Baildon

18/02782/FUL 20/02/2019 Baildon Mills, Baildon 2 £ 31,439.75 Baildon Parish Council Baildon

18/04674/FUL 26/02/2019 Land to rear of 23 Delph Hill, Baildon 2 £ 32,643.92 Baildon Parish Council Baildon Former Yorkshire Yorkshire Reservoir, 17/06410/FUL 14/05/2018 West Lane, Baildon 2 £ 47,720.00 Baildon Parish Council Baildon

17/06921/FUL 03/07/2018 Green Lane, Baildon 2 £ 6,300.00 Baildon Parish Council Baildon

18/01992/FUL 18/07/2018 Moorside Farm, Moorside, Baildon 2 Self build £ - Baildon Parish Council Baildon

18/02249/FUL 20/09/2018 Land at Tong Park, Baildon 3 £ 14,000.00 Baildon Parish Council Baildon Appendix 3 - CIL Liability notices issued

Norwood House, Lower Green, 18/00180/FUL 13/12/2018 Baildon 3 £ 5,800.00 Baildon Parish Council Shipley Glenside House, Saltiare Road, 18/03820/FUL 12/11/2018 Eldwick 2 Self build £ - Bingley Town Council Bingley Lodges 1 and 2, Faweather Grange 18/04723/FUL 14/02/2019 Holiday Lodges 2 £ - Bingley Town Council Bingley 18/04833/FUL 14/02/2019 38 Kings Road, Bingley 3 £ 5,848.53 Bingley Town Council Bingley Riverside Works, Ireland Street, 18/03872/FUL 20/02/2019 Bingley 3 £ 4,200.00 Bingley Town Council Bingley 17/03208/FUL 14/02/2018 123 Gilstead Lane, Gilstead 2 £ 2,750.00 Bingley Town Council Bingley 17/06954/FUL 14/02/2018 5A Priestthorpe Lane, Bingley 3 £ 1,740.00 Bingley Town Council Bingley 17/06772/FUL 09/05/2018 Littlegarth, Sheriff Lane, Eldwick 2 Self build £ 6,200.00 Bingley Town Council Bingley 17/03704/MAF 09/05/2018 Lidl, Bingley Super £ 105,750.00 Bingley Town Council Bingley 17/04630/FUL 01/06/2018 60 Moorbottom Lane, Bingley 3 Self build £ - Bingley Town Council Bingley Former site Semmering, Sheriff Lane, 18/00139/FUL 13/06/2018 Eldwick 2 £ 11,271.00 Bingley Town Council Bingley

Page 44 Page Land at 412555 440340, Saltaire 18/00719/FUL 18/07/2018 Road, Eldwick 2 Self build £ - Bingley Town Council Bingley 18/02640/FUL 18/09/2018 Royston Fold Farm, Eldwick 2 £ 3,500.00 Bingley Town Council Bingley 18/05178/FUL 22/03/2019 Littlegarth, Sheriff Lane, Eldwick 2 £ 34,802.10 Bingley Town Council Bingley Bradford Trident 18/03849/FUL 08/01/2019 554 Manchester Road 4 £ - Community Council Little Horton Bradford Trident 17/05946/FUL 09/05/2018 387 Little Horton Road, Bradford 4 £ - Community Council Little Horton Bradford Trident 17/05618/FUL 22/06/2018 Land South of 3 Mumford Street 4 £ - Community Council Little Horton The Prince Of Wales Inn, Bowling Old Bradford Trident 18/01201/FUL 22/06/2018 Lane 4 £ - Community Council Little Horton

18/00475/FUL 12/06/2018 Queens Head, 93 Main Street, Burley 1 £ 11,360.00 Burley in Wharfedale Wharfedale 18/00856/FUL 19/07/2018 12 Rose Bank, Ilkley 1 Self build £ - Burley in Wharfedale Wharfedale Land north of 10 Aberdeen Terrace, Clayton and Fairweather 19/00031/FUL 22/03/2019 Clayton 4 £ - Clayton Parish Council Green Clayton and Fairweather 17/05251/MAF 09/05/2018 Holts Lane, Clayton 4 £ - Clayton Parish Council Green Appendix 3 - CIL Liability notices issued

Clayton and Fairweather 18/02044/FUL 18/07/2018 Abbey House, Cockin Lane, Bradford 4 £ - Clayton Parish Council Green The Manor, Sutton Drive, Cullingworth Parish 18/02564/FUL 18/09/2018 Cullingworth 3 £ - Council Bingley Rural Upper Bradshaw Head Farm, Long Denholme Parish Town 17/06733/FUL 15/05/2018 Causeway, Denholme 4 £ - Council Bingley Rural St Pauls Church, Halifax Road, Denholme Parish Town 18/00595/FUL 22/06/2018 Denholme 4 £ - Council Bingley Rural Land at Harden Road & Keighley 18/03868/MAR 14/02/2019 Road, Harden 3 £ 56,560.00 Harden Parish Council Bingley Rural 17/06037/FUL 13/06/2018 Back O'The Mill, Keighley Road 3 £ 7,200.00 Harden Parish Council Bingley Rural Land East of Myrtle Lodge, Myrtle Haworth, Cross Roads 18/04328/FUL 17/12/2018 Drive 3 £ - and Stanbury Worth Valley Haworth, Cross Roads 18/03416/FUL 08/01/2019 Land at Fife Street, Haworth 3 £ 4,880.00 and Stanbury Worth Valley Land adjacent to 10 Pink Street, Haworth, Cross Roads 18/03707/FUL Page 45 Page 15/01/2019 Haworth 3 Self build £ - and Stanbury Worth Valley Ponden House, Ponden Lane, Haworth, Cross Roads 18/05141/FUL 20/02/2019 Stanbury 2 Self build £ - and Stanbury Worth Valley Overwood, Mytholmes Lane, Haworth, Cross Roads 18/00447/FUL 13/06/2018 Haworth 3 Self build £ - and Stanbury Worth Valley Woodlands House, Bridgehouse Lane, Haworth, Cross Roads 17/06324/FUL 13/06/2018 Haworth 3 £ - and Stanbury Worth Valley Haworth, Cross Roads 18/01428/FUL 22/06/2018 Oldfield Gate Farm, Haworth 2 Self build £ - and Stanbury Worth Valley 13 Sugden End, Halifax Road, Cross Haworth, Cross Roads 18/01439/FUL 18/07/2018 Roads, Keighley 4 £ - and Stanbury Worth Valley Land adjacent to 62 Sun Street, Howarth, Cross Roads 17/03065/FUL 01/11/2017 Haworth 3 £ 1,233.00 and Stanbury Worth Valley Ashburn House, Parish Ghyll Drive, 18/03379/FUL 29/10/2018 Ilkley 1 £ 300.00 Ilkley Ilkley 18/02554/FUL 12/11/2018 Sirius, Langbar Road, Ilkley 1 Self build £ - Ilkley Town Council Ilkley 18/03967/FUL 16/11/2018 4 Grange Estate, Ilkley 1 £ 12,416.00 Ilkley Town Council Ilkley 17/03895/FUL 12/02/2019 , Hollin Hall Drive, Ilkley 1 Self build £ - Ilkley Town Council Ilkley 18/05259/FUL 26/02/2019 Beck House, Manor Rise, Ilkley 1 £ 14,232.17 Ilkley town council Ilkley Appendix 3 - CIL Liability notices issued

Land Opposite To 23 Springs Lane, 17/03004/FUL 22/02/2018 Ilkley 1 Self build £ - Ilkley Town Council Ilkley Caretakers House, Myddleton 18/00354/FUL 13/06/2018 Grange, Ilkely 1 £ - Ilkley Town Council Ilkley 18/01124/FUL 22/06/2018 9 Clifton Road, Ilkley 1 £ 3,000.00 Ilkley Town Council Ilkley 18/00621/FUL 04/07/2018 20 Moorfield Road, Ilkley 1 Self build £ - Ilkley Town Council Ilkley 18/00841/FUL 04/07/2018 21Moorfield Road, Ilkley 1 £ 14,940.00 Ilkley Town Council Ilkley 18/01844/FUL 12/07/2018 6 Olicana Park, Ilkley 1 Self build £ - Ilkley Town Council Ilkley 18/01451/FUL 18/07/2018 10 High Wheatley, Ilkley 1 Self build £ - Ilkley Town Council Ilkley Holme Lea Residential Home, 2 18/02115/FUL 01/08/2018 Queens Road, Bradford 1 £ - Ilkley Town Council Ilkley Rhyddings Lodge, Backstone Lane, 18/01936/HOU 07/08/2018 Ilkley 1 £ 12,400.00 Ilkley Town Council Ilkley 18/02086/FUL 07/08/2018 9-9A Leeds Road, Ilkley 1 £ 4,530.00 Ilkley Town Council Ilkley 18/01858/FUL 20/09/2018 2 Clifton Road, Ilkley 1 £ 22,130.00 Ilkley Town Council Ilkley 18/03158/FUL 11/10/2018 Land at Curly Hill, Ilkley 1 £ 30,700.00 Ilkley Town Council Ilkley

Page 46 Page 18/05433/FUL 25/03/2019 10 High Wheatley, Ilkley 1 Self build £ - Ilkley Town Council Ilkley Dawslack Barn, Parkers Lane, 17/04844/FUL 25/01/2018 Keighley 3 Self build £ - Keighley Town Council Keighley Central Eden House, 25 Temple Street, 17/05874/FUL 08/01/2019 Keighley 4 £ - Keighley Town Council Keighley Central

17/02777/FUL 11/02/2019 Whinburn Farm, Keighley 3 Self build £ - Keighley Town Council Keighley Central

18/04921/HOU 14/02/2019 20 Greenacres Drive, Keighley 3 £ 3,168.88 Keighley Town Council Keighley Central

19/00193/FUL 22/03/2019 105B Cavendish Street, Keighley 4 £ - Keighley Town Council Keighley Central

18/00132/FUL 15/05/2018 7 Devonshire Street, Keighley 4 £ - Keighley Town Council Keighley Central

18/00197/FUL 15/05/2018 41-49 Lawkholme Lane, Keighley 4 £ - Keighley Town Council Keighley Central

18/02144/FUL 20/09/2018 8 Lord Street, Keighley 4 £ - Keighley Town Council Keighley Central Land North of Back Shaw Lane, 17/01349/FUL 01/11/2017 Keighley 4 £ - Keighley Town Council Keighley East Appendix 3 - CIL Liability notices issued

Site at Street Lane, East Morton, 18/03942/FUL 05/12/2018 Keighley 3 £ 2,780.00 Keighley Town Council Keighley East Cragg Hill Cottage, Woodhouse Road, 18/03881/FUL 17/12/2018 Keighley 4 £ - Keighley Town Council Keighley East

18/03499/FUL 26/02/2019 24 Hainworth, Keighley 4 £ - Keighley Town Council Keighley East Land behnd 8-10 Scott Lane, 19/00024/FUL 22/03/2019 Riddlesden 3 £ 4,091.75 Keighley Town Council Keighley East Moorside Meadow, Back Shaw Lane, 17/04406/PAR 25/01/2018 Keighley 4 £ - Keighley Town Council Keighley East

18/00140/FUL 13/06/2018 The Bungalow, Florist Street, Keighley 4 £ - Keighley Town Council Keighley East

18/00229/MAF 22/06/2018 Land at Park Lane, Keighley 4 £ - Keighley Town Council Keighley East

18/00885/FUL 03/07/2018 Banks Lane, Riddlesden 3 £ 9,780.00 Keighley Town Council Keighley East Page 47 Page 18/00196/FUL 11/10/2018 68 Wesley Place 4 £ - Keighley Town Council Keighley East

18/03323/FUL 11/10/2018 Aireview Equestrian Centre 4 £ - Keighley Town Council Keighley East

17/04161/FUL 05/11/2018 16 Coronation Way, Keighley 4 £ - Keighley Town Council Keighley West

18/03198/MAF 17/12/2018 Land south Occupation Lane, Keighley 4 £ - Keighley Town Council Keighley West

18/05402/FUL 26/02/2019 Coppy Hill Farm, Tarn Lane, Laycock 2 £ 10,396.15 Keighley Town Council Keighley West

18/00537/FUL 22/06/2018 Lower Holme House Farm, Keighley 2 £ 2,750.00 Keighley Town Council Keighley West

18/00367/FUL 04/07/2018 93 Ingrow Lane, Keighley 4 £ - Keighley Town Council Keighley West 18/02069/FUL 11/10/2018 Oxford Village, Keighley 4 £ - Keighley Town Council Keighley West Land North of 14 Slaymaker Lane, 17/03375/FUL 01/11/2017 Oakworth 4 £ - Keighley Town Council Worth Valley Former Workshopnear Bent House, 18/03100/FUL 29/10/2018 Oldfield Lane 2 £ - Keighley Town Council Worth Valley Appendix 3 - CIL Liability notices issued

18/00019/PAR 31/10/2018 Tim Lane, Oakworth 2 £ 3,000.00 Keighley Town Council Worth Valley 16 Moor Lodge Country Retreat, Two 18/05069/FUL 20/02/2019 Laws Road 2 £ - Keighley Town Council Worth Valley Moor Lodge, Two Laws Road, 18/01193/FUL 22/06/2018 Stanbury 2 £ - Keighley Town Council Worth Valley

18/01132/FUL 03/07/2018 Moor Lodge Farm, Stanbury 2 Self build £ - Keighley Town Council Worth Valley Land south east of Romiley House, 18/01148/FUL 18/07/2018 Oakworth 4 £ - Keighley Town Council Worth Valley

18/02708/FUL 20/09/2018 Wildfell, Slaymaker Lane, Oakworth 2 £ 32,950.00 Keighley Town Council Worth Valley

18/04001/FUL 08/01/2019 103-107 Bradford Road, Menston 1 £ - Menston Parish Council Wharfedale Land rear to 2 Fairfax Gardens, 18/05196/FUL 26/02/2019 Menston 1 £ 39,360.84 Menston Parish Council Wharfedale Page 48 Page 18/02551/FUL 13/03/2019 18 Victoria Avenue, Menston 1 Self build £ - Menston Parish Council Wharfedale Derry Hill Farm, Bingley Road, 19/00108/FUL 22/03/2019 Menston 1 self build £ - Menston Parish Council Wharfedale

18/05331/FUL 25/03/2019 6 Halstead Drive, Menston 1 £ 12,008.39 Menston Parish Council Wharfedale

17/06959/FUL 26/03/2019 Land At 5 Whiddon Croft 1 Self build £ - Menston Parish Council Wharfedale

17/04167/FUL 14/02/2018 Strathmore, 25 Moorland Crescent 1 Self build £ - Menston Parish Council Wharfedale Land adjacent to High 17/06333/FUL 13/06/2018 Doat/Hazelmere, Burley Lane 1 £ 17,293.00 Menston Parish Council Wharfedale Former Annexe, Land at Main Street, 18/01686/FUL 20/09/2018 Menston 1 Self build £ - Menston Parish Council Wharfedale

18/02293/FUL 28/02/2019 37 Main Street, Menston 1 £ - Menston Parish Council Wharfedale Former site of 21 Moorhouse Lane, 18/03652/FUL 05/12/2018 Oxenhope 3 £ 4,480.00 Oxenhope Parish Council Worth Valley

17/06062/FUL 18/07/2018 Brent Villa, Upper Town, Oxenhope 3 £ 6,180.00 Oxenhope Parish Council Worth Valley Appendix 3 - CIL Liability notices issued

18/02327/FUL 18/09/2018 Westfield Lodge, Oxenhope 2 £ - Oxenhope Parish Council Worth Valley 18/02396/FUL 16/11/2018 Land at Long Lane, Queensbury 3 Self build £ - Queensbury

17/05051/FUL 31/01/2019 Site of Crunwelle Sourt, Sandy Lane 3 £ 5,520.00 Sandy Lane Thornton and Allerton

18/04812/FUL 14/02/2019 Prune Park Inn, Prune Park Lane 3 £ - Sandy Lane Thornton and Allerton

18/04232/FUL 20/02/2019 Land east of 19 Cliffe View, Bradford 3 £ 2,560.00 Sandy Lane Thornton and Allerton 18/03418/FUL 29/10/2018 The Forge, Greengate, Silsden 2 £ - Silsden Craven 18/03979/FUL 17/12/2018 1 Hayhills Road, Silsden 2 Self build £ - Silsden Town Council Craven 17/03316/FUL 12/04/2018 Drabble House Farm, Silsden 3 Self Build £ 2,980.00 Silsden Town Council Craven Manor House Farm, Bolton Road, 18/00967/FUL 18/07/2018 Silsden 2 £ 20,000.00 Silsden Town Council Craven 18/03197/FUL 20/12/2018 Richmond, Purcell Drive, Silsden 2 Self build £ - Silsden Town Council Craven

Page 49 Page Steeton with Eastburn 18/01058/FUL 14/05/2018 Land at Sycamore Grove 3 £ 2,780.00 Parish Council Craven

Steeton with Eastburn 18/00026/FUL 13/06/2018 40 and 40A Parkway, Steeton 3 Self build £ - Parish Council Craven

Steeton with Eastburn 18/01530/FUL 03/07/2018 1 Styveton Way, Steeton 3 £ 1,080.00 Parish Council Craven

17/06855/FUL 09/05/2018 Tan House Lane, Wilsden 3 Self build £ - Wilsden Parish Council Bingley Rural 18/01518/FUL 03/07/2018 39 Everest Avenue, Shipley 4 £ - Wrose Parish Council Windhill and Wrose 18/04651/FUL 09/01/2019 3A Oxford Road, Bradford 4 £ - Bolton and Undercliffe Land at 39 High House Road, 18/04431/FUL 14/02/2019 Bradford 4 £ - Bolton and Undercliffe

18/04830/FUL 14/02/2019 Land at Poplars Park Road 4 £ - Bolton and Undercliffe Land south of 15 Rose Mount, 17/03390/FUL 22/03/2019 Bradford 4 £ - Bolton and Undercliffe Appendix 3 - CIL Liability notices issued

17/04851/FUL 13/06/2018 Peel Park Hotel, Otley Road 4 £ - Bolton and Undercliffe Former site of 37 Westwood Avenue, 17/06092/FUL 13/06/2018 Bradford 4 £ - Bolton and Undercliffe Land to rear of 39-47 Park Crescent, 17/05464/FUL 22/06/2018 Bradford 4 £ - Bolton and Undercliffe

18/01070/FUL 18/07/2018 1087 Bolton Road, Bradford 4 £ - Bolton and Undercliffe

18/01351/FUL 18/07/2018 Land at Green Terrace, Bradford 4 £ - Bolton and Undercliffe Red House Inn, 202-204 Barkerend 18/01874/MAF 14/02/2019 Road 4 £ - Bowling and Barkerend

18/01421/FUL 19/07/2018 24 Fenby Avenue 4 £ - Bowling and Barkerend

18/02977/FUL 02/10/2018 21 Westbury Street, Bradford 4 £ - Bowling and Barkerend

Page 50 Page Land At Former Wainfleet House, Affordable 18/03783/MAF 14/02/2019 Rushton Road 4 housing £ - Bradford Moor 18/05291/FUL 22/03/2019 1222 Leeds Road, Bradford 4 £ - Bradford Moor Land between 124 and 126 Gain 18/00038/FUL 15/05/2018 Lane, Bradford 4 £ - Bradford Moor

18/03210/FUL 02/10/2018 Land Between 124 & 126 Gain Lane 4 £ - Bradford Moor 17/04814/POR 31/10/2018 City Exchange, Bradford 4 £ - City Land west of 25-29 Brearton Street, 18/02780/FUL 17/12/2018 Bradford 4 £ - City 18/05101/FUL 26/02/2019 52 Godwin Street 4 £ - City 18/05212/FUL 26/02/2019 56 - 58 Manningham Lane 4 £ - CIty 18/05363/FUL 26/02/2019 24 Kirkgate, Bradford 4 £ - City

16/09263/MAF 25/01/2018 126-1028 Thornton Road, Bradford 4 City 17/04699/MAF 13/06/2018 Conditioning House, Bradford 4 £ - City 18/00138/MAF 22/06/2018 77 Westgate, Bradford 4 £ - City 18/00454/MAF 22/06/2018 8-10 Piccadilly, Bradford 4 £ - City 18/01303/FUL 22/06/2018 64 Vicar Lane, Bradford 4 £ - City 18/00253/CLP 04/07/2018 26 Chapel Street, Bradford 4 £ - City Appendix 3 - CIL Liability notices issued

Eldon Lodge, Eldon Place, 17/06941/MAF 18/07/2018 Manningham 4 £ - City

18/01626/FUL 19/07/2018 Pennine House, Well Street, Bradford 4 £ - City

18/01498/MAF 07/08/2018 8-10 Claremont Green, Great Horton 4 £ - City

18/01911/MAF 20/09/2018 Cathedral Centre, 2Captain Street 4 £ - City 18/02671/FUL 02/10/2018 111 - 117 Sunbridge Road 4 £ - City Clayton and Fairweather 18/03703/FUL 16/11/2018 109 Allerton Road 4 £ - Green Clayton and Fairweather 17/06864/FUL 13/06/2018 Former 99 Allerton Road, Bradford 4 £ - Green Clayton and Fairweather 17/06924/FUL 13/06/2018 8 Hedge Side, Bradford 4 £ - Green 17/01432/FUL 28/09/2017 Land West of 55 Farmstead Road 4 £ - Eccleshill

Page 51 Page Land adjacent to 72 Fagley Lane, 17/06432/FUL 13/06/2018 Bradford 4 £ - Eccleshill Fagley Youth and Community Centre, 17/05678/MAF 22/06/2018 Fagley Road 4 £ - Eccleshill

17/01776/FUL 18/07/2018 Former 132 Fagley Road, Bradford 4 £ - Eccleshill Land to West of Moorside Meadows, 18/01971/FUL 18/07/2018 Bradford 4 £ - Eccleshill 18/02791/FUL 11/10/2018 32 Bank, Bradford 4 £ - Eccleshill 17/02894/FUL 28/09/2017 17 Snape Drive 4 Self build £ - Great Horton Hollingwood Villa, 1 Hollingwood 18/03712/FUL 17/12/2018 Lane 4 £ - Great Horton 18/04096/FUL 26/02/2019 62 Glenrose Drive, Bradford 4 £ - Great Horton

17/05684/MAF 04/07/2018 Land south of 607 Great Horton Road 4 £ - Great Horton Land between Hews Clews and Anne 18/00926/FUL 04/07/2018 Street, Bradford 4 £ - Great Horton 18/01043/MAF 01/08/2018 100 Hollingwood Lane, Bradford 4 £ - Great Horton 18/01140/FUL 20/09/2018 Lion Works, Paternoster Lane 4 £ - Great Horton 18/04442/FUL 09/01/2019 175 Bradford Road, Shipley 4 £ - Heaton Appendix 3 - CIL Liability notices issued

Former site of 1 Midland Road, 18/05079/FUL 20/02/2019 Frizinghall 4 £ - Heaton

18/00260/FUL 22/06/2018 Land at 36 Aireville Avenue, Bradford 4 £ - Heaton 18/02133/FUL 08/08/2018 16 Park Drive, Bradford 4 £ - Heaton 17/03314/FUL 23/01/2018 269 Highfield Road, Idle 3 £ 3,900.00 Idle and Thackley Land south east of 55 Westfield Lane, Affordable 18/02325/MAF 08/01/2019 Idle 3 housing £ 50,350.00 Idle and Thackley Land to rear of Plumpton Barn, 17/04780/FUL 25/01/2018 Thackley 3 Self build £ - Idle and Thackley 17/04718/MAF 04/05/2018 Thackley Grange 3 £ 2,280.00 Idle and Thackley 17/04916/FUL 14/05/2018 11 & 13 Apperley Road 3 £ 3,640.00 Idle and Thackley 18/00142/FUL 14/05/2018 Meadowcroft Close, Bradford 3 £ 4,800.00 Idle and Thackley 17/04070/FUL 15/05/2018 899 Harrogate Road, Bradford 4 £ - Idle and Thackley 16/02062/MAF 12/06/2018 1023 Harrogate Road, Bradford 3 £ 27,871.80 Idle and Thackley 18/00225/FUL 13/06/2018 288 Apperley Road 3 £ - Idle and Thackley

Page 52 Page 18/01146/FUL 22/06/2018 Idle United Reformed Church 3 Self build £ - Idle and Thackley 18/00487/FUL 22/06/2018 8 Oaklands, Bradford 3 £ 2,160.00 Idle and Thackley 18/01650/FUL 01/08/2018 17 High Street, Idle 3 £ 1,320.00 Idle and Thackley 17/05824/MAF 07/08/2018 Land east of 43 Brunswick Road 4 £ - Idle and Thackley Affordable 16/08277/MAF 23/01/2018 32 Green Lane 4 housing £ - Manningham 17/03258/FUL 23/01/2018 4 Walmer Villas 4 £ - Manningham 18/03299/FUL 29/10/2018 4 Nesfield Street, Bradford 4 £ - Manningham Commercial House, Manningham 18/03797/FUL 29/10/2018 Lane 4 £ - Manningham 18/04607/FUL 20/02/2019 106 Whetley Hill 4 £ - Manningham 18/05020/FUL 26/02/2019 19 - 25 Aberford Road, Bradford 4 £ - Manningham Sekhon & Firth, Commercial House, 18/01528/FUL 18/07/2018 Mannhingham Lane 4 £ - Manningham

17/04196/FUL 05/11/2017 Former 62 Long Lane, Queensbury 3 £ 7,200.00 Queensbury

18/04051/FUL 17/12/2018 Land at Scarlet Heights, Queensbury 4 £ - Queensbury Land at Commercial Street, 18/03426/FUL 15/02/2019 Queensbury 3 £ 16,840.00 Queensbury Appendix 3 - CIL Liability notices issued

17/02561/FUL 15/05/2018 305-313 Beacon Road, Bradford 4 £ - Queensbury Greenfield House, Roper Lane, 18/00577/FUL 06/06/2018 Queensbury 3 Self build £ - Queensbury West Whins, Blackshaw Beck Lane, 17/06488/FUL 04/07/2018 Queensbury 4 £ - Queensbury 18/00920/FUL 19/07/2018 Bradshaw View, Queensbury 3 £ 10,860.00 Queensbury Church of Nazarene, Hillcrest Road, 18/01700/MAF 20/09/2018 Queensbury 3 £ 23,680.00 Queensbury Land South Of 66 To 72 Poplar Grove, 18/04237/FUL 09/01/2019 Bradford 4 £ - Royds 18/00071/FUL 13/06/2018 19 Reevy Park Court, Bradford 4 £ - Royds 17/06494/MAF 22/06/2018 Western Way, Halifax Road 4 £ - Royds 18/00962/HOU 22/06/2018 74 Poplar Grove 4 £ - Royds 18/01277/FUL 18/07/2018 1 Abb Scott Lane, Bradford 4 £ - Royds Land south of 66-72 Poplar Grove, 18/01862/FUL 07/08/2018 Bradford 4 £ - Royds

Page 53 Page Land south of 66-72 Poplar Grove, 18/01855/FUL 08/08/2018 Bradford 4 £ - Royds 18/01215/FUL 20/09/2018 60-62 Union Road, Low Moor 4 £ - Royds 17/02735/FUL 01/11/2017 9 Moorhead Lane, Shipley 2 £ 7,750.00 Shipley 18/04522/HOU 09/01/2019 28 Lindisfarne Road 2 £ 10,750.00 Shipley Fairmont Lodge, 124 Otley Road, 18/03925/MAF 09/01/2019 Shipley 4 £ - Shipley 19/00077/FUL 22/03/2019 63 Birklands road, Shipley 3 £ - Shipley Affordable 17/01313/MAF 25/01/2018 Bankside, Dock Lane, Shipley 3 housing £ 145,800.00 Shipley 17/06808/FUL 14/05/2018 Cliffe Wood Avenue 3 £ - Shipley Ivy House Nursing Home, 6 Hollin 17/06421/MAF 13/06/2018 Wood close, Shipley 2 £ - Shipley Land adjacent to Bridge House, Dock 18/00351/ful 13/06/2018 Lane 3 £ 16,720.00 Shipley 18/01009/FUL 03/07/2018 Saltaire Road, Saltaire 3 £ 1,088.00 Shipley 18/01542/MAF 14/02/2019 Bankside, Dock Lane, Shipley 3 £ 149,428.00 Shipley

18/02243/FUL 29/10/2018 1483 Thornton Road, Bradford 4 £ - Thornton and Allerton Appendix 3 - CIL Liability notices issued

Barn At 1 Stream Head Road, 18/04527/FUL 20/02/2019 Thornton 4 £ - Thornton and Allerton

18/05264/FUL 22/03/2019 Land south of 18 Ivy Lane, Bradford 4 £ - Thornton and Allerton

17/05250/FUL 13/06/2018 705 Thornton Road, Thornton 4 Self build £ - Thornton and Allerton Land at Upper Heights Road, 18/01687/FUL 18/07/2018 Thornton 4 £ - Thornton and Allerton Moorhouse Moor Farm, 607 Allerton 18/02852/FUL 20/09/2018 Road 4 £ - Thornton and Allerton 17/02951/FUL 23/01/2018 34 Wheatlands Drive 3 £ 10,760.00 Toller 17/06636/HOU 14/05/2018 14 Locarno Avenue 3 Self build Toller 18/00428/HOU 13/06/2018 2 Westway, Bradford 3 Self build £ 2,446.00 Toller

18/00254/FUL 03/07/2018 Lady Royd Lodge, Duckworth Lane 4 £ - Toller 18/02134/FUL 07/08/2018 77-79 Girlington Road, Bradford 4 £ - Toller

Page 54 Page Land at grid ref 421001 431189, 18/03146/FUL 05/12/2018 Raikes Lane, Tong 4 £ - Tong

18/01437/FUL 03/07/2018 Jacmil Caravan Storage, Tong Lane 4 £ - Tong Former site of 5 and 7 South East of 3 18/01457/FUL 01/08/2018 Burnham Avenue 4 £ - Tong Barn and Metal Works, Bogden 18/01207/FUL 07/08/2018 House Farm, Spen Lane 4 £ - Tong

18/02939/FUL 17/12/2018 137 Carr Bottom Road, Little Horton 4 £ - Wibsey

17/02554/FUL 12/04/2018 Windmill pub, High Street, Wibsey 4 £ - Wibsey

18/00187/FUL 13/06/2018 227 Carr Bottom Road, Little Horton 4 £ - Wibsey 18/00606/FUL 13/06/2018 993 Manchester Road, Bradford 4 £ - Wibsey Land At Grid Ref 415010 430957, 18/01195/FUL 22/06/2018 Little Horton Lane 4 £ - Wibsey 18/01212/HOU 22/06/2018 46 St Matthews Road, Bradford 4 £ - Wibsey

18/03041/FUL 02/10/2018 Windmill Pub, High Street, Wibsey 4 £ - Wibsey Appendix 3 - CIL Liability notices issued

Affordable 16/09513/MAF 07/09/2017 Land at Crag Road 4 housing £ - Windhill and Wrose 17/00830/FUL 28/09/2017 Land South of Stubbing House 4 £ - Windhill and Wrose

18/05226/FUL 26/02/2019 Land to rear of 82 Carr Lane, Shipley 4 £ - Windhill and Wrose New Victoria Hotel, 78 Livingstone 18/00498/FUL 13/06/2018 Road 4 £ - Windhill and Wrose

17/02978/FUL 01/11/2017 Gas Works Yard, Cleckheaton Road 4 £ - Wyke 17/04146/FUL 23/01/2018 4 Pye Nook, Bradford 4 £ - Wyke 18/04513/FUL 20/02/2019 62 Rooley Crescent 4 £ - Wyke 17/06740/FUL 17/04/2018 70 Rooley Crescent 4 £ - Wyke 17/05580/FUL 13/06/2018 675-677 Wyke Lane, Wyke 4 £ - Wyke 18/00827/FUL 22/06/2018 450-452 Huddersfield Road 4 £ - Wyke £ 679,633.93 Page 55 Page This page is intentionally left blank Appendix 4 - CIL payments received, neighbourhood funds and 5% admininistration sum retained

Application Site address CIL zone Sum paid Parish/Town Council Ward 15% 25% Balance 5% Strategic funds number 10 Bark Lane, Addingham Parish 18/00836/FUL Addingham 1 £ 17,490.00 Council Craven £ 2,623.50 £ 14,866.50 £ 743.33 £ 14,123.17 Darkwood House, Addingham Parish Town 17/00570/MAF Addingham 1 £ 108,474.00 Council Craven £ 16,271.10 £ 92,202.90 £ 4,610.15 £ 87,592.75 17/03704/MAF Lidl, Bingley Super £ 105,750.00 Bingley Town Council Bingley £ 15,862.50 £ 89,887.50 £ 4,494.37 £ 85,393.13 5A Priestthorpe Lane, 17/06954/FUL Bingley 3 £ 1,740.00 Bingley Town Council Bingley £ 261.00 £ 1,479.00 £ 73.95 £ 1,405.05 123 Gilstead Lane, 17/03208/FUL Gilstead 2 £ 2,750.00 Bingley Town Council Bingley £ 412.50 £ 2,337.50 £ 116.88 £ 2,220.62 Queens Head, 93 Main 18/00475/FUL Street, Burley 1 £ 11,360.00 Burley in Wharfedale Wharfedale £ 2,840.00 £ 8,520.00 £ 426.00 £ 8,094.00 Land adjacent to 62 Sun Haworth, Cross Roads 17/03065/FUL Street, Haworth 3 £ 1,233.00 and Stanbury Worth Valley £ 184.95 £ 1,048.05 £ 52.40 £ 995.65 Former site of 21 Moorhouse Lane, 18/03652/FUL Oxenhope 3 £ 4,480.00 Oxenhope Parish Council Worth Valley £ 672.00 £ 3,808.00 £ 190.40 £ 3,617.60 Site of Crunwelle Sourt, Sandy Lane Parish Page 57 Page 17/05051/FUL Sandy Lane 3 £ 5,520.00 Council Thornton and Allerton £ 828.00 £ 4,692.00 £ 234.60 £ 4,457.40 17/04718/MAF Thackley Grange 3 £ 2,280.00 Idle and Thackley £ 342.00 £ 1,938.00 £ 96.90 £ 1,841.10

Land adjacent to Bridge 18/00351/FUL House, Dock Lane 3 £ 16,720.00 Shipley £ 2,508.00 £ 14,212.00 £ 710.60 £ 13,501.40 Bankside, Dock Lane, 17/01313/MAF Shipley 3 £ 72,900.00 Shipley £ 10,935.00 £ 61,965.00 £ 3,098.25 £ 58,866.75

£ 350,697.00 £ 50,900.55 £ 2,840.00 £ 296,956.45 £ 14,847.83 £ 282,108.62

Parish and Town Council transfersAddingham Parish Council £18,894.60 Bingley Town Council £16,536.00 Burley in Wharfedale £2,840.00 Haworth, Cross Roads and Stanbury £184.95

Oxenhope Parish Council £672.00 Sandy Lane Parish Council £828.00 Appendix 4 - CIL payments received, neighbourhood funds and 5% admininistration sum retained

Ward transfers Idle and Thackley £342.00 Shipley £13,443.00

5% administration sum retained £14,847.83 Page 58 Page Agenda Item 7/

Report of the Assistant Director (Planning, Transportation & Highways) to the meeting of Regulatory and Appeals Committee to be held on 5th December 2019 V

Subject: This is a full application for the demolition of an existing dwelling and construction of 150 dwellings with associated engineering, landscaping and access works, at land to the south of Rooley Crescent, Staithgate Lane, Bradford.

Summary statement: This application seeks permission for the construction of 150 dwellings.

The main issue relating to the proposal is the impact it will have on the Councils ability to provide the Park and Ride Scheme allocated on land to the west of the site. The Park and Ride Scheme is one of the schemes now being considered for funding through the "Transforming Cities Fund Stage 2 Big Bid" and is important in relation to the Council trying to reduce road traffic and vehicle emissions in order to improve air quality within Bradford. The access route to the proposed Park and Ride Scheme is on a route that is allocated to run across the northern section of the application site. The design of the layout of the development has provided the opportunity for an access to be created but the Highways Department have concerns that the proposal does not allow the creation of an access that would be suitable to serve the Park and Ride Scheme in terms of its design and the potential impact it would have on the residential amenities of the occupiers of the dwellings associated with the proposal. It is considered that if the application were approved in its current form it would potentially sterilise the proposed Park and Ride Scheme.

Other concerns with the proposal relate to the potential impact of flooding and the provision of an element of affordable housing.

Based on these concerns the application is recommended for refusal.

Julian Jackson Portfolio: Assistant Director (Planning, Regeneration, Planning and Transport Transportation & Highways) Report Contact: John Eyles Overview & Scrutiny Area: Major Development Manager Regeneration and Economy Phone: (01274) 434380 E-mail: [email protected]

Page 59 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

1. SUMMARY

This is a full application for the demolition of an existing dwelling and construction of 150 dwellings with associated engineering, landscaping and access works, at land to the south of Rooley Crescent, Staithgate Labe, Bradford.

2. BACKGROUND

Attached at Appendix 1 is the Technical Report of the Assistant Director (Planning, Transportation and Highways). This identifies the material considerations relevant to the application.

3. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS

All considerations material to the determination of this planning application are as set out in Appendix 1.

4. FINANCIAL & RESOURCE APPRAISAL

The presentation of the proposal is subject to normal budgetary constraints.

5. RISK MANAGEMENT AND GOVERNANCE ISSUES

No implications.

6. LEGAL APPRAISAL

The determination of the application is within the Council’s powers as the Local Planning Authority.

7. OTHER IMPLICATIONS

7.1 EQUALITY & DIVERSITY

Section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 states that the Council must, in the exercise of its functions “have due regard to the need to eliminate conduct that is prohibited by the Act, advancing equality of opportunity between people who share a protected characteristic and people who do not share it, and fostering good relations between people who share a protected characteristic and people who do not share it. For this purpose section 149 defines “relevant protected characteristics” as including a range of characteristics including disability, race and religion. In this particular case due regard has been paid to the section149 duty but it is not considered there are any issues in this regard relevant to this application.

Page 60 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

7.2 SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS

No significant issues raised. The site is located within a sustainable location in that it is within walking distance of facilities including retail, employment and recreation facilities as well as having access to a bus service along Rooley Avenue.

7.3 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS IMPACTS

A condition could be incorporated within a planning permission requiring the inclusion of electric vehicle charging points, in accordance with the Council’s Low Emissions Strategy. Concerns over the potential failure to deliver the adjacent Park and Ride scheme (on land allocated for that particular use on the Development Plan) by preventing a proper means of access is a material consideration and could have adverse impacts in relation to wider strategies to reduce air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions.

7.4 COMMUNITY SAFETY IMPLICATIONS

Core Strategy Policy DS5 states that development proposals should be designed to ensure a safe and secure environment and reduce the opportunities for crime. Conditions are recommended in relation to matters such as boundary treatment to further enhance the security of the site. Building Regulations Approved Document Q relates to Secured by Design issues for the individual dwellings.

7.5 HUMAN RIGHTS ACT

Article 6 - right to a fair and public hearing. The Council must ensure that it has taken into account the views of all those who have an interest in, or whom may be affected by the proposal.

7.6 TRADE UNION

None.

7.7 WARD IMPLICATIONS

Ward members have been fully consulted on the proposal and it is not considered that there are any significant implications for the Ward itself.

7.8 AREA COMMITTEE ACTION PLAN IMPLICATIONS

None.

Page 61 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

7.9 IMPLICATIONS FOR CORPORATE PARENTING

None.

7.10 ISSUES ARISING FROM PRIVACY IMPACT ASSESMENT

None.

8. NOT FOR PUBLICATION DOCUMENTS

None.

9. OPTIONS

The Committee can refuse the application as per the recommendation contained within Appendix 1, or approve the application.

If the Committee decide that planning permission should be granted, then it would be recommended that the Committee resolve to be minded to grant consent and delegate the decision to the Assistant Director, Planning Transportation and Highways giving a clear steer in relation to required contents of any S106 Agreement and appropriate conditions.

10. RECOMMENDATIONS

The application is recommended for refusal for the reasons included with Appendix 1.

11. APPENDICES

Appendix 1 Technical Report.

12.BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS

National Planning Policy Framework Core Strategy Replacement Unitary Development Plan

Page 62 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

19/02602/MAF

Land To South Of Rooley Crescent Staithgate Lane, Bradford

Page 63 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

Appendix 1 5th December 2019

Ward: Wyke Recommendation: TO REFUSE PLANNING PERMISSION

Application Number: 19/02602/MAF

Type of Application/Proposal and Address: This is a full application for the demolition of an existing dwelling and construction of 150 dwellings with associated engineering, landscaping and access works, at land to the south of Rooley Crescent, Staithgate Lane, Bradford.

Applicant: Caddick Land Limited

Agent: Mr Mark Eagland (Peacock & Smith)

Site Description: The site is located to the south of Rooley Crescent and Newhall Drive and comprises open fields separated by landscaped boundaries. To the east of the site are industrial buildings located off Staithgate Lane, and, to the south and south west is a copse of trees that extends further to the south and runs either side of the railway line. To the west are open fields under which is located the “Odsal Tip”, a landfill site. Running underneath the eastern boundary of the site is a railway tunnel whilst to the further east of the site, beyond Staithgate Lane, is the M606.

Relevant Site History: There is no relevant planning permission on the site.

The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF): The National Planning Policy Framework is a material planning consideration on any development proposal. The Framework highlights the fact that the purpose of the planning system is to contribute to the achievement of sustainable development and that there is a presumption in favour of sustainable development which can deliver:- i) Planning for prosperity (an economic role) - by ensuring that sufficient land of the right type and in the right places is available to allow growth and innovation; ii) Planning for people (a social role) - by promotion of strong, vibrant and healthy communities by providing an increase supply of housing to meet the needs of present and future generations and by creating a good quality built environment with accessible local services; iii) Planning for places (an environmental role) - by protecting and enhancing the natural, built and historic environment, adapting to climate change including moving to a low-carbon economy.

As such the Framework suggests local planning authorities should approve development proposals that accord with statutory plans without delay.

Page 64 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

The Local Plan for Bradford: The Core Strategy for Bradford was adopted on 18 July 2017 though some of the policies contained within the preceding Replacement Unitary Development Plan (RUDP), saved for the purposes of formulating the Local Plan for Bradford, remain applicable until adoption of Allocations and Area Action Plan development plan documents. The site is not allocated for any specific land-use in the RUDP but is located within an area identified under policy OS1 as Urban Greenspace (Ref: BS/OS1.4 – South Bradford Golf Course, Odsal). Within the northern section of the site there is an allocation under policy TM20 – Highway Improvements (Ref: BS/TM20.2 – M606/Rooley Lane, Staygate Roundabout) which will serve the allocated Park and Ride Allocation to the west under policy TM7 (Ref: BS/TM7.2 – Odsal). Accordingly, the following adopted saved RUDP and Core Strategy policies are applicable to this proposal.

Replacement Unitary Development Plan Policies: OS1 Urban Greenspace TM7 Park and Ride Sites TM20 Cycleway Improvements

Core Strategy Policies: P1 Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development SC1 Overall Approach and Key Spatial Priorities SC4 Hierarchy of Settlements SC9 Making Great Places TR1 Travel Reduction and Modal Shift TR2 Parking Policy TR3 Public Transport, Cycling and Walking HO5 Density of Housing Schemes HO6 Maximising the Use of Previously Developed Land HO8 Housing Mix HO9 Housing Quality HO11 Affordable Housing EN2 Biodiversity and Geodiversity EN5 Trees and Woodland EN7 Flood Risk EN8 Environmental Protection EN12 Minerals Safeguarding DS1 Achieving Good Design DS2 Working with the Landscape DS3 Urban Character DS4 Streets and Movement DS5 Safe and Inclusive Places ID2 Viability ID3 Developer Contributions

Parish Council: There is no Parish Council in the Wyke Ward.

Publicity and Number of Representations: The application was publicised by press notice, site notice and neighbour notification letters. The expiry date for the publicity exercise was the 2nd August 2019.

Page 65 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

As a result of the publicity exercise 148 representations have been received objecting to the proposal including one from a Local Ward Councillor. A petition comprising 414 signatures has also been submitted objecting to the proposal. The representations also include an objection from the Odsal Area Residents Association.

Summary of Representations Received: Principle of development:  There are many more suitable sites within the Bradford District where this type of development would be more suited  There is no call for rented accommodation in this area as there are already several houses up to rent and have been for a while as they can't find tenants  Why build on a green site when there are many old buildings in Bradford which could be converted into apartments or flats, and brownfield sites which could be used e.g. the Initial/Grattan site on Northside Road  More work and houses in the city would decrease need for cars

Residential amenity:  Noise created during the construction period by the site  Dust and mess created on the site will directly affect the residents  Air pollution created by construction vehicles and the construction process will impact on residents  Dwelling number 119 which is to be built overlooking my property. This property will overshadow our property with our view being of a side brick wall.  Impact of the new access on the residential amenities of the occupiers of the adjacent dwellings  The electric pylons??? Are they staying? How would that affect the public living below it? If the pylons are being re-routed underground how would that affect the current residents?  The tranquil atmosphere of the area will be spoilt as more and more people move in to an area that has already recently been developed  The council keeps going on about protecting open green land when elections are coming round  Loss of privacy by overlooking between existing and proposed dwellings

Drainage:  We will see more flooding as the climate changes and removing green spaces and replacing with roads with intensify problems  The land in question is always flooded and clogged

Highways:  People will use cars as the local facilities are not within walking distance  The nearest bus stop is at the bottom of Rooley Crescent which is too far for people to walk  Lack of available public transport  The number of cars that use Rooley Crescent as a rat run between Staithgate Lane and Rooley Avenue is a lot.  Health and safety issues of operating construction vehicles in a residential area  Additional road traffic on Rooley Crescent and Deanbeck Avenue will be unacceptable  Extra traffic will come as a result from building on the Richard Dunns site whether it is homes or industrial buildings

Page 66 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

 Concerns to the access of emergency services if required as current traffic already struggles in the area  The schooling, local doctors access to shops via bus routes is already inadequate  Concerned where workers will park their cars when on site  No alternative access road suggested when it would be safer to have an access road at the bottom of Staithgate lane but that would probably cost the developers more money.  Parking during match days at the stadium leaves residents unable to park  Lack of parking resulting in poorly parked vehicles nearly blocking roads making it nearly impossible for large vehicles to pass If there was ever a fire in the area I dread to think how hard it would be for a fire truck to attend  Law enforcement was penalizing motorists for taking shortcuts through the residential area off the A road and the motorway. But that's fine now as a result of a development.  Deanbeck Avenue, which gives access to Rooley Crescent, is very narrow, and house owners are forced to park half on the road and half on the footpath in order to allow free access along the road  Why is access to the proposed development being taken off Rooley Crescent, when there is already a much more suitable access road in Staithgate Lane, adjacent to Expect Distribution, together with two farmer's gates lower down  Parking is currently a huge problem in the entire area and 150 houses will only make this worse  Over the years there have been accidents, fatalities (including a councillor's daughter) on Rooley Avenue and yet it gets no permanent solution to the problems faced daily by local inhabitants simply trying to get to work, school, doctors etc - it is only fit for being loaded with more traffic  Traffic gridlock in this area affects all of Bradford because of its massive importance to the motorway access for the City

Environment:  What about car pollution in the area?  Impact on the existing trees on the site  Concerned about the site which was formerly a tip for chemical and human waste and a tip  The Rooley Croft development has suffered from contamination from the old Odsal tip. Why would this development be any different?  A decision was made that no Environmental Impact Assessment was required for this development even though it is above the 5 hectare limit. This decision (if correct) seems to be at best irresponsible and at worst worthy of some kind of official enquiry  The environmental impact of all the recent development in the area (housing on Rooley Lane, McDonalds, redevelopment of a golf course to industrial units, the ever expanding Euroway Estate and more recently the development of Northern view with over a 100 houses) has been massive, increase in traffic congestion, air pollution, noise pollution and not to mention the detrimental effects on the local wildlife  Queuing traffic will increase air pollution  This site sits above an area of old mine workings  This area was identified by Bradford council as part of a green corridor next to the M606 why is Bradford Council ignoring their own reports.

Page 67 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

Wildlife:  Impact on the wildlife in the area  Bats nest in the tunnel on the disused tracks next to the field, by law you can't build on/near nest sites.

Other:  Where are the children going to go to school from the new estate?  Effect that the development will have on the valuation of our property  The housing is rented accommodation which will bring its own problems with uncertainty of the type of tenants  There is also lots of mining issues from many years back in the proposed area  The infrastructure cannot support any more houses being built in this neighbourhood after already having had 2 estates plus 1 small development already completed all the local schools doctors dentists are already vastly over subscribed  Social housing will be a high turnover of tenants and no play areas in this area for children as it is  There's was an article in the T & A recently saying there are so many council properties that are costing so much money to look after that are unoccupied?? So why do we need these affordable homes? Fill up the council ones  The reason given by the developers is that there is a lack of rental accommodation in Bradford; a simple search on RightMove shows that there are plenty's of houses available for rent  Don’t think anything will be done as people in positions of power who are making these decisions can be enticed to change their decisions  What are our local councillor’s views on this?  The area is congested to hell now, don’t the council think about the residents who have paid rates and looked after their properties for 30 years or more, we have already had loads of new properties built already  Do the new residents realise insurance would be invalid as it was an old tip and has chimneys to expel methane gas, plus it used to be a quarry before the tip.  You councillors are not bothered as they don’t live here, on an evening it’s like a rat race, can’t imagine what it will be like when Richard Dunns is sold for housing as it will be on the cards to pay for the Sedburgh new gym complex  Would not surprise if a deal is not done  It’s not affordable housing as the company are not social landlords  With all the dwellings being for rent it begs the question ' What quality of housing will be built?'  Why are none of the properties for sale?  Why is it that some people got leaflets/letters and others didn't?  The builder applying for the properties to be built was also part of the declined sports Village set to replace the Bradford bulls stadium. The company placed several objections to the sports Village been built. Their reasons were there would be too much traffic in the area and bad for the environment. I would like you know why the company objected to the sports Village but is wanting to build establishments that will have the same effect as their objections to the sports Village  Make the decisions with the planet and eco systems in place and not quick profits.  Perhaps the land would be better used as a community allotment, or you could plant a hundred trees to make a statement and put Bradford on the map for something positive for a change  Local residents bought the properties as a private property you’re going to make it into a council estate how are you going to reinstate the residents who’ve been here

Page 68 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

for 30 plus years whose property value will decrease and why hasn't council tax gone down since were no longer residential... only people this will benefit are council and developers who we’ve heard hardly anything from  Under the Unitary Development Plan (UDP) of the council the land in question is allocated for Park and Ride facility. Bradford council have so far spent in access of a million pounds to make up a case for HS2 and NPR. It is estimated that the project will earn Bradford a £1 billion in yearly revenues  The Park and Ride facility is exactly at the location of the development and by allowing the development Bradford Council will be showing not only disloyalty to the citizens of the city but to the region and the waste of tax payer's money  Lack of feedback to the residents from the Agent in relation to the pre-application consultation exercise  The most recent phase of commenting on the application has not been helped by the Council's errors and user-unfriendliness of the internet based facilities  The reference to HSE seems cursory when many remember that television cameras were only allowed to film at the farm gate at the northern edge of the proposed development when the news crews were covering the fire at the, then, Allied Colloids plant. There are very serious issues underlying this observation  The planning application puts spin on maintaining the middle area as a beck - this is only because the area they talk about is unsettled/bog and unlikely that they could build on it, this is spin and if could have been an extra 30 houses it would have been to maximize profit  Lack of Community Involvement – The Planning Statement goes into detail about community involvement and Member and Public Consultation. In my mind Consultation is a two way discussion and the statement implies that this has taken place. However, no meaningful discussions have taken place, the developers did not even acknowledge letters and emails, and therefore how will this change when so much of the development arguments are based on community involvement?  The developers do not have a track record in this type of development  Concerns regarding the proposal to build southerly towards a number of existing COMMA chemical sites in the area. Any development works could cause disturbances to settled chemicals and be hazardous  Why were the previous planning applications refused?  Have Councillors and Planning Staff done any research into the application  Lack of recreation facilities in the area and the loss of this field will exacerbate the situation  Infestation of vermin once the ground is broken as happened with the former Northern View Hospital Site

Consultations: Highways DC (Transport Assessment) – Objection to the proposal on the grounds that it would prejudice the future provision of the Park and Ride Scheme on land to the west of the site

West Yorkshire Combined Authority (Highways) – No objection to the principle of the development but state that the Developer should fund a package of sustainable travel measures such as discounted MetroCards (Residential MetroCard Scheme) for all or part of the site at a cost of £75,075.00p to encourage the use of other more sustainable modes of transport than the private car

Page 69 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

Education (Client Team) – There are little or no surplus places at nearby primary schools in any year group to accommodate potential additional children who may come to live in this development. This is also the case for most of the secondary schools nearby, although there are currently places available at Bradford Forster in years 9 and 10, and Tong has space in all year groups.

Sport & Leisure – The proposal will have a significant impact on the existing recreational facilities in the vicinity of the site and a financial contribution from CIL funds will be sought to help mitigate these impact. Any areas of open space within the development will need to be maintained either through a private maintenance agreement of through the payment of a 25 year commuted sum if the Developer wishes the Council to maintain them

West Yorkshire Police – No objection to the principle of the development but comments are made on specific aspects of it including the provision of a management plan for the areas of public open space, boundary treatments, shared pathways, surveillance of parking bays, external lighting, doors and windows, and, intruder alarms

Biodiversity Team – No objection is raised to the principle of the development in that the updated Management Plan has incorporated all the initial concerns raised. The development must be carried out according to the Ecological Management Plan (R- 3681-02.3) and the Construction Environment (Ecology) Management Plan (R-3681- 03.1) as submitted

Environmental Health Land Contamination – No objection subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions relating to remediation verification, unexpected contamination and the importation of materials

Lead Local Flood Authority – No objection to the principle of the development but further information is sought in order to fully assess the flood risks associated with the proposed development

Yorkshire Water Land Use Planning – No objection subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions relating to the disposal of both foul and surface water

The Coal Authority – No objection to the principle of the development as the coal mining features within and adjacent to the site will have minimal impact on the proposal

Health and Safety Executive – Do not advise against the granting of planning permission on safety grounds

Summary of Main Issues: 1. Principle of development 2. Visual amenity 3. Residential amenity 4. Highway safety 5. Drainage 6. Trees 7. Secured by design 8. Contaminated land 9. Biodiversity issues 10. Affordable housing

Page 70 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

11. Health and Safety issues 12. Community Infrastructure Levy 13. Other issues

Appraisal: The scheme proposes the construction of 150 dwellings with there being a mix of 1 (20), 2 (23), 3 (93), and, 4+ (14) bedrooms in size. The layout includes a mix of detached, semi-detached and terraced (3 dwellings) dwellings. The 1 bedroom units will be in groups of 4 and be back to back dwellings. Vehicular access to the site will be taken through a new access from Rooley Crescent to the north created through the demolition of an existing dwelling.

1. Principle of development

Paragraph 7 of the National Planning Policy Framework states that the purpose of the planning system is to contribute to the achievement of sustainable development. At a very high level, the objective of sustainable development can be summarised as meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. Paragraph 8 goes onto state that achieving sustainable development means that the planning system has three overarching objectives, which are interdependent and need to be pursued in mutually supportive ways and these include identifying and co-ordinating the provision of infrastructure (economic objective), by fostering a well-designed and safe built environment, with accessible services and open spaces that reflect current and future needs and support communities’ health, social and cultural well-being (social objective), and, to contribute to protecting and enhancing our natural, built and historic environment; including making effective use of land, helping to improve biodiversity, using natural resources prudently, minimising waste and pollution, and mitigating and adapting to climate change, including moving to a low carbon economy (environmental objective).

Paragraph 11 of the National Planning Policy Framework states that development proposals should be determined in accordance with an up-to-date development plan without delay.

Urban Greenspace (Policy OS1):

Policy OS1 of the Replacement Unitary Development Plan relates to land within the defined Urban Greenspaces. The policy has been superseded by policy EN1 of the Core Strategy but is saved until the adoption of the Allocations and Area Action Plan Development Plan Documents.

The site is located within an area defined as Urban Greenspace within the Replacement Unitary Development Plan. Policy OS1 states that development will not be permitted in the areas identified as Urban Greenspace unless it retains their open and green character, and, through design makes a positive contribution to the character and amenity of such areas. The layout of the site is such that there are a number of swathes of green open space within the application site that helps to break up the mass of the built form. The southern section of the site will remain open and will be enhanced through additional tree and hedge planting. This open area will extend up towards the northern boundary of the site with the area around the beck being maintained and enhanced. Running from the centre of the northern boundary towards the western boundary is another strip of open land. Not only will these areas break up the built form

Page 71 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee of the development but will also retain, and enhance, an element of open green space as well as making a positive contribution to the character of the area. It is considered that the inclusion of the green corridors, all of which could be appropriately landscaped to further minimise the potential impact on the allocated urban greenspace, the overall impact on the openness of the area is acceptable.

Housing density and mix (Policies HO5 & HO8):

Policy HO5 of the Core Strategy states that in order to meet both the objectives of delivering housing growth and managing that growth in a sustainable way developers will be expected to make the best and most efficient use of land. Densities should normally achieve at least a minimum density of 30 dwellings per hectare although higher densities would be possible in areas well served by public transport.

Policy HO8 of the Core Strategy states that the Council will ensure that a mix and balance of housing is provided to meet the needs of the District’s growing and diverse population. All large sites will be expected to incorporate a mix of housing types, sizes, prices and tenures and the mix should be based on both market demand and evidence of local need within the District’s SHMA.

The scheme proposes the construction of 150 dwellings with there being a mix of 1 (20), 2 (23), 3 (93), and, 4+ (14) bedrooms in size. The layout includes a mix of detached, semi-detached and terraced (3 dwellings) dwellings. The 1 bedroom units will be in groups of 4 and be back to back dwellings. As such it is considered that the proposal satisfies the requirements of policy HO8 with regards to providing a mix and balance of house types to meet the demands of the area.

The application site is 6.07 hectares in size and the scheme proposes 150 dwellings. This equates to a density of 25 dwellings per hectare. This density is below the minimum policy requirement of 30 dwellings per hectare as identified in policy HO5. However, there are extenuating circumstances for this reduced density including the need to protect the area of land allocated for the access route to the proposed Park and Ride Scheme to the west and the need to provide a buffer zone underneath the pylons that run through the site from the south east to the north. As such, in this instance, the reduced density is considered to be acceptable.

Park & Ride Scheme including access route (Policies TM7 & TM20):

Policy TM7 – allocation BS/TM7.2 (Odsal) – This scheme forms part of the South Bradford Integrated Transport Improvements. Access to the car park from the M606 will be via a new link road from Staithgate Lane, which is also shown on the Proposals Map.

Policy TM20 – allocation BS/TM20.2 – M606/Rooley Lane/Staygate Roundabout – This scheme forms part of the South Bradford Integrated Transport Improvements.

Running across the northern section of the site is an allocation for a Highway Improvement under policy TM20 of the Replacement Unitary Development Plan. The allocation, under reference BS/TM20.2 (M606/Rooley Lane, Staygate Roundabout), forms part of the South Bradford Integrated Transport Improvements and will provide access from Staithgate Lane to the allocated Park and Ride Scheme located immediately to the west of the application site.

Page 72 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

The Applicant has submitted a layout which does show the Highway Improvements allocated as a protected green corridor but shows it as part estate road serving plots 78-90 and 144-150 in the eastern part of the section. As the site moves to the west this then becomes an area of open space which narrows to a width of 20 metres as it reaches the western boundary of the site. At either side of this point are residential plots, plot 6 to the north and plot 23 to the south. On western side of the joint boundary at this point is a pylon which would require moving to allow vehicular access into the protected Park and Ride site.

Both the allocation for the Park and Ride Scheme and the Highway Improvements have not previously been progressed. However, the allocation and protection of the site(s) through relevant development plan policies has served to keep the option open to deliver such a scheme if and when deemed appropriate. A scheme to deliver a Park and Ride facility on the allocated site to improve air quality within the Bradford District is now seen as making a significant contribution towards the reduction of road traffic and vehicle emissions. It is one of the schemes now being considered for funding through the "Transforming Cities Fund Stage 2 Big Bid". At the time of writing this report it is important to point out that there is currently no design available for the Park and Ride Scheme with regards to either the size of the parking area or the likely access route from Staithgate Lane. It is important therefore that the allocated route within the adopted Replacement Unitary Development Plan is protected.

In terms of the likely size of the Park and Ride Scheme it is envisaged that a minimum 500 spaces would be required but this could increase as more detailed designs are undertaken. A Scheme of this size would generate approximately 50% peak hour flow across the site, 45% in and 5% out, some 250 two way trips. This equates to the same trips as an extra 367 units that when added to the 150 proposed is 517 units. It is also a potential bus route and therefore would need to be a carriageway width of 6.25 to 6.75 metres and two footways of 3 metres with 2 grass verges of 1 metre width. The current layout does not show this and is deficient in all of the above requirements.

The access shown to the top of the site that touches the north eastern boundary terminates in a turning head at its western limit but is assumed this would push through the open space and through to the western site boundary. However this road would cross the proposed sole residential access into the application site from Rooley Crescent, immediately adjacent to a junction into a shared surface for units 7-22, which is considered to be unacceptable. The only available exit through the western boundary for this road is where the existing UHV electricity pylon is and causing a blockage. Both of the other two estate roads are also substandard in width and geometry and to promote a Park and Ride route along either of these two routes would require routing through private parking areas along the western boundary and the demolition or omission of two or more houses on the eastern boundary.

Further, to put the Park and Ride access along any of these routes would effectively create an additional access from Staithgate/M606 out onto Rooley Crescent and beyond, potentially creating an inappropriate short cut for commuters wishing to avoid the Staygate roundabout. The nature of a main Park and Ride route would not accord with the design principles of short, uncalmed lengths of highway with a design speed of 15-20mph that would be required in a residential development and therefore the longer unrestrained lengths of road would lead to higher average speeds and raise a highway safety concern.

Page 73 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

The consideration of the route of the Park and Ride facility is unknown and therefore whilst the current proposed layout is unacceptable for the reasons above it is not possible to give a definitive answer of which route should be the preferred route until the business case for the Park and Ride Scheme is at a more advanced stage.

The Applicant has submitted a Technical Note exploring 3 options for the Park and Ride access off Staithgate Lane. The routes proposed are all considered to be acceptable by the Applicant. The options are as follows together with the Councils response:

Option A (running through the northern section of the site) – this alignment very broadly fits within the RUDP protected alignment to the north of the site and the route of the 2001 planning application – the Highways Department have stated that the principle of having an access road serving the Park & Ride site, which would essentially run through a residential development, is not acceptable. The number of trips as discussed above are not residential in nature and give rise to highway safety concerns.

Option B (running through the centre of the site) – this route runs through the middle of the site and ties closely into the Premier Foods access option with minor realignment works, it ties into the planned roundabout on Staithgate Lane – the Highways Department have stated that this has previously been considered as a route for a Park & Ride scheme however the proposal of having this now running through a residential area is again not acceptable.

Option C (running through the southern section of the site) – this runs to the south of the site, taken off the planned roundabout on Staithgate Lane but utilises the existing industrial estate road, having the advantage of reducing the number of legs on the roundabout, which is normally considered as reducing safety risks – the Highways Department have stated that this route is likely to present significantly more challenging engineering difficulties for the construction of a complete through route to serve the Park & Ride site given the site layout and additional constraints to the south. A live tunnel exists (running north – south through the site) and cover to this is shallowest at the southern end of the site. Hence preferred options for the alignment of an access route have remained to the north within the site.

In conclusion it is not considered that any proposal for residential development within the application site would be supported by the Highways Department as it would effectively sterilise the delivery of any future potential Park and Ride Scheme (on land to the west) accessing via this land.

Whilst the principle of residential development in relation to the sites location within an area allocated as Urban Greenspace is considered acceptable in principle as the layout does incorporate large swathes of open land which would break up the built development there are significant concerns as to how the proposed layout would impact on the ability to deliver the allocated Park and Ride Scheme on land to the west of the site. This Scheme is now considered to be an important element of the Councils aims in reducing air emission pollution in Bradford through reductions in road traffic. The layout as proposed would severely restrict the ability to create an access to the Park and Ride Scheme and would effectively sterilise the delivery of the Park and Ride Scheme. As such therefore it is considered that the principle of the development is not

Page 74 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee acceptable and would be contrary to policies TM7 and TM20 of the Replacement Unitary Development Plan.

2. Visual amenity

The National Planning Policy Framework states in paragraph 124 that the creation of high quality buildings and places is fundamental to what the planning and development process should achieve. Good design is a key aspect of sustainable development, creates better places in which to live and work and helps make development acceptable to communities. Paragraph 127 states that planning policies and decisions should ensure that developments: a) will function well and add to the overall quality of the area, not just for the short term but over the lifetime of the development; b) are visually attractive as a result of good architecture, layout and appropriate and effective landscaping; c) are sympathetic to local character and history, including the surrounding built environment and landscape setting, while not preventing or discouraging appropriate innovation or change (such as increased densities); d) establish or maintain a strong sense of place, using the arrangement of streets, spaces, building types and materials to create attractive, welcoming and distinctive places to live, work and visit; e) optimise the potential of the site to accommodate and sustain an appropriate amount and mix of development (including green and other public space) and support local facilities and transport networks; and f) create places that are safe, inclusive and accessible and which promote health and well-being, with a high standard of amenity for existing and future users; and where crime and disorder, and the fear of crime, do not undermine the quality of life or community cohesion and resilience.

Paragraph 130 states that permission should be refused for development of poor design that fails to take the opportunities available for improving the character and quality of an area and the way it functions, taking into account any local design standards or style guides in plans or supplementary planning documents. Conversely, where the design of a development accords with clear expectations in plan policies, design should not be used by the decision-maker as a valid reason to object to development.

Policy DS1 of the Core Strategy states that planning decisions should contribute to achieving good design and high quality places through, amongst other things, taking a holistic, collaborative approach to design putting the quality of the place first, and, taking a comprehensive approach to redevelopment in order to avoid piecemeal development which would compromise wider opportunities and the proper planning of the area.

Policy DS2 of the Core Strategy states that development proposals should take advantage of existing features, integrate development into wider landscape and create new quality spaces. Wherever possible designs should, amongst other things, retain existing landscape and ecological features and integrate them within developments as positive assets, work with the landscape to reduce the environmental impact of the development, and, ensure that new landscape features and open spaces have a clear

Page 75 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee function, are visually attractive and fit for purpose, and have appropriate management and maintenance arrangements in place.

Policy HO9 of the Core Strategy states that new housing should be of high quality and achieve good design, should be accessible and easily adaptable to support the changing needs of families and individuals over their lifetime and provide private outdoor space for homes.

The site is located on the southern edge of the urban area with residential development located to the north and north west (including Rooley Crescent/Newhall Drive/Deanbeck Avenue/Radfield Drive) whilst to the east are industrial premises located on Staithgate Lane. The dwellings comprise a mix of detached and semi- detached dwellings and include both single (bungalows) and two storeys in height. There is a mix of materials including stone, brick and render.

The proposed layout includes detached, semi-detached and terraced (of three dwellings) dwellings as well as incorporating blocks of 4 dwellings in a back-to-back style. The dwellings will all be two storeys in height and will be constructed using brick and stone on the elevations and concrete tiles on the roofs. There are tracts of open space running through the development that help break up the overall mass of the development and help reduce the visual impact on the wider area.

The layout of the development and the designs of the proposed dwellings are considered acceptable, subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions with particular reference to materials, and will be not be visually detrimental to the character and appearance of either the streetscene or the wider locality and the requirements of policies DS1 and DS2 of the Core Strategy are therefore satisfied.

3. Residential amenity

Policy DS5 of the Core Strategy states that development proposals should make a positive contribution to people’s lives through high quality, inclusive design by, amongst other things, not harming the amenity of existing or prospective users and residents.

The application site is bounded to the north and north west by existing residential development on Rooley Crescent and Newhall Drive. The relationships between the existing and proposed dwellings include both main to main elevation and main elevation to gable end.

The first relationship to consider is that with the dwellings on Newhall Drive whose rear elevations face onto the application site. The relationships between the existing and proposed dwellings are rear elevation to gable end (14/16 Newhall Drive to plot 78), rear elevation to rear elevation (20 Newhall Drive to plot 82), and, side elevation to rear elevation (22 Newhall Drive to plots 85-87. The separation distances are 14 metres, 20 metres, and 22 metres respectively. Plot 78 is located close to the joint boundary with 14/16 Newhall Drive and will have its gable end facing onto the rear gardens of the existing properties. The gable end will be blank with no windows at all located within it. The distance between the boundary and the gable end will be approximately 2½ metres. The dwellings on Newhall Drive do benefit from having relatively long gardens and therefore there is adequate separation distance between the private garden of these dwellings and plot 78 such that it is not considered that the residential amenities will be adversely affected.

Page 76 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

The second relationship is that of the dwellings on Rooley Crescent whose rear (76/78 Rooley Crescent) and side (42 Rooley Crescent) face onto the site. The nearest plots to the boundary are plots 17 and 22 which are sited at an oblique angle to the boundary. The separation distances between plot 17 and 76/78 Rooley Crescent) and plot 22 to 42 Rooley Crescent are 18½ metres and 13 metres respectively. 78 Rooley Crescent does have a conservatory on its rear elevation which does reduce the separation distance to 13½ metres. Due to the orientation of the plots and the design of the dwellings, such that there are no windows in the side elevation of plot 17, it is not considered that the residential amenities of the occupiers of either the existing or proposed dwellings will be adversely affected.

The final relationship to consider is that of plot 1 to the dwelling to the immediate north that is located to the rear of 72 Rooley Crescent. The relationship is side elevation to side elevation with a separation distance of 14 metres. This is considered acceptable and the residential amenities of the occupiers of either the existing or proposed dwellings will not be adversely affected.

With regards to the relationship of the proposed dwellings to the industrial premises and land to the west there is a minimum distance of 32 metres between the proposed dwellings to the site boundary and this distance is considered acceptable in that the residential amenities of the occupiers of the proposed dwellings will not be adversely affected.

Overall therefore it is considered that the layout of the development is such that the residential amenities of the occupiers of both the proposed dwellings and those existing dwellings that abut the site will not be adversely affected by the proposal and the requirements of policy DS5 of the Core Strategy are satisfied.

4. Highway safety

Paragraph 102 of the National Planning Policy Framework states transport issues should be considered from the earliest stages of development proposals such that, amongst other things, the potential impacts of development on transport networks can be addressed, and, opportunities to promote walking, cycling and public transport use are identified and pursued.

Paragraph 109 of the National Planning Policy Framework states that development should only be prevented or refused on highways grounds if there would be an unacceptable impact on highway safety, or the residual cumulative impacts on the road network would be severe. It goes onto state in paragraph 110 that applications for development should: a) give priority first to pedestrian and cycle movements, both within the scheme and with neighbouring areas; and second – so far as possible – to facilitating access to high quality public transport, with layouts that maximise the catchment area for bus or other public transport services, and appropriate facilities that encourage public transport use; b) address the needs of people with disabilities and reduced mobility in relation to all modes of transport; c) create places that are safe, secure and attractive – which minimise the scope for conflicts between pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles, avoid unnecessary street clutter, and respond to local character and design standards;

Page 77 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee d) allow for the efficient delivery of goods, and access by service and emergency vehicles; and e) be designed to enable charging of plug-in and other ultra-low emission vehicles in safe, accessible and convenient locations.

Policy TR1 of the Core Strategy seeks to reduce the demand for travel, encourage and facilitate the use of sustainable travel modes, limit traffic growth, reduce congestion and improve journey time reliability whilst policy TR2 seeks to manage car parking to help manage travel demand, support the use of sustainable travel modes, meet the needs of disabled and other groups whilst improving quality of place.

The layout of the development is such that it will be accessed via a single access road taken from Rooley Crescent which will involve the demolition of an existing dwelling. Internally within the layout there will be a number of interlinked access road connecting the two areas of development.

With regards to the layout there are some minor issues that have been raised by the Highways Department but have not been fully addressed. The Council is currently looking to introduce a 20mph zone and traffic calming area along Rooley Crescent, Radfield Drive and Dean Beck Avenue. The Highways Department have stated that details have been provided to the Applicant but no confirmation has been received to say that they are agreeable to delivering this. However the Applicant did respond on the 6th September 2019 stating that “in discussion with the Council, Gurnam Shergill requested traffic calming in the area shown on the attached plan (email of 19 December 2018 14:31). Traffic calming was also requested in the agreed Scoping Document. Whilst it is noted that the Council have said that they would provide details of their preferred traffic calming scheme, despite a number of requests this has not been forthcoming, although the Council are known to prefer schemes which includes either speed cushions or round top road humps at 60m spacing. Features would only be required on Rooley Crescent, Radfield Drive and Dean Beck Avenue but all streets shaded would be in the 20 zone”. The Applicant goes onto state that “given the road layout with tight turns and on street parking both of which moderate speed; accepting that there is no accident record or school in this residential area, we consider that a 20mph signed traffic calming scheme is all that is required. The 20mph sign only scheme would include gateway entry and exit signs, repeater signs (TSRGD diagram 670) and could include 20mph road markings (TSRGD diagram 1065)”. Any traffic calming scheme could be agreed through the attachment of a Section 106 to a planning permission should a scheme be agreed between the Highways Department and the Council.

The Transport Assessment submitted in support of the application is relatively limited in relation to the area assessed in that it has concentrated on the immediate network surrounding the site however these are all minor roads and junctions. The scoping for the Assessment should have been widened to include additional junctions including Staithgate Lane/Staithgate Roundabout and Rooley Avenue (A6036)/Odsal Roundabout. However the Applicant has stated that the scoping of the Transport Assessment was agreed by officers within the Highways department on the 19th November 2018 and has submitted the Scoping Document to prove this.

The West Yorkshire Combined Authority have not raised an objection to the principle of the development but state that the Developer should fund a package of sustainable travel measures such as discounted MetroCards (Residential MetroCard Scheme) for

Page 78 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee all or part of the site at a cost of £75,075.00p to encourage the use of other more sustainable modes of transport than the private car. As an alternative to the provision of Residential MetroCards the Council does now seek the provision of Electric Vehicle Charging Points within the curtilage of each dwelling that has an off-street parking space and these are normally secured via a condition attached to a planning permission. It is considered that the provision of electric vehicle charging points represents a betterment of the scheme as the charging points are in situ permanently rather than, for example, the Residential MetroCard Scheme which is only for 1 year and there being no guarantee the users will renew them at the end of that period. As such it is recommended that the provision of the bus shelters and the Residential MetroCard Scheme not be sought in this instance.

In terms of the internal layout of the development as proposed it is generally considered to be acceptable subject to the agreement of a traffic calming scheme for the wider area. However there is an overall objection to the proposal in highway terms in that the layout would impact on the ability to provide the access to the Park and Ride Scheme and the proposal satisfies the requirements of policy TR1 of the Core Strategy.

5. Drainage

Paragraph 163 of the National Planning Policy Framework states that when determining any planning applications, local planning authorities should ensure that flood risk is not increased elsewhere. Paragraph 165 states that major developments should incorporate sustainable drainage systems unless there is clear evidence that this would be inappropriate. The systems used should: a) take account of advice from the lead local flood authority; b) have appropriate proposed minimum operational standards; c) have maintenance arrangements in place to ensure an acceptable standard of operation for the lifetime of the development; and d) where possible, provide multifunctional benefits.

Policy EN7 of the Core Strategy states that the Council will manage flood risk pro- actively which policy EN8 states that proposals for development will only be acceptable provided there is no adverse impact on water bodies and groundwater resources, in terms of their quantity, quality and the important ecological features they support.

In relation to the drainage of the site the Applicant proposes to connect to the mains sewer with regard to the discharge of foul water whilst with regard to the disposal of surface water it is intended to connect to an existing watercourse. The drainage proposals have been fully considered by the Lead Local Flood Authority and Yorkshire Water.

Yorkshire Water have not raised an objection to the drainage proposals as outlined in the submitted Flood Risk Assessment & Outline Drainage Strategy in that the foul water will discharge to a combined sewer located in Dean Beck Avenue and he sub-soil conditions do not support the use of soakaways and surface water is to discharge to the watercourse within the site.

However with regards to the potential flooding impact of the proposal the Lead Local Flood Authority do not consider that sufficient information has been submitted to allow the full impact to be assessed. Additional information was requested from the Applicant

Page 79 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee on the 20th August 2019 and has not been forthcoming. The additional information sought related to the following issues:

1. There appears to be a surface water flood route entering the site from the NW corner. It looks like the developer might need to install an infiltration drain along the Western boundary to intercept this. If so, the developer should show this on the drawings or else explain how this will be dealt with. 2. The proposed maximum surface water discharge rate is based on the gross site area, whereas this should be based on the post-development impermeable area. 3. The calculations for the attenuation storage seem to be based on a 30% allowance for climate change, whereas the FRA states 40%. 4. The developer needs to provide a surface water drainage strategy (plan) which shows the proposed surface water drainage network, including the attenuation storage basins, outfall(s) and key level information. The SuDS basins should also be shown on the Masterplan. 5. Detailed proposals for dealing with the existing pumping Rising Main, which crosses the site need to be submitted. 6. Additional details, of the watercourse into which it is proposed to discharge are required (photos). 7. Additional information about the adoption and future maintenance of the SuDS is required.

Without this information it is not possible to fully assess the proposal with regards to the potential of flood risk as a result. As such an objection to the proposal on flood risk grounds is raised and it is therefore considered that the proposal fails to satisfy the requirements of policies EN7 and EN8 of the Core Strategy.

6. Trees

Policy EN5 of the Core Strategy states that the Council will seek to preserve and enhance the contribution that trees and areas of woodland cover make to the character of the district.

There are a number of trees located within the site that are spread along the internal boundaries. However the majority of the trees are located adjacent to the southern and south western boundaries. These trees form part of a much larger copse of trees that extends further south away from the site and located either side of the railway line.

The layout of the site will result in the loss of a number of trees located in the northern section of the site but those in the southern section where there are no dwellings proposed will remain. Those trees along the western boundary will, where possible, be retained. The dwellings are positioned within the site such that they will not impact on the trees located adjacent to the site with the bulk of them being adjacent the area of open space proposed for the southern section of the site. This will ensure their future retention with there being no future pressure for their removal.

As such therefore there is no objection to the proposal with regards to the impact on the existing trees in the vicinity of the site and the proposal therefore satisfies the requirements of policy EN5 of the Core Strategy.

Page 80 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

7. Secured by Design

Paragraph 91 of the National Planning Policy Framework states that Planning decisions should aim to achieve healthy, inclusive and safe places which are safe and accessible, so that crime and disorder, and the fear of crime, do not undermine the quality of life or community cohesion – for example through the use of clear and legible pedestrian routes, and high quality public space, which encourage the active and continual use of public areas.

Policy DS5 of the Core Strategy states that development proposals should make a positive contribution to people’s lives through high quality, inclusive design. In particular they should, amongst other things, be designed to ensure a safe and secure environment and reduce the opportunities for crime.

The West Yorkshire Police Architectural Liaison Officer has not raised an objection to the principle of the development but has raised a number of comments on specific aspects of the proposal with these being as follows:

Management plan for the areas of public open space: There should be a good management plan for the areas of public space/green areas to ensure that these remain tidy and well maintained over the coming years – the provision of such a management plan would be secured through a condition attached to a planning permission.

Boundary treatments: The proposed boundary treatments are generally considered to be suitable. However where parking is located at the rear of the property for plots 29 to 33, 69 to 71 and 72, it may be prudent to have close board timber fencing with a 15 to 20mm space between the panels as it may increase surveillance of the parking bays. Alternatively including a 1500mm high close board fence with 300mm high trellis on the top may also increase visibility.

Installing low level boundaries such as knee rail, railings, planting around the front boundaries of plots or plot dividers creates defensible space to each plot and prevents parking along the corner of grassed areas and a clear delineation of plots. Including a gate at each end of the pathway to plot 33 and on the pathway between plots 31/32 creates defensible space and demarcation to the boundaries would also be encouraged – securing the appropriate form of boundary treatment would normally be done through the imposition of a condition on a planning permission.

Shared pathways: Several of the plots appear to have shared pathways and rear gated access to allow for bin access/bin storage. Rear gates and rear pathways are features which are not supported by the Police due to the lack of natural surveillance they create. The majority of burglaries occur at the rear of the property where surveillance is reduced and having gates in these locations can create more vulnerability to crime. Whilst the inclusion of these rear access alleyways is not encouraged, in order to improve the security of the dwellings then a shared lockable gate, which is located near to the front building line of the plots, should be installed which will restrict stranger access to the rear gates – securing the appropriate form of gating would normally be done through the imposition of a condition on a planning permission.

Page 81 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

Surveillance of parking bays: It is positive to see that the majority of parking is on plot or in curtilage and has good surveillance. Where parking is located to the side of a dwelling, installing a small side window the active rooms (i.e. kitchen or lounge) will help improve natural surveillance of the side parking bays – the inclusion of a side window is not a guarantee of natural surveillance. The parking spaces do benefit from good natural surveillance from the public highway and this is considered to be sufficient.

External lighting: Each plot should include external lighting above the front and rear access doors such as low energy photo electric cell or dusk until dawn lights with warm white led lights as this will illuminate the entrances – security of dwellings is outside the control of the planning system and is controlled under Building Regulations Approved Document Q. It is therefore upto the developer to accord with the relevant requirements of this document.

Security or dwellings: Doors and windows (including locks) should be to standards that comply with Secured by Design standards. Intruder alarms should also be fitted to the dwellings to further improve security – security of dwellings is outside the control of the planning system and is controlled under Building Regulations Approved Document Q. It is therefore upto the developer to accord with the relevant requirements of this document.

As such therefore there is no objection to the proposal will regards to the provision of a safe and secure environment for the future residents and the proposal therefore satisfies the requirements of policy DS5 of the Core Strategy.

8. Contaminated land

Paragraph 178 of the National Planning Policy Framework states that decisions should ensure that: a) a site is suitable for its proposed use taking account of ground conditions and any risks arising from land instability and contamination. This includes risks arising from natural hazards or former activities such as mining, and any proposals for mitigation including land remediation (as well as potential impacts on the natural environment arising from that remediation); b) after remediation, as a minimum, land should not be capable of being determined as contaminated land under Part IIA of the Environmental Protection Act 1990; and c) adequate site investigation information, prepared by a competent person, is available to inform these assessments.

Paragraph 179 states that where a site is affected by contamination or land stability issues, responsibility for securing a safe development rests with the developer and/or landowner.

Policy EN8 of the Core Strategy states that proposals which are likely to cause pollution or are likely to result in exposure to sources of pollution (including noise, odour and light pollution) or risks to safety, will only be permitted if measures can be implemented to minimise pollution and risk to a level that provides a high standard of protection for health, environmental quality and amenity.

Page 82 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

A Combined Stage 1/Stage 2 Geo-Environmental Report has been submitted in support of the application. With regards to contamination the Report identified that the vast majority of the topsoil of the site was found to be suitable for use on a residential site. However there are a number of areas where the top soil will require removal from the site. The contamination risk assessment confirmed that, provided remedial measures are implemented, basically comprising removal of localised areas of topsoil from site, excavation and stockpiling of localised areas of topsoil for future placement in areas of public open space, and provision of cover blankets in the area of contaminated made ground, the materials present on the site are compatible with the proposed usage.

With regards to gas monitoring of the site the results indicate that low level gas protection measures (gas membrane and sub-floor void) will be required for carbon dioxide. This pathway for the gas will be blocked by these measures.

A Remediation Verification Strategy has been submitted in relation to the removal of the areas of contaminated top soil together with the inclusion of the gas protection measures. The Strategy also incorporates a process for testing materials to be brought onto the site together with the process in relation to the discovery of any unexpected contamination.

The Coal Authority have stated that the site is located within the defined Development High Risk Area. Their records indicate that within the application site and surrounding area there are coal mining features and hazards which need to be considered in relation to the determination of the application, specifically likely historic unrecorded underground coal mining at shallow depth and a recorded mine entry (shaft). The Combined Stage 1/Stage 2 Geo-Environmental Report submitted in support of the application has been the subject of intrusive site investigations and these have confirmed that there are no shallow coal workings encountered within the site and that all other seams would be at sufficient depth not to implicate on ground stability or are of inferior quality, having not been worked. The shaft and its zone of influence would also be completely remote from the area where the built development will be. The Coal Authority therefore confirm that the risks to the development posed by the coal mining features would be very low and therefore no objection is raised to the proposed development by the Coal Authority.

Overall therefore, based on the submitted information, there is no objection to the proposal with regards to ground conditions subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions. The proposal therefore satisfies the requirements of policy EN8 of the Core Strategy.

9. Biodiversity

Paragraph 175 of the National Planning Policy Framework states that when determining planning applications, Local Planning Authorities should ensure that if significant harm to biodiversity resulting from a development cannot be avoided (through locating on an alternative site with less harmful impacts), adequately mitigated, or, as a last resort, compensated for, then planning permission should be refused.

Policy EN2 of the Core Strategy states that development proposals that may have an adverse impact on important habitats and species outside Designated Sites need to be

Page 83 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee assessed against the impact it will have on habitats and species as well as the extent to which appropriate measures to mitigate any potentially harmful impacts can be identified and carried out.

The layout of the development incorporates vast swathes of open space which provide an opportunity for biodiversity enhancements to not only the site but also the wider area. The Ecological Impact Assessment submitted in support of the application identified a number of mitigation/enhancement proposals for the site in relation to, amongst other things, the Bradford Wildlife Habitat Network, hedgerows and trees, wildlife and the watercourse running through the site. These mitigation/enhancement proposals include the creation of new woodland tree and shrub planting in the southern section of the site, the creation of enhanced wildflower grasslands running through the centre of the site in a south north direction together with the enhancement of the watercourse running in the same direction, a significant increase in hedgerow planting along the western boundary and around the watercourse, and, the inclusion of a number of bat/nesting bird boxes throughout the site.

A separate Bat Activity Report was submitted which concluded that bat activity is found to be low across the Site during the summer monitoring period and transect, but with an increase in activity autumn. Despite this increase in registrations during autumn, bat activity levels at the Site are still considered to be modest overall. The Report stated that the proposals already retain large amounts of open space, the native tree planting and central watercourse/ hedgerow. However it recommended that to further benefit bats additional linear native tree planting could be incorporated into the design, providing greater connectivity through the site and provision additional foraging features for local bat populations. Additionally bat boxes could be erected on new buildings and these should be focused around the peripheries of the site, in areas of minimal disturbance and away from direct lighting.

A Biodiversity Management Plan has also been submitted which describes the aims of the biodiversity enhancements, the period the plan will cover (10 years) and how it will be delivered.

The Biodiversity Officer has assessed the supporting documentation and has raised no objection subject to the imposition of a condition on a planning permission requiring the development to be carried out in accordance with the Ecological management Plan and the Construction Environment (Ecology) Management Plan.

Subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions to secure the ecological benefits there is no objection to the proposal with regards to ecological impact and the proposal satisfies the requirements of policy EN2 of the Core Strategy.

10. Affordable housing

Policy HO11 of the Core Strategy states the Council will ensure that there is a sufficient supply of good quality affordable housing distributed throughout the District and, subject to viability, will negotiate upto 20% in towns, suburbs and villages.

The site is located in an area where the affordable housing requirement is the on-site provision of upto 20% of the number of units to a Registered Provider for delivery at affordable rent. The provision of the affordable housing would normally be secured via a Section 106 Legal Agreement. Within the submission the Applicant has

Page 84 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee acknowledged that the site is located in an area where the affordable provision is upto 20% of the number of units. The Applicant goes onto state that the affordable housing provision would be subject to negotiation and site viability. Whilst this statement is correct a Financial Viability Appraisal would need to be submitted to justify a reduction in the provision of 20% of the number of units.

The Applicant has neither confirmed that the full provision of affordable housing units will be offered nor submitted a Financial Viability Appraisal to justify a reduced number of units. As such it is considered that the proposal is contrary to the provisions of policy HO11 of the Core Strategy.

11. Health and Safety issues

The site is located in the outer zone of the BASF plc. hazardous installation and as such there is a requirement to consult with the Health and Safety Executive. This is done through the computerised PADHI+ system. Having done the computerised consultation the advice received is that they do not advise, on safety grounds, against the granting of planning permission.

As such therefore there is no objection to the proposal on health and safety grounds associated with the nearby hazardous installations.

12. Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL)

The application site is located within CIL zone 4 which has a liability of £0 per square metre of newly developed floor spaces.

13. Other issues

A number of other issues have been raised during the publicity exercise that have not been addressed in the earlier sections of this report. These issues, together with the response, are as follows:

Where are the children going to go to school from the new estate? – contributions towards education infrastructure enhancements are no longer secured via Section 106 money and are done through Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL).

Effect that the development will have on the valuation of our property – the issue of devaluation of the adjacent dwellings is not a material planning consideration in the determination of planning applications.

The housing is rented accommodation which will bring its own problems with uncertainty of the type of tenants – the tenancy of the market dwellings is not a material planning consideration. Whilst the Council requires the development to provide up to 20% affordable dwellings, the tenure of which could be controlled by the local planning authority, the developer has not, as stated earlier in this Report, committed to that policy provision or demonstrated why it is not viable to do so. As such the application relates to the construction of 150 dwellings and it would be upto the developer as to whether they were rented or sold as private dwellings. The planning system cannot control tenure unless the dwellings are classed as “affordable dwellings” which in this case they are not.

Page 85 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

There is also lots of mining issues from many years back in the proposed area – The Coal Authority have been consulted on the application and have not raised an objection to the proposal as it is not considered that the mining features and hazards in the area will impact on the development.

The infrastructure cannot support any more houses being built in this neighbourhood after already having had 2 estates plus 1 small development already completed all the local schools, doctors, dentists are already vastly oversubscribed – no evidence has been produced to support this objection, but any adverse impacts on local doctors/dentists/schools arising directly from the development can be addressed via the allocation of Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) receipts which can be used towards expanding educational and public health infrastructure..

Social housing will be a high turnover of tenants and no play areas in this area for children as it is – As stated earlier in this report, there is no commitment for this proposal to provide the Council’s policy quantum of affordable housing nor justification as to why it is not viable, but notwithstanding that the turnover of occupants of social housing is not a relevant material planning consideration.

There's was an article in the T & A recently saying there are so many council properties that are costing so much money to look after that are unoccupied?? So why do we need these affordable homes? Fill up the council ones – throughout the Bradford District there will be a number of empty or derelict houses but the Council have no control over whether these are occupied. The Council no longer has a stock of “Council houses”, they are run by InCommunities. The Core Strategy has identified that there is a need for at least 42,100 new houses to be built over the period upto 2030 (although this figure is currently under review) and this proposal will contribute towards that figure.

The reason given by the developers is that there is a lack of rental accommodation in Bradford; a simple search on RightMove shows that there are plenty's of houses available for rent – the tenure of dwellings is not a material planning consideration that can be controlled under the planning system unless the dwellings are classed as “affordable dwellings” which in this case they are not.

Don’t think anything will be done as people in positions of power who are making these decisions can be enticed to change their decisions – the application is being presented to the Regulatory and Appeals Committee where it will be determined in a fair and appropriate manner.

What are our local councillor’s views on this? – the local Ward Councillors are entitled to comment on the planning application just as all the local residents can. It is entirely their choice as to whether they wish to comment.

The area is congested to hell now, don’t the council think about the residents who have paid rates and looked after their properties for 30 years or more, we have already had loads of new properties built already – the application is assessed on its merits and there are a number of issues against which the application is considered. These issues are addressed in detail in the above sections of this report.

Do the new residents realise insurance would be invalid as it was an old tip and has chimneys to expel methane gas, plus it used to be a quarry before the tip – the issue of

Page 86 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee insurance for the future occupants of the dwellings is not a material planning consideration and is outside the remit of the planning system.

You councillors are not bothered as they don’t live here, on an evening it’s like a rat race, can’t imagine what it will be like when Richard Dunns is sold for housing as it will be on the cards to pay for the Sedburgh new gym complex – the application has been fully considered with regards to the impact it will have on the existing highway network. A Transport Assessment has been submitted and fully considered by the Councils. Highways Department and it is considered that the capacity of the highway network can safely accommodate the additional traffic generated by the proposed development. The future uses of the Richard Dunn centre cannot be taken into account at present as it is not certain what the end use of the site will be.

Would not surprise if a deal is not done – the application is dealt with in the same way as every other planning application and in accordance with local and national planning guidance.

It’s not affordable housing as the company are not social landlords – a company can offer affordable housing by registering as a Registered Provider, they do not have to be an established landlord to submit an application for affordable housing.

With all the dwellings being for rent it begs the question ' What quality of housing will be built?' – the new dwellings will need to comply with the standards required under the Building Control legislation and will therefore be built to a high quality.

Why are none of the properties for sale? – the tenure of dwellings is not a material planning consideration and is outside the remit of the planning system. The application relates to the construction of 150 dwellings and it is the Developers choice as to whether these are sold as market houses or rented.

Why is it that some people got leaflets/letters and others didn't? – the application was publicised in accordance with the Council’s Code of Practice relating to the Publicity of planning applications.

The builder applying for the properties to be built was also part of the declined sports village set to replace the Bradford Bulls stadium. The company placed several objections to the sports village being built. Their reasons were there would be too much traffic in the area and bad for the environment. I would like you know why the company objected to the sports Village but is wanting to build establishments that will have the same effect as their objections to the sports Village – the issue of the history of the sports village has no bearing on this planning application. The application is being considered on its own merits.

Make the decisions with the planet and eco systems in place and not quick profits – the application is being assessed on its own merits and in accordance with relevant local policies, the national policy framework and guidance and material considerations. The proposal will incorporate issues such as the inclusion of electric vehicle charging points for each dwelling to encourage the use of electric vehicles whilst also looking to secure ecological and biological improvements that have been addressed at length in Section (Biodiversity) above.

Page 87 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

Perhaps the land would be better used as a community allotment, or you could plant a hundred trees to make a statement and put Bradford on the map for something positive for a change – the application has to be considered in relation to what has been submitted and potential alternative uses cannot be used as a reason for refusal. It is upto the landowner as to what they want to do with the site in terms of an end use.

Local residents bought the properties as a private property, you’re going to make it into a council estate. How are you going to reinstate the residents who’ve been here for 30 plus years whose property value will decrease and why hasn't council tax gone down since were no longer residential... only people this will benefit are council and developers who we’ve heard hardly anything from – the proposal is for a residential development and will extend the existing residential area off Rooley Crescent. The issue of devaluation of existing properties is not a material planning consideration. The area will still be classed as a residential area. With regards to Council Tax changes this is not within the remit of the planning system.

Under the Unitary Development Plan (UDP) of the council the land in question is allocated for Park and Ride facility. Bradford council have so far spent in access of a million pounds to make up a case for HS2 and NPR. It is estimated that the project will earn Bradford a £1 billion in yearly revenues – the site is not allocated for a Park and Ride Scheme, this relates to land to the west (Odsal Tip). The northern part of the application site does include an allocation for highway improvements to allow access to be gained to the proposed Park and Ride Scheme.

The Park and Ride facility is exactly at the location of the development and by allowing the development Bradford Council will be showing not only disloyalty to the citizens of the city but to the region and the waste of tax payer's money – the site is not allocated for a Park and Ride Scheme, this relates to land to the west (Odsal Tip). The northern part of the application site does include an allocation for highway improvements to allow access to be gained to the proposed Park and Ride Scheme.

Lack of feedback to the residents from the Agent in relation to the pre-application consultation exercise – the community consultation exercise that was undertaken prior to the submission of the planning application was undertaken by the Developer and it is upto them as to whether or not they offer feedback to the residents who commented on the proposal. A very brief summary of the community consultation exercise was included within the Design and Access Statement.

The most recent phase of commenting on the application has not been helped by the Council's errors and user-unfriendliness of the internet based facilities – as far as Officers are aware there have been no problems with the Councils website in terms of gaining access to the application details. With regards to the “Council’s errors” no details have been provided as to what they are and therefore no comment can be offered.

The reference to HSE seems cursory when many remember that television cameras were only allowed to film at the farm gate at the northern edge of the proposed development when the news crews were covering the fire at the, then, Allied Colloids plant. There are very serious issues underlying this observation – the HSE have been consulted on the planning application and is addressed in Section 11 (Health and Safety issues) above.

Page 88 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

The planning application puts spin on maintaining the middle area as a beck - this is only because the area they talk about is unsettled/bog and unlikely that they could build on it, this is spin and if could have been an extra 30 houses it would have been to maximize profit – the application and quantum of houses contemplated have been assessed on the plans submitted and these include the retention and enhancement of the beck. Whether more houses could have been included in this area is irrelevant. Members should make their decision on the application before them.

Lack of Community Involvement – The Planning Statement goes into detail about community involvement and Member and Public Consultation. In my mind Consultation is a two way discussion and the statement implies that this has taken place. However, no meaningful discussions have taken place, the developers did not even acknowledge letters and emails, and therefore how will this change when so much of the development arguments are based on community involvement? – the Applicant has undertaken a community consultation exercise and it has been very briefly described in the Design and Access Statement. By undertaking a community consultation exercise they have met the requirements for the planning submission. It is entirely upto the Applicant as to how the exercise is conducted with regards to offering feedback to the residents.

The developers do not have a track record in this type of development – the track record of the Applicant in relation to their development history is irrelevant when considering the planning application. The application is for the construction of 150 dwellings and has been thoroughly assessed on this basis in the Sections above.

Concerns regarding the proposal to build southerly towards a number of existing COMMA chemical sites in the area. Any development works could cause disturbances to settled chemicals and be hazardous – the Health and Safety Executive have been consulted on the application and have not raised an objection to the proposal in relation to the sites location near hazardous installations.

Why were the previous planning applications refused? – there is no relevant planning history on the site.

Have Councillors and Planning Staff done any research into the application – the planning application has been thoroughly assessed by the various Consultees both internally within the Council and external bodies and a recommendation has been made on the basis of the submitted responses.

Lack of recreation facilities in the area and the loss of this field will exacerbate the situation – the field is a private field and not a formal recreation area, as such its loss will not impact on the recreational facilities in the area. Through the redevelopment of the site will open up areas for public use and could therefore increase the level of facilities to serve the proposed as well as existing residents.

Infestation of vermin once the ground is broken as happened with the former Northern View Hospital Site – the issue of rat infestation is an issue that will be addressed by the Environmental Health Department if this does happen.

Community Safety Implications: There are no other community safety implications other than those referred to in the main body of the report.

Page 89 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

Equality Act 2010, Section 149: Section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 states that the Council must, in the exercise of its functions “have due regard to the need to eliminate conduct that this is prohibited by the Act, advancing equality of opportunity between people who share a protected characteristic and people who do not share it, and fostering good relations between people who share a protected characteristic and people who do not share it. For this purpose Section 149 defines “relevant protected characteristics” as including a range of characteristics including disability, race and religion. In this particular case due regard has been paid to the Section 149 duty but it is not considered there are any issues in this regard relevant to this application.

Reasons for Refusal:

1. Impact on delivery of the Park & Ride Scheme The northern part of the application site is allocated as a Highway Improvement area (Ref: BS/TM20.2 – M606/Rooley Lane, Staygate Roundabout) to serve the proposed Park and Ride Scheme (Ref: BS/TM7.2 – Odsal) on allocated to the west of the application site. The layout of the development is such that it will not allow an access road of suitable width and geometry to be provided to serve the proposed Park and Ride Scheme without the need to extend into private garden areas or demolish the proposed dwellings. Any proposed access route would also conflict with other roads within the estate such as the shared surface for units 7-22. As such therefore, it is considered that the proposal is contrary to policies TM7 and TM20 of the Replacement Unitary Development Plan, policy TR1of the Core Strategy and paragraphs 102 and 109-110 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

2. Affordable housing The proposal is of a type and scale that would normally require social contributions to be made due to the additional pressures placed on local infrastructure in relation to provision of affordable housing. The developer has neither offered the full contribution nor given an acceptable justification as to why it should not be made. For this reason, the proposal fails to comply with HO11 of the Councils adopted Core Strategy.

3. Lack of information re drainage The application as submitted provides insufficient information to enable its proper consideration by the Local Planning Authority. In particular, there is inadequate information with regards to the flood risks associated with the proposed development.

Page 90 Agenda Item 8/

Report of the Assistant Director (Planning, Transportation & Highways) to the meeting of Regulatory and Appeals Committee to be held on 5th December 2019 W

Subject: A full planning application for the construction of 11 dwellings on land at Holly Fold, Steeton with Eastburn, Bradford.

Summary statement: A full assessment of the application, relevant planning policies and material planning considerations is included in the report at Appendix 1. Through the attachment of planning conditions and a Section 106 Legal Agreement it is considered that the proposal is acceptable and it is recommended that Planning Permission is granted.

A legal agreement is required to secure the provision of 30% of the units for affordable housing, or for the payment of an equivalent commuted sum. The agreement will also ensure that the new estate road and drainage infrastructure are adequately maintained throughout the lifetime of the development.

Julian Jackson Portfolio: Assistant Director (Planning, Transportation & Highways) Change Programme, Housing, Planning and Transport Report Contact: John Eyles Overview & Scrutiny Area: Major Development Manager Phone: (01274) 434380 Regeneration and Economy E-mail: [email protected]

Page 91 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

1. SUMMARY The Regulatory and Appeals Committee are asked to consider the recommendations for the determination of planning application reference 18/03203/MAF made by the Assistant Director (Planning, Transportation and Highways) as set out in the Technical Report at Appendix 1.

2. BACKGROUND Attached at Appendix 1 is a copy of the Officer’s Report which identifies the material considerations of the proposal.

3. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS All considerations material to the determination of this planning application are set out in the Officer’s Report at Appendix 1.

4. FINANCIAL & RESOURCE APPRAISAL

West Yorkshire Combined Authority have requested a financial contribution of £5,940 for the provision of a residential Metrocard Scheme.

It is proposed to provide electric vehicle charging points to all dwellings in lieu of a contribution towards a bus residential Metrocard scheme. It is considered that the provision of EV charging points represents a betterment of the scheme as charging points are in situ permanently rather than a MertroCard Scheme which is only for 1 year, with no guarantee that residents will renew after that period.

5. RISK MANAGEMENT & GOVERNANCE ISSUES None relevant to this application.

6. LEGAL APPRAISAL The options set out are within the Council’s powers as the Local Planning Authority under the provisions of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).

7. OTHER IMPLICATIONS All considerations material to the determination of the application are set out in the technical report at Appendix 1.

7.1 EQUALITY & DIVERSITY In writing this report due regard has been has been taken of the need to eliminate unlawful discrimination, harassment and victimisation, advance equality of opportunity between different groups and foster good relations between different groups, in accordance with the duty placed upon Local Authorities by Section 149 of the Equality Act 2010.

The context of the site, the development scheme proposed and the representations received have been reviewed to identify the potential for the determination of this application to disadvantage any individuals or groups of people with characteristics protected under the Equality Act 2010.

The outcome of this review is that there is that there is not considered to be any sound reason to conclude that the proposed development would have a significantly detrimental impact on any groups of people or individuals with protected characteristics.

Site address - page 2

Page 92 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

Full details of the process of public consultation undertaken and a summary of the comments made are attached at Appendix 1.

7.2 SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS The development meets the sustainability criteria outlined in relevant national and local planning policies. The site is located within close proximity to certain amenities in Eastburn and nearby Steeton, with public transport connections to access facilities and services further afield. The development would not result in either the formation of a new settlement or significant sprawl of an existing settlement. No adverse sustainability implications are therefore foreseen.

7.3 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS IMPACTS The development of new buildings and land for residential purposes will invariably result in an increase in greenhouse gas emissions associated with both construction operations and the activities of future users of the site. Consideration should also be given to the likely traffic levels associated with this development. Consideration should also be given as to whether the location of the proposed development is such that the use of sustainable modes of travel would be best facilitated and future greenhouse gases associated with activities of the residents are minimised.

It is accepted that the proposed development would result in greenhouse gas emissions. However, it is considered that such emissions are likely to be relatively lower than would be the case for alternative, less sustainable locations.

In order to encourage alternative means of transport Electric Vehicle (EV) charging points will be secured by a planning condition at a rate of 1 per residential unit in line with the Type 1 Mitigation requirements set out in the Bradford Low Emission Strategy.

7.4 COMMUNITY SAFETY IMPLICATIONS All community safety implications material to the determination of this planning application are set out in the Officer’s Report at Appendix 1.

7.5 HUMAN RIGHTS ACT Articles 6 and 8 and Article 1 of the first protocol all apply (European Convention on Human Rights). Article 6- the right to a fair and public hearing. The Council must ensure that it has taken into account the views of all those who have an interest in, or whom may be affected by the proposal.

7.6 TRADE UNION None

7.7 WARD IMPLICATIONS The Technical Report at Appendix 1 summarises the material planning issues raised by representations and the appraisal gives full consideration to the effects of the development upon residents within Craven Ward.

7.8 AREA COMMITTEE ACTION PLAN IMPLICATIONS None

7.9 IMPLICATIONS FOR CORPORATE PARENTING None

Site address - page 3

Page 93 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

7.10 ISSUES ARISING FROM PRIVACY IMPACT ASSESMENT None

8. NOT FOR PUBLICATION DOCUMENTS None

9. OPTIONS The Committee can approve the application as per the recommendation contained in the main report, or refuse the application. If Members are minded to refuse the application then reasons for refusal need to be given.

10. RECOMMENDATIONS This full application is recommended for approval, subject to the conditions included within Appendix 1.

11. APPENDICES Appendix 1: Technical Report

12. BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS National Planning Policy Framework Replacement Unitary Development Plan Local Plan for Bradford

Site address - page 4

Page 94 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

Site address - page 5

Page 95 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

Appendix 1 "Date"

Ward: Craven (ward 09) Recommendation:

MEMBERS BE MINDED TO GRANT PLANNING PERMISSION SUBJECT TO A SECTION S106 AGREEMENT AND CONDITIONS AS SPECIFIED IN THIS REPORT.

THAT THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR PLANNING, TRANSPORTATION AND HIGHWAYS BE AUTHORISED TO ISSUE THE GRANT OF PERMISSION UPON SATISFACTORY COMPLETION OF THE S106 AGREEMENT

Application Number: 18/03203/MAF

Type of Application/Proposal and Address: A full planning application for the construction of 11 dwellings on Land at Holly Fold, Steeton with Eastburn, Bradford.

Applicant: Mr Wilkinson

Agent: Mr Robert Kaminski LARK Architects Ltd

Site Description:

The site is comprised of an area of steeply sloping grazing land enclosed by dry stone walls to the east and west boundaries, garden fences to the northern boundary, and a timber and wire fence to the southern boundary. Access into the site is taken from Holly Fold, a residential development which in turn takes access from Sycamore Grove.

Holly Fold is comprised of two and three storey stone built properties with a mix of detached and semi-detached properties. Sycamore grove consists of two storey dwellings constructed of brickwork. To the east of the site properties on Acer Close are two storeys in height and are constructed of stone beneath slate roofs.

The surrounding area is predominantly residential to the north and east of the site. The land to the south and west is within the green belt and consists of a paddock to the south and a field enclosed by stone walls to the west.

Relevant Site History:

There are no applications relating directly to the application site. The following applications relate to the land directly to the north of the application site

14/02638/MAF-Construction of thirteen houses, access road and one double garage- Granted Subject to S106-02.04.2015

Site address - page 6

Page 96 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

16/08707/VOC-Variation of condition 25 of planning application 14/02638/MAF dated 02/04/2015 (construction of thirteen houses, access road and one double garage) in order to substitute revised plans for plots 1-3-Granted-08.06.2018

The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF): The National Planning Policy Framework is now a material planning consideration on any development proposal. The Framework highlights the fact that the purpose of the planning system is to contribute to the achievement of sustainable development and that there is a presumption in favour of sustainable development which can deliver:- i) Planning for prosperity (an economic role) - by ensuring that sufficient land of the right type and in the right places is available to allow growth and innovation; ii) Planning for people (a social role) - by promotion of strong, vibrant and healthy communities by providing an increase supply of housing to meet the needs of present and future generations and by creating a good quality built environment with accessible local services; iii) Planning for places (an environmental role) - by protecting and enhancing the natural, built and historic environment, adapting to climate change including moving to a low-carbon economy.

As such the Framework suggests local planning authorities should approve development proposals that accord with statutory plans without delay.

Replacement Unitary Development Plan (RUDP):

Allocation

The site is unallocated, however, the main body of the site was formerly allocated a Safeguarded Land on the RUDP proposals map. K/UR5.3

Proposals and Policies

The majority of non-allocation related policies within the RUDP have now been superseded by policies set out in the Core Strategy. The following adopted Core Strategy policies are considered to be relevant to the proposed development.

P1- Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development SC1- Overall Approach and Key Spatial Priorities SC4- Hierarchy of Settlements SC6- Green Infrastructure SC9- Making Great Places TR1- Travel Reduction and Modal Shift TR2- Parking Policy TR3- Public Transport, Cycling and Walking HO5- Density of Housing Schemes HO8- Housing Mix HO9- Housing Quality HO11- Affordable Housing EN2- Biodiversity and Geo-diversity EN3- Historic Environment EN4- Landscape EN5- Trees and Woodland Site address - page 7

Page 97 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

EN7- Flood Risk EN8- Environmental Protection DS1- Achieving Good Design DS3- Urban Character DS4-Streets and Movement DS5- Safe and Inclusive Places ID2-Viability ID3- Developer Contributions

Neighbourhood Planning

The site is located within the Neighbourhood Area Designation of the emerging Steeton with Eastburn and Silsden Neighbourhood Plan. A draft version of the aforementioned plan has undergone public consultation and has been submitted to Bradford Council to be checked against all relevant legislation. The remaining stages of the adoption process are for the neighbourhood plan to undergo an independent examination and for a referendum to be held after which the plan will come into force as part of the statutory development plan for the area if more than half of those voting are in favour.

The emerging neighbourhood plan has not yet undergone independent examination or referendum and therefore whilst it is a material consideration in the decision making process it can only be given limited weight at the present-time.

Parish Council:

Steeton with Eastburn Parish Council

Publicity and Number of Representations: The application was publicised by press notice, site notice and neighbour notification letters. The expiry date for the submission of comments was 18th October 2019. 33 objections were received in connection with the application.

Summary of Representations Received:

The following objections were received:

-Poor design of dwellings -Poor quality construction materials -The development will overlook the living areas and amenity areas of properties on Holly Fold -Increased wear and tear on Holly Fold resulting from construction traffic and use of the road by residents of the development. -Insufficient drainage information. -Hard surfacing will increase flash flooding in the area. -All plots will overlook properties on Holly Fold -What will happen to the existing power lines crossing the site -Increased emissions from additional vehicle traffic -Increased noise and disturbance. -Landslide risk -Increased risk of crime due to the formation of an alleyway at the rear of plots 4-11 -Loss of habitat -Loss of view from properties on Holly Fold. Site address - page 8

Page 98 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

-Impact on the resale value of properties on Holly Fold -The 2012 The Phase 1 habitat assessment is out of date. -The existing and proposed site plans do not correctly depict numbers 11, 12 and 14 Holly Fold. -The land within the application site is at "High" risk of landslide according to the Ground SurePhase 1 Desktop study submitted for application 14/02638 (part 2) page No evidence or assessment of this significant risk has been submitted by the applicant. -No details have been provided in relation to the proposed carriage gradients -There is no commentary within the application on how the applicant intends to respond to the 2no. overhead power lines that cross the site. -The proposed Public Right of Way has no natural surveillance and has the potential to increase the risk of crime. -Plots 1 & 2 are dated in their approach to modern-living -The repetition of 8 properties of the same design creates a bland streetscape. -Inadequate provision of green space. -The driveway parking is not dimensioned and may not be of an appropriate size. -Artificial slate and natural stone would be more appropriate construction materials. - Construction vehicle washing facilities should be provided -The plans do not show the full route of the public right of way -Inadequate mix of unit sizes. -Clarification is needed of the boundary treatment separating the carriageway and Holly Fold. -Adverse pedestrian safety implications -Housing development is not necessary -The Habitat Assessment is outdated and inadequate -No details of street lighting -How will the foul sewage network be connected in Holly Fold -Local Schools are already at capacity -Additional congestion -Insufficient time period for neighbour consultation -Construction traffic noise nuisance -Holly Fold is not accessible for disabled people due to on-street parking -Increased dust and vibrations from construction work -Construction traffic will damage parked cars. -Health risks to neighbouring property owners from re-routing overhead power lines. -The development encroaches into the green belt. -Working hours should be restricted to Monday to Friday 0900-1600

The Airedale NHS Foundation Trust has made the following comments:

- A contribution of £3,127.33 should be made to the trust in order to provide additional services to meet patient demand.

Consultations:

Environmental Health- Land Contamination The Environmental Health Department have assessed the submitted information and have raised no objection to the proposed development subject to the imposition of planning conditions requiring the submission of a Phase 2 site investigation and risk assessment; confirmation of the completion of investigative works, submission of a detailed remediation strategy and the submission of a remediation verification report. Further conditions are also required in order to ensure that any unexpected Site address - page 9

Page 99 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee contamination is dealt with appropriately and that any imported materials are of an acceptable quality.

Lead Local Flood Authority The LLFA do not have any objections to the proposed development, provided that the following flood risk and drainage conditions are included with any grant of planning permission:

The surface water drainage scheme shall be constructed in accordance with Proposed Surface Water / Foul Drainage Layout and Manhole Schedule, Drawing No. 2018-146- 01-Rev D. The drainage scheme shall be maintained thereafter by a Residents' Management Company.

Reason: In the interests of the amenity of future occupiers, pollution prevention and the effective management of flood risk and to accord with Policies DS5, EN7 and EN8 of the Core Strategy Development Plan Document.

The surface water/watercourse inlet chamber and grid shall be maintained by a Residents' Management Company.

Reason: In the interests of the amenity of future occupiers, pollution prevention and the effective management of flood risk and to accord with Policies DS5, EN7 and EN8 of the Core Strategy Development Plan Document.

Trees Team

No objections are raised and no tree protection conditions are required.

Education

Based on the data available in September 2018 the above housing development may cause concerns on where children of families coming to reside in the development might attend school. Primary schools in proximity to the site are currently full or overcrowded, which may mean that the Council would need to increase the number of school places in this area.

The site is located in CIL Zone 3, where there is a charge of £20 per sq.m. These funds would then be maintained and allocated to communities and departments as shown in the 123 agreement and in line with the decision of the Authority’s Executive.

West Yorkshire Combined Authority

The closest bus stop (20054) would benefit from the installation of a real time display at a cost of £10,000.

To encourage the use of sustainable transport as a realistic alternative to the car the developer needs to fund a package of sustainable travel measures. The contribution appropriate for this development would be £5,940.00.

Highways

Site address - page 10

Page 100 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

The proposal is to construct 12 dwellings and is an extension of a recently completed development of 13 dwellings approved under 14/02638/MAF.

The proposed development does not connect to the adopted highway network. The highway layout completed under 14/02638/MAF is private and maintained by the residents. The applicant should therefore serve notice on the current residents of Holly Fold.

There are steep gradients on this site but no information on gradients has been submitted. Cross sections and long sections of access road should be submitted. The maximum acceptable gradient is 1 in 15.

The proposed site access road should have a seamless connection to the existing road; the hard margin across the end of the existing road should be removed to create a continuous surface.

There should be no radii in shared surface roads. The radii should be replaced with 4m splays.

The level of parking provision is 2 spaces per dwelling which is acceptable. Visitor parking should also be provided at a rate of 1 space per 4 dwellings which equates to 3 spaces. Visitor parking should be provided within the adoptable highway.

The diverted Right of Way should be illuminated and constructed to an adoptable standard with no steps.

The street terminates 48m beyond the turning facility which should be reconsidered as this requires an additional turning facility.

There are no details submitted regarding highway drainage.

A highway maintenance agreement would be required for the access road to ensure the Council does not become liable for its maintenance in the future. This will need to be conditioned.

Rights of Way

Public Footpath No. 16 (Steeton with Eastburn) crosses the site. As referred to in the Design and Access Statement in section 3 a diversion order was made in January 2016. The order was confirmed in March 2016 but it has not yet taken legal effect as the new route for the footpath has not been certified.

Effectively the public footpath remains legally recorded at the present time on its original route, the intention though is that the footpath rights will be moved to the new route.

The footpath does not appear to have been plotted quite correctly where it runs to the rear of Plot 1. The path is shown confined between the southern boundary of the site and the rear of Plot 1 – as is apparent from the diversion order plan the footpath is not tight against the southern boundary.

Site address - page 11

Page 101 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

The rear boundary of Plot 1 must be amended to allow the footpath to remain on the correct line. Alternatively the developer must apply for and successfully obtain a diversion order to legally divert the footpath.

The other point I would query is the boundaries to be used adjacent to the footpath, these are shown as a dry stone wall with a 1.8 metre fence behind it. On other sites where garden fences have been erected inside original dry stone walls then the wall has fallen into disrepair and caused an obstruction to footpath users there have sometimes been difficulties in establishing who owns and is responsible for the wall. The developer may wish to consider omitting the dry stone walls. If the boundaries are approved as referred to on the plans the ownership and responsibility for maintenance of the dry stone walls must be very clear.

At the south west corner of the site the footpath ascends some wooden steps towards the high wall at the boundary. These steps are in need of attention and should be rebuilt by the developer, preferably in more durable materials when the path is surfaced.

Yorkshire Water

Company records indicate a water main crosses the red line site boundary. The presence of the main may affect the layout of the site and therefore I consider it to be a material consideration in the determination of this application. It is recommended that no obstruction encroaches within 3 metres on either side of the main i.e. a protected strip width of 6 metres.

If planning permission is granted the developer should be made aware of the need to adhere to the standard requirements in relation to rights of way during the period of any works on site.

The exact line of the main will have to be determined on site under Yorkshire Water Services supervision. It may be possible for the main to be diverted under s.185 of the Water Industry Act1991. These works would be carried out at the developer's expense. The cost of these works may be prohibitive.

Biodiversity

Following the provision of an updated Phase 1 Habitat Assessment (Wright Environment Limited April 2019) it is considered that there are no major protected species constraints preventing the development of the site. It is recommended that a condition is imposed ensuring the protection of breeding birds.

The proposed development would likely result in a net loss of Biodiversity. Ideas for enhancements, and the need for them are well set out within the updated Ecology report, however the plans for the site (having been produced before the ecology report was updated) show little or no mitigation or enhancements (only predominantly non- native trees are included within the plan).

Landscape Design

The site is classified as greenfield and is identified within the Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) as suitable for development. Housing development Site address - page 12

Page 102 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee has recently being completed within the same enclosure. Although the surrounding fields are categorised as green belt the field enclosure does not sit within greenbelt itself. The site is not within a defined conservation area or within buffer zone of listed buildings.

The construction materials and visual appearance of the proposed development are almost identical to adjoining new build. The site occupies an elevated position some 110m AOD. The development would be visible for some distance within the Aire valley. The topography of the site is a challenge with significant slope to the rear gardens of the properties with retaining walls some 2.5m in height. A landscaping plan should be submitted identifying tree and shrub species, grass, paving materials etc. and include a management and maintenance plan for any public open space provided. Tree planting to the frontage of the proposed properties would greatly improve the visual appearance and setting. It’s important that any existing dry stone walls are protected. A combination of dry stone walling and timber fencing would be more visually acceptable to divide gardens

Steeton with Eastburn Parish Council

No comments received.

West Yorkshire Police

Public Footpath-The site plan shows that there is an existing public right of way which is located between plots 1 and 2. From looking at the layouts of the new and existing houses, there appears to be minimal natural surveillance overlooking the footpath which could create a location for potential anti-social behaviour or crime. The footpath looks to be on an uphill gradient which includes a dog leg turn behind the rear garden of plot 1 which obscures surveillance. It is accepted that wherever the footpath is positioned, it’s unlikely to get increased natural surveillance as most of the houses have rear gardens facing towards the location.

Boundary Treatments- 1.8 metre high close boarded timber fencing should be used to secure garden areas. Rear plot dividers should either be to a height of 1500mm close boarded timber with an 1800mm high privacy panel adjacent to the rear doorway or 1500mm high close boarded with a 300mm high trellis on the top which will provide the security and privacy. Plots 4/5, 6/7, 8/9, 10/11 each have a shared pathway with gated access located along the rear building line of each plot which could allow any stranger / potential offender to enter the pathway and attempt entry into the rear gates as surveillance is limited. Secured by Design and Police do not support shared pathways or rear gated access as these two features create a vulnerability to crime due to the lack of surveillance.

Summary of Main Issues: Principle of development Density Housing Mix Visual Amenity Residential Amenity Highway and Pedestrian Safety Land Contamination Biodiversity Site address - page 13

Page 103 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

Drainage Community Safety Further Issues Raised by Representations

Appraisal:

Principle

The site was formerly allocated as Safeguarded Land on the Replacement Unitary Development Plan Proposals Map. This allocation was intended to safeguard the land for longer term housing or employment development. Following adoption of the Core Strategy policy UR5 (safeguarded Land) of the RUDP was deleted and the site is now classified as unallocated land.

Paragraph 59 of the National Planning Policy Framework stresses the need for Local Planning Authorities to significantly boost the supply of new housing. The adopted Core Strategy underscores this strong planning policy support for the delivery of new housing, emphasising that one of the key issues for the future development of the district is the need to house Bradford's growing population by delivering 42,100 new residential units by 2030. More specifically, policy HO3 of the Core Strategy identifies a need to provide 700 new homes in Steeton with Eastburn upto 2030.

Paragraph 73 of the NPPF states that Local planning authorities should identify and update annually a supply of specific deliverable sites sufficient to provide a minimum of five years of housing against their housing requirement set out in adopted strategic policies, or against their local housing need where the strategic policies are more than five years old. Where there has been a record of persistent under-delivery of housing the local planning authority should identify an additional 20%.

The Bradford Council Five Year Housing Land statement published on 1st March 2019 indicates that there is a substantial shortfall in housing land relative to aforementioned requirements, with a supply equivalent to 2.06 years. It is therefore considered that despite the predicted downturn in the overall housing requirement for the district it will remain the case that the Council cannot demonstrate a five year housing land supply.

Under these circumstances paragraph 11 of the NPPF confirms that the relevant policies for the supply of housing should not be considered up-to-date.

In light of the record of persistent under-delivery and the housing land supply shortfall relative to the requirements of the NPPF, there is an urgent need to increase the supply of housing land in the Bradford district. This proposal would make a valuable contribution towards meeting that need. The site is considered to occupy a sustainable location in an established residential area, where shops and services are accessible by travel modes other than the car. Given the previous site allocation, the sustainable location of the site and the absence of a five year housing land supply it is considered that the principle of residential development on this site is acceptable.

Density

The proposed layout is for a development of 11 dwellings on a developable area of 0.35 hectare. Policy HO5 of the Core Strategy advises that developments should usually achieve a density of 30 dwellings per hectare, whilst taking account of the need Site address - page 14

Page 104 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee to arrive at a well-designed layout which reflects the nature of the site and its surroundings and given the type and size of housing needed in the area. The proposed development would therefore ensure the efficient use of the available land in accordance with policy HO5 of the Core Strategy.

Housing Mix

Policy HO8 of the Core Strategy seeks to ensure that a mix and balance of housing is provided to meet the needs of the District’s growing and diverse population. The policy identifies that there is a need for all types and sizes of housing, but that there should be particular emphasis on family housing. The proposed development would provide 11 three bedroom dwellings which would contribute towards meeting the objective of providing family housing in accordance with policy HO8 of the Core Strategy.

Visual Amenity

The proposed development is comprised of two detached dwellings, six semi-detached dwellings and a terraced row of three dwellings. The surrounding area includes a variety of construction materials including natural stone, artificial stone and brickwork as well as natural slate and concrete tiles. As the area includes a variety of construction materials the proposed use of artificial stone and concrete tiles is considered to be acceptable subject to the imposition of a planning condition requiring the approval of samples.

All retaining walls within the site would be faced in artificial stone to match the proposed dwellings. The off street car parking areas to the front of each dwelling would be block paved and the plots would be separated by 1 metre high dry stone walls. To the rear curtilage plots include Indian stone patio areas and grassed gardens enclosed by 1.8 metre high close boarded timber fencing. The proposed construction materials are considered to be appropriate and would ensure a high quality development that is in keeping with its context.

In respect of landscaping the development includes tree planting along the south and west boundaries of the site in order to soften the appearance of the development and ensure that is appropriately integrated into the wider landscape.

The proposed development is considered to accord with policies DS1, DS2 and DS3 of the Core Strategy.

Residential Amenity

Policy DS5 of the Core Strategy requires that development proposals should not harm the amenity of prospective users and residents.

The proposed layout ensures that the development would not introduce any new dwellings with habitable room windows with an unrestricted view within 7 metres of the rear garden boundary, or within 17 metres of the habitable room windows of any other dwelling. Having taken account of the separation distances achieved and the change in land levels in relation to neighbouring properties it is considered that the proposed development would not result in any adverse overlooking implications.

Site address - page 15

Page 105 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

The proposed dwellings achieve sufficient separation distances to ensure that no adverse overbearing or overshadowing implications are incurred either within the development site or on existing neighbouring residential properties.

In conclusion the proposed development would not harm the amenity of existing or prospective residents and the proposal is considered to accord with policy DS5 of the Core Strategy.

Highway and Pedestrian Safety

Paragraph 108 of the NPPF requires that in assessing planning applications it should be ensured that:

 appropriate opportunities to promote sustainable transport modes can be – or have been – taken up, given the type of development and its location;

 safe and suitable access to the site can be achieved for all users; and

 any significant impacts from the development on the transport network (in terms of capacity and congestion), or on highway safety, can be cost effectively mitigated to an acceptable degree.

Paragraph 109 of the NPPF makes clear that development should only be prevented or refused on highways grounds if there would be an unacceptable impact on highway safety, or the residual cumulative impacts on the road network would be severe.

At the local level the objectives of the NPPF are reflected in the Transport and Movement policies of the adopted Core Strategy. Specifically, policy TR1 sets out how development decisions will aim reduce the demand for travel, encourage and facilitate the use of sustainable travel modes, limit traffic growth, reduce congestion and improve journey time reliability. Policy TR2 seeks to manage car parking to help manage travel demand, support the use of sustainable travel modes, meet the needs of disabled and other groups whilst improving quality of place.

The proposed development would provide 11 new dwellings. The site occupies a sustainable location in an existing residential area, where there is access to public transport facilities including bus services from Main Road and rail services from Steeton and Silsden railway station. In light of the scale of the development and the availability of alternative transport options the proposed development is not considered to result in a substantial number of additional vehicle trips. Consequently the proposed development is not anticipated to have a severe impact on the surrounding highway network in terms of capacity or congestion.

The highway layout has been amended to meet the requirements of Highways Development Control. Specifically, the red line boundary has been amended in order to extend upto the adopted highway network at Sycamore Grove, with the relevant notice served on interested parties. The site access road has been amended to ensure a seamless transition with the existing surface of Holly Fold and radius kerbs have been replaced with 4 metre splays. A turning head has been provided at the east end of the private road to ensure that vehicles can enter and exit the development in a forward gear. The updated plan indicates that the private drive serving the proposed development would have a maximum gradient of 1:15. Site address - page 16

Page 106 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

The proposed access and highway layout are considered to be acceptable and would facilitate safe and suitable access to the site for all users.

In respect of the promotion of sustainable modes of travel the proposed development would provide electric vehicle charging points at a rate of one per dwelling, in accordance with the requirements of the Low Emission Strategy for Bradford.

Policy TR2 and Appendix 4 of the Core Strategy require the provision of an average of 1.5 off street car parking spaces per unit for residential development. The proposed development would provide 22 car parking spaces to serve 11 dwellings and 4 further spaces for visitor car parking. The garage serving plot 2 has been included as a car parking space as its dimensions, 6mx3m, are sufficient to house a vehicle. It is necessary to impose a planning condition removing permitted development rights for the conversion of the garage, as plot 2 would only benefit from a single useable driveway parking space. The retention of the garage would ensure that plot 2 would benefit from 2 off street car parking spaces which is suitable to serve a 3 bedroom property and accords with the parking requirements of the Core Strategy.

The development is considered to meet the required car parking standards and accords with policy TR2 of the Core Strategy.

In conclusion the proposed development is considered to occupy a sustainable location with access to public transport facilities. The inclusion of EV charging points would also promote the use of more sustainable forms of transport. The site access is considered to be safe and suitable for all users and the development would not result in an unacceptable impact on highway safety. The development is not considered to have a severe impact on the highway network in respect of capacity or congestion.

Land Contamination

Policy EN8 (B) of the Core Strategy requires that proposals for development of land which may be contaminated or unstable must incorporate appropriate investigation into the quality of the land. Where there is evidence of contamination or instability, remedial measures must be identified to ensure that the development will not pose a risk to human health, public safety and the environment.

A Phase 1 Desktop Report (Mugen Geo Ltd) has been submitted in support of the application. The Environmental Health Department have assessed the submitted information and have raised no objection to the proposed development subject to the imposition of planning conditions requiring the submission of a Phase 2 site investigation and risk assessment; confirmation of the completion of investigative works, submission of a detailed remediation strategy and the submission of a remediation verification report. Further conditions are also required in order to ensure that any unexpected contamination is dealt with appropriately and that any imported materials are of an acceptable quality. Subject to the aforementioned conditions the proposed development is considered to accord with policy EN8 of the Core Strategy.

Biodiversity

Site address - page 17

Page 107 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

The site is not specifically designated for its biodiversity value. Nonetheless policy EN2(d) requires consideration of any adverse impact that a development may have on important habitats and species.

A Phase 1 Habitat Assessment has been provided in support of the application. The assessment does not identify any protected or notable species, or priority habitats to be present. No further survey work is therefore considered to be required.

There are no records of breeding birds for the site. However, in accordance with best practice site clearance should occur outside of the breeding bird season (March- August), or where this is not possible a pre-clearance check should be undertaken by a suitably qualified ecologist to confirm or otherwise the presence of active nests. If an active nest is identified, all works within the vicinity of the nest should be delayed until the young have fledged and the nest is no longer in use. An ecologist should confirm that the nest is no longer in use. The developer shall be alerted to the aforementioned requirements by a footnote on the decision notice.

Paragraph 170 of the Framework identifies the need for planning decisions to contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by, amongst other things, minimising impacts on and providing net gains for biodiversity. In this regard the submitted Phase 1 Habitat Assessment provides a number of recommendations, including the provision of bat and bird nest boxes into the fabric of the proposed dwellings and accessibility features to improve habitat connectivity to enable small mammals to move freely between the site and offsite fields and between garden areas.

The aforementioned requirements can be secured by a planning condition requiring the submission of a Biodiversity Enhancement Plan based on the recommendations provided with the Phase 1 Habitat Assessment. The enhancements shall then be provided prior to occupation of the dwellings and retained for the lifetime of the development. Subject to the aforementioned condition it is considered that the development can deliver net gains for biodiversity in accordance with the requirements of the Framework and policy EN2 of the Core Strategy.

The site is located within the South Pennine Moors Special Protection Area (SPA)/Special Area of Conservation (SAC) (European Site), which is also a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) and includes Ilkley Moor. Potential detrimental impacts of additional housing have been highlighted in the Habitat Regulations Assessment of the Core Strategy for the Bradford District and the Core Strategy includes policy SC8 which considers the impact of proposed housing developments on the European Site. The development site falls within 'Zone C' of policy SC8.

There are 3 ways in which additional residential development close to the SPA/SAC could impact on its nature conservation interest: Loss of supporting habitat; urban edge effects (risk of fire, predation of birds by pets, loss of air quality etc); and additional recreational pressure.

In this case, the site is primarily grassed land and is not supporting habitat to the SPA/SAC as it is not a habitat for nesting birds. The site is also well beyond the 400m zone of influence in respect of damaging urban edge impacts (e.g. fire- spread, fly-tipping, cat predation) and is significantly physically separated from

Site address - page 18

Page 108 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee the SPA/SAC moors by intervening development. The potential impact of urban edge effects will be negligible.

It is acknowledged that a net increase of residential dwellings can, in principle, add increased recreational pressure on the SPA/SAC. However, the relatively small size of the proposal and availability of amenity space within the site itself are such that the proposed development is unlikely to add significantly to recreational pressure on the moors compared with that from the general population already within the 7km zone and that arising from visitors to the moors. The proposal is therefore considered to accord with policy SC8 of the Core Strategy.

Drainage

Policy EN7 of the Core Strategy deals with Flood Risk and states that the Council will manage flood risk pro-actively. In assessing development proposals this will require that all sources of flooding are addressed, that proposals will only be acceptable where they do not increase flood risk elsewhere and that any need for improvements in drainage infrastructure is taken into account. Development proposals will also be required to seek to minimise run-off and for Greenfield sites run off should be no greater than the existing Greenfield overall rates.

The Council’s Drainage Unit (acting as Lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA)) have assessed the submitted information and have advised that they have no objections to the proposed development subject to the imposition of a planning condition.

A condition is required to ensure that the surface water drainage scheme including the surface water/watercourse inlet chamber and grid, are constructed in accordance with the submitted details and that the infrastructure is maintained thereafter.

In conclusion the proposed development is considered to be appropriately flood resistant and flood resilient. Through the imposition of the suggested planning condition the development will be served by acceptable drainage infrastructure based on SuDS principles and suitable maintenance arrangements will be put in place to ensure an acceptable standard of operation for the lifetime of the development. The proposal is therefore considered to accord with the requirements of policy EN7 of the Core Strategy and paragraphs 163 and 165 of the NPPF.

Community Safety

Policy DS5 requires that development proposals are designed to ensure a safe and secure environment and reduce opportunities for crime. The Police Architectural Liaison Officer has reviewed the submitted proposals and, whilst not objecting in principle to the proposed development the following points of detail have been raised:

- Install side windows to plots 1 and 2 to provide surveillance of the footpath route.

-Stone walls directly abutting the boundary fences of plots 1 and 2 could be used as climbing aids to access the rear of the properties.

-Rear boundary treatments of all plots should be 1.8 metres in height.

-Bin storage at plot 1 should be set behind the boundary fence. Site address - page 19

Page 109 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

- Plots 4/5, 6/7, 8/9, 10/11 each have a shared pathway with gated access located along the rear building line of each plot which could allow any stranger / potential offender to enter the pathway and attempt entry into the rear gates as surveillance is limited.

The aforementioned issues have been addressed through the submission of amended plans, with the exception of omitting the shared pathways to plots 4/5 and 6/7. Given the constraints of the site the use of a shared footpaths to plots 4/5 and 6/7 cannot be avoided. However, it is considered that the development has generally been designed to reflect the principles of secure by design and that the spaces which would be created by the development would not be unacceptably insecure or susceptible to antisocial behaviour.

It is considered that there are no grounds to conclude that the proposed development would create an unsafe or unsecure environment and the proposal is considered to accord with policy DS5 of the Core Strategy.

Further Issues Raised by Representations

Increased wear and tear on Holly Fold resulting from construction traffic and use of the road by residents of the development.

An increase in wear and tear of the road surface is not an adequate reason to refuse planning permission.

Insufficient drainage information.

The submitted information has been assessed by the Lead Local Flood Authority and it is considered to be sufficient to enable the determination of the application.

Hard surfacing will increase flash flooding in the area.

The drainage details have been assessed by the Lead Local Flood Authority and it is considered that subject to adherence to the agreed details the development will not increase flood risk elsewhere.

All plots will overlook properties on Holly Fold

The proposed dwellings are sufficiently separated from Holly Fold to ensure that no adverse overlooking implications would be incurred.

Increased emissions from additional vehicle traffic

It is accepted that the proposed development would result in greenhouse gas emissions. However, it is considered that such emissions are likely to be relatively lower than would be the case for alternative, less sustainable locations. In order to encourage alternative means of transport Electric Vehicle (EV) charging points will be secured by a planning condition at a rate of 1 per residential unit in line with the Type 1 Mitigation requirements set out in the Bradford Low Emission Strategy.

Increased noise and disturbance. Site address - page 20

Page 110 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

A condition is proposed restricting hours of construction work to 0:730-18:00 Monday to Friday, 07:30-1300 on Saturday and no working on Sundays or public/bank holidays. The proposed condition is considered to be sufficient to prevent working during unsociable hours.

Increased risk of crime due to the formation of an alleyway at the rear of plots 4-11

The proposed layout would not result in the formation of an alleyway at plots 4-11.

Loss of habitat

The development site is not comprised of high value habitat. The development would also be subject to a planning condition requiring the submission of Biodiversity Enhancement Plan to ensure that the recommendations outlined in the Phase 1 Habitat Assessment are incorporated into the development

Loss of view from properties on Holly Fold.

The loss of a view is not a material planning consideration.

Impact on the resale value of properties on Holly Fold.

Property value is not a material planning consideration.

The 2012 The Phase 1 habitat assessment is out of date.

An updated Habitat Assessment has been provided dated 18th April 2019.

The existing and proposed site plans do not correctly depict numbers 11, 12 and 14 Holly Fold.

The submitted site plan is of sufficient detail to enable accurate assessment of the development proposal.

The land within the application site is at "High" risk of landslide.

Paragraph 179 of the NPPF advises that where a site is affected by land stability issues, responsibility for securing a safe development rests with the developer and/or landowner.

No details have been provided in relation to the proposed carriageway gradients

The submitted information includes carriageway gradients. The carriageway would have a maximum gradient of 1:15.

The proposed Public Right of Way has no natural surveillance and has the potential to increase the risk of crime.

The proposal has been amended in line with the comments of the Police Liaison Officer. Additional window openings have been provided in the gable elevations of plots 1 and 2 in order to increase natural surveillance of the footpath.

Site address - page 21

Page 111 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

Plots 1 & 2 are dated in their approach to modern-living

The proposed dwellings are considered to be of an appropriate standard to meet with the housing quality objectives of policy HO9 of the Core Strategy

The repetition of 8 properties of the same design creates a bland streetscape.

The proposed property designs are considered to be acceptable and would not detract from the surrounding residential area.

Inadequate provision of green space.

The size and topography of the site are substantial constraints to the provision of public green space within the development layout.

Artificial slate and natural stone would be more appropriate construction materials.

The proposed construction materials are considered to be acceptable subject to the approval of samples.

Construction vehicle washing facilities should be provided

The use of wheel washing facilities to prevent mud on the highway throughout the construction process can be ensured by a planning condition.

The plans do not show the full route of the public right of way

The plans accurately detail the route of the public right of way through the site in line with the diversion order which was confirmed in March 2016. Any deviation from this route would require the developer to apply for and successfully obtain a further diversion order to legally divert the footpath.

Inadequate mix of unit sizes.

The development would provide 11 three bedroom dwellings. Policy HO11 of the Core Strategy identifies the delivery of more family housing as the number one strategic priority for meeting the needs of the districts growing population and it is considered that the development would contribute towards meeting this objective. Whilst a mix of units sizes would be desirable for a larger development site it is not considered to be necessary in this instance.

Clarification is needed of the boundary treatment separating the carriageway and Holly Fold.

The existing boundary fence to the rear of properties on Holly Fold would remain in place.

Housing development is not necessary

The adopted Core Strategy identifies the need to house Bradford’s growing population by delivering 42,100 new residential units by 2030. More specifically, policy HO3 of the

Site address - page 22

Page 112 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

Core Strategy identifies a need to provide 346 new homes in Steeton with Eastburn upto 2030.

Local Schools are already at capacity

Contributions towards education infrastructure are secured through the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL). The application site is located in CIL zone 3 where there is a charge of £20 per sq m. The development would generate a CIL payment of £25,484.

Insufficient time period for neighbour consultation

The application has been publicised in accordance with the protocol for the publicity of planning applications is set out in section 15 of The Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015 under Publicity for applications for planning permission.

Increased dust and vibrations from construction work

A footnote is to be imposed alerting the developer of the need to adhere to IAQM guidance.

Health risks to neighbouring property owners from re-routing overhead power lines.

There are EMF (electric and magnetic field) limits in force in the UK. All of the electricity system, including all overhead lines, complies with these limits. The limits are set to prevent all established effects of EMFs on people.

The development encroaches into the green belt.

The site is not located on green belt land.

There is no commentary within the application on how the applicant intends to respond to the 2no. overhead power lines that cross the site.

A footnote has been imposed alerting the developer of the need to discuss diversion of power lines running across the site with the provider/appropriate body concerned at the earliest opportunity.

A contribution of £3,127.33 should be made to the Airedale NHS Foundation trust in order to provide additional services to meet patient demand.

Without evidence of:

 the exact services and items the monies will be used towards;  how this development directly generates the health demand for those services (and the nature of that demand) during the relevant 12 months of the grant of the permission beyond those already planned for by population growth; and  why the Trust cannot currently meet such demand itself;

It is not possible to conclude that the contribution satisfies the requisite tests that the contribution is necessary, directly related to the development and reasonable in scale and kind. Site address - page 23

Page 113 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

Planning Obligations

The site is located in an area where policy HO11 of the Core Strategy requires that 30% of the units are provided on an affordable basis. The provision of on-site affordable housing/or an equivalent commuted sum will be secured by a S106 agreement in the event that planning permission is granted.

Community Infrastructure Levy

The site is located in CIL Zone 3. The development would generate a CIL payment of £25,484.48

Equality Act 2010, Section 149: In writing this report due regard has been has been taken of the need to eliminate unlawful discrimination, harassment and victimisation, advance equality of opportunity between different groups and foster good relations between different groups, in accordance with the duty placed upon Local Authorities by Section 149 of the Equality Act 2010.

The context of the site, the development scheme proposed and the representations received have been reviewed to identify the potential for the determination of this application to disadvantage any individuals or groups of people with characteristics protected under the Equality Act 2010.

The outcome of this review is that there is that there is not considered to be any sound reason to conclude that the proposed development would have a significantly detrimental impact on any groups of people or individuals with protected characteristics.

Reason for Granting Planning Permission:

The proposed development would meet the requirements of Core Strategy policies P1, SC1, SC4, SC6, SC9, TR1, TR2, TR3, HO5, HO8, HO9, HO11, EN2, EN3, EN4, EN5, EN7, EN8, DS1, DS3, DS4, DS5, ID2 and ID3 and the application is recommended for approval.

Conditions:

General

1.Approved Plans

The development hereby approved shall only be carried out in accordance with the following documents:-

04 Revision D- Proposed Site Plan 15- Proposed Site Sections 434-07 Revision C- Plot 1 Plans and Elevations 434-08 Revision C- Plot 2 Plans and Elevations 434-09 Revision A- Plot 3 and 4 Plans and Elevations 434-12- Plots 7, 8 and 9 Plans and Elevations 434-13 – Plots 5,6,10 and 11 Plans and Elevations Site address - page 24

Page 114 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

14- Proposed Highway Details 15- Proposed Site Sections 2018 - 146 - 01 Revision D- Proposed Surface Water and Foul Drainage Layout 2018 - 146 - 03 Catchment Area Plan 2018 - 146 – 04- Highways Drainage

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt as to the terms under which this planning permission has been granted.

2. Three Year Time Limit The development to which this notice relates must be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this notice.

Reason: To accord with the requirements of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990 (as amended).

3. PD Rights Removed A-E Notwithstanding the provisions of The Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (or any subsequent equivalent legislation) no development falling within Classes A to E of Part 1 of Schedule 2 of the said Order shall subsequently be carried out to the development hereby approved without the prior express written permission of the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To safeguard the amenities of occupiers of adjoining properties and to accord with Policies DS3 and DS5 of the Core Strategy Development Plan Document.

4. Material Samples Before development above damp proof course commences on site, arrangements shall be made with the Local Planning Authority for the inspection of all external facing and roofing materials to be used in the development hereby permitted. The samples shall then be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the development constructed in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To ensure the use of appropriate materials in the interests of visual amenity and to accord with Policies DS1 and DS3 of the Core Strategy Development Plan Document.

5. Bin Storage Prior to the first occupation of the residential units the bin storage areas shall be provided and made available for use in accordance with the approved plan and thereafter retained.

Reason: To ensure appropriate design arrangements for waste handling and to accord with Policies DS1 and DS5 of the Core Strategy.

6. Landscaping Scheme In the first planting season following the completion of the development, or as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, the landscaping proposals and new tree planting shall be implemented at the site in accordance with details shown on the approved Proposed Site Plan reference 04 Revision D. Site address - page 25

Page 115 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

Any trees or plants comprising the approved landscaping that become diseased or die, or which are removed or damaged within the first 5 years after the completion of planting shall be removed and a replacement landscape planting using the same or similar species/specifications shall be planted in the same position no later than the end of the first available planting season following the demise of the original landscape planting.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and to accord Policies EN5, DS2 and DS3 of the Core Strategy Development Plan Document.

7. Landscape Maintenance Prior to occupation of any part of the development, a schedule of landscape maintenance for a minimum period of 25 years shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The schedule shall include a plan to define all communal hard and soft landscaped areas to be maintained under the maintenance regime, an outline of maintenance works to be undertaken and the frequency of those work, together with details of responsibilities for implementing the maintenance regime by a Management Company or other agency. It shall provide email, postal address and telephone contact details of such a company or agency. Landscape maintenance of the identified areas shall subsequently be carried out in accordance with the approved schedule for the period agreed.

Reason: To ensure effective future maintenance of the landscaped areas in the interests of visual amenity and to accord with Policies DS2, DS3 and DS 5 of the Local Plan Core Strategy.

8. Bat and Bird Box Details Prior to the first occupation of the dwellings details of bat and bird nest boxes to be incorporated into the design of all units shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The bat and bird nest boxes so approved shall then be provided in full prior to the first occupation of the development and shall thereafter be retained as long as the development is in use.

Reason: To ensure that the development contributes positively towards the overall enhancement of the District’s biodiversity resource and to accord with policy EN2 of the Core Strategy.

9. Boundary Treatments

The boundary treatments as indicated on submitted drawing reference 04 Rev C shall be provided in full prior to the first occupation of the residential units and shall thereafter be retained.

Reason: In the interests of amenity and privacy and to accord with Policy DS5 of the Core Strategy.

10. Construction Hours Construction work shall only be carried out between the hours of 0730 and 1800 on Mondays to Fridays, 0730 and 1300 on Saturdays and at no time on Sundays, Bank or Public Holidays.

Site address - page 26

Page 116 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

To protect the amenity of the occupants of nearby dwellings and to accord with policy DS5 of the Core Strategy Development Plan Document.

11. Construction Plan Notwithstanding the provisions of Class A, Part 4 of Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995, or any subsequent legislation, the development hereby permitted shall not be begun until a plan specifying arrangements for the management of the construction site has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The construction plan shall include the following details: i) Full details of the contractors means of access to the site including measures to deal with surface water drainage; ii) Hours of delivery of materials; iii) Location of site management offices and/or sales offices; iv) Location of materials storage compounds, loading and unloading areas and areas for construction vehicles to turn within the site; v) Car parking areas for construction workers, sales staff and customers; vi) The extent of and surface treatment of any all temporary road accesses leading to compound/storage areas and the construction depths of these accesses their levels and gradients. vii) Temporary warning and direction signing on the approaches to the site. The construction plan details so approved before development is begun and shall be kept in place, operated and adhered to at all times until the development is completed.

Reason: To ensure the provision of proper site construction facilities in the interests of highway safety and the amenity of the surrounding environment and its occupants and to accord with policies TR1, TR3, DS4 and DS5 of the Local Plan for Bradford.

Highways

12. Access Before Use Before any part of the development is brought into use, the proposed means of vehicular and pedestrian access hereby approved shall be laid out, hard surfaced, sealed and drained within the site in accordance with the approved plan numbered 434-04C and completed to a constructional specification approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure that the site is connected to existing street and path networks, public transport and places and that a safe and suitable form of access is made available to serve the development in accordance with Policy DS4 of the Core Strategy Development Plan Document and Paragraph 108 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

13. Parking Provision Prior to the first occupation of the residential units, the off street car parking facility shall be laid out, hard surfaced, sealed and drained within the curtilage of the site in accordance with the approved drawings. The gradient shall be no steeper than 1 in 15 except where otherwise approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Site address - page 27

Page 117 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to accord with Policies TR2 and EN7 of the Core Strategy

14. Electric Vehicle Charging From the date of first occupation, each residential unit on site with dedicated parking shall be provided with access to a fully operational 3 pin socket on a dedicated 16A circuit, capable of providing a 'trickle' charge to an electric vehicle. Charging points should be provided via outdoor, weatherproof sockets within easy access of the parking areas or within dedicated garage space. All EV charging points shall be clearly marked with their purpose and drawn to the attention of new residents in their new home welcome pack/travel planning advice.

Reason: To facilitate the uptake and use of low emission vehicles by future occupants and reduce the emission impact of traffic arising from the development in line with the West Yorkshire Low Emission Strategy and the National Planning Policy Framework.

Land Contamination

15. Site Investigation Scheme Prior to development commencing, a Phase 2 site investigation and risk assessment methodology to assess the nature and extent of any contamination on the site, whether or not it originates on the site, must be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other off site receptors and to comply with policy EN8 of the Local Plan for Bradford.

16. Site Investigation Implementation Prior to development commencing the Phase 2 site investigation and risk assessment must be completed in accordance with the approved site investigation scheme. A written report, including a remedial options appraisal scheme, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure that the site is remediated appropriately for is intended use and to comply with policy EN8 of the Local Plan for Bradford.

17. Remediation Strategy Prior to construction of the development a detailed remediation strategy, which removes unacceptable risks to all identified receptors from contamination, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The remediation strategy must include proposals for verification of remedial works. Where necessary, the strategy shall include proposals for phasing of works and verification.

Reason: To ensure that the site is remediated appropriately for its intended use and to comply with policy EN8 of the Local Plan for Bradford.

18. Remediation Verification Site address - page 28

Page 118 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

A remediation verification report, including where necessary quality control of imported soil materials and clean cover systems, prepared in accordance with the approved remediation strategy shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the first occupation of each phase of the development (if phased) or prior to the completion of the development.

Reason: To ensure that the site is remediated appropriately for its intended use and to comply with policy EN8 of the Local Plan for Bradford.

19. Unexpected Contamination If, during the course of development, contamination not previously identified is found to be present, no further works shall be undertaken in the affected area and the contamination shall be reported to the Local Planning Authority as soon as reasonably practicable (but within a maximum of 5 days from the find). Prior to further works being carried out in the identified area, a further assessment shall be made and appropriate remediation implemented in accordance with a scheme also agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure that the site is remediated appropriately for its intended use and to comply with policy EN8 of the Local Plan for Bradford.

20. Material Importation A methodology for quality control of any material brought to the site for use in filling, level raising, landscaping and garden soils shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to materials being brought to site.

Reason: To ensure that all materials brought to the site are acceptable, to ensure that contamination/pollution is not brought into the development site and to comply with policy EN8 of the Local Plan for Bradford.

Drainage

21. Foul and Surface Water Infrastructure The surface water drainage scheme shall be constructed in accordance with Proposed Surface Water / Foul Drainage Layout and Manhole Schedule, Drawing No. 2018-146- 01-Rev D. The drainage scheme including the inlet chamber and grid shall be maintained thereafter by an appointed Management Company for the lifetime of the development.

Reason: In the interests of the amenity of future occupiers, pollution prevention and the effective management of flood risk and to accord with Policies DS5, EN7 and EN8 of the Core Strategy Development Plan Document.

Footnotes

1. Works Affecting an Ordinary Watercourse The developers attention is drawn to the need to gain consent for works affecting an ordinary watercourse from the Lead Local Flood Authority, in this case Bradford Council. The developer must therefore apply to Bradford Council Land Drainage Department for consent to undertake works affecting the watercourse banking. For

Site address - page 29

Page 119 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee advice regarding works to the watercourse please contact Edward Norfolk on 01274 433905 or via e-mail at [email protected]

2. Rights of Way The affected public footpath must not be obstructed by any plant, materials or equipment. Any obstruction of the route constitutes an offence under the Highways Act 1980 and will be pursued accordingly.

If essential works mean that the public right of way cannot be kept open because of safety hazards, a temporary diversion or closure order must be obtained. Please contact [email protected] for details.

Even if planning permission is granted, no new stiles, gates, barriers or other structures can be erected on or across a public right of way without prior approval from the Council's Rights of Way Section. The requirements of the Equality Act 2010 must also be considered.

If work alongside the public footpath presents a danger to path users the affected section should be fenced off with safety netting

The surface of the footpath should not be disturbed, however, if damage to the public footpath is caused by development works it must be promptly repaired by the applicant at their expense. If any changes are proposed that would affect the surface in any way these must be approved, in advance, by the Rights of Way Section.

Throughout the period of development, the line of the footpaths must be indicated on site. If building works remove features that would enable users to find the footpath/bridleway the line of the footpath/bridleway must be clearly indicated by some other means, as this will help to minimise conflict and difficulties on site.

3. Breeding Birds All wild birds are protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended), including their nests (whilst in use or being built) as well as any eggs the nest may contain. Site clearance should not occur during the bird nesting season. This is weather dependant but generally extends from 1st March to 31st August (inclusive). If this is not possible and breeding birds are encountered, any such works undertaken within the bird nesting period (March to August inclusive) should be supervised by a suitably qualified ecologist and no site clearance should take place until after the fledglings have left the nest.

4. Power Line Diversion Footnote: The developer is advised to discuss diversion of power lines running across the site with the provider/appropriate body concerned at the earliest opportunity.

Site address - page 30

Page 120 Agenda Item 9/

Report of the Assistant Director (Planning, Transportation & Highways) to the meeting of Regulatory and Appeals Committee to be held on 5th December 2019 X

Subject: This is a full application for the construction of 167 two, three and four bedroomed, 2 storey traditional residential homes on the former site of Otto House, Ingleby Road, Bradford.

Summary statement: The proposal is seeking permission for the construction of 167 dwellings on a previously- developed site. The site has had planning permission previously granted under reference 15/04130/MAO as well as part of a larger site including the former Rentokill site to the west under reference 12/01722/MAO. The principle of residential development on the site is therefore considered to be acceptable.

The application has been fully assessed against all relevant local and national planning policies and all public representations and consultation responses have been fully taken into consideration. The scheme cannot provide any affordable housing and a Financial Viability Appraisal has been submitted to justify this and it has been independently assessed and the conclusions have been concurred with.

Subject to the imposition of the recommended conditions, including the securing of a Traffic regulation Order to restrict on-street parking on Northside Road and the provision of a “yellow box junction” at the junction of Northside Road and Ingleby Road, it is considered that the proposal is acceptable.

Julian Jackson Portfolio: Assistant Director (Planning, Regeneration, Planning and Transport Transportation & Highways) Report Contact: John Eyles Major Development Manager Phone: (01274) 434380 Overview & Scrutiny Area: E-mail: [email protected] Regeneration and Economy

Page 121 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

1. SUMMARY

This is a full application for the construction of 167 two, three and four bedroomed, 2 storey traditional residential homes on the former site of Otto House, Ingleby Road, Bradford.

2. BACKGROUND

Attached at Appendix 1 is the Technical Report of the Assistant Director (Planning, Transportation and Highways). This identifies the material considerations relevant to the application.

3. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS

All considerations material to the determination of this planning application are as set out in Appendix 1.

4. FINANCIAL & RESOURCE APPRAISAL

The presentation of the proposal is subject to normal budgetary constraints.

5. RISK MANAGEMENT AND GOVERNANCE ISSUES

No implications.

6. LEGAL APPRAISAL

The determination of the application is within the Council’s powers as the Local Planning Authority.

7. OTHER IMPLICATIONS

7.1 EQUALITY & DIVERSITY

Section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 states that the Council must, in the exercise of its functions “have due regard to the need to eliminate conduct that is prohibited by the Act, advancing equality of opportunity between people who share a protected characteristic and people who do not share it, and fostering good relations between people who share a protected characteristic and people who do not share it. For this purpose section 149 defines “relevant protected characteristics” as including a range of characteristics including disability, race and religion. In this particular case due regard has been paid to the section149 duty but it is not considered there are any issues in this regard relevant to this application.

Page 122 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

7.2 SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS

No significant issues raised. The site is located within a very sustainable location in that it is located within walking distance of facilities including a defined retail centre, recreation, employment and education.

7.3 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS IMPACTS

A condition is recommended requiring the inclusion of electric vehicle charging points, in accordance with the Council’s Low Emissions Strategy.

7.4 COMMUNITY SAFETY IMPLICATIONS

Core Strategy Policy DS5 states that development proposals should be designed to ensure a safe and secure environment and reduce the opportunities for crime. Conditions are recommended in relation to matters such as boundary treatment to further enhance the security of the site. Building Regulations Approved Document Q relates to Secured by Design issues for the individual dwellings.

7.5 HUMAN RIGHTS ACT

Article 6 - right to a fair and public hearing. The Council must ensure that it has taken into account the views of all those who have an interest in, or whom may be affected by the proposal.

7.6 TRADE UNION

None.

7.7 WARD IMPLICATIONS

Ward members have been fully consulted on the proposal and it is not considered that there are any significant implications for the Ward itself.

7.8 AREA COMMITTEE ACTION PLAN IMPLICATIONS

None.

7.9 IMPLICATIONS FOR CORPORATE PARENTING

None.

7.10 ISSUES ARISING FROM PRIVACY IMPACT ASSESMENT

None.

Page 123 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

8. NOT FOR PUBLICATION DOCUMENTS

None.

9. OPTIONS

The Committee can approve the application as per the recommendation contained within Appendix 1, or refuse the application.

If the Committee decide that planning permission should be refused, they may refuse the application accordingly, in which case reasons for refusal will have to be given based upon development plan policies or other material considerations.

10. RECOMMENDATIONS

The application is recommended for approval, subject to the conditions included with Appendix 1.

11. APPENDICES

Appendix 1 Technical Report.

12.BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS

National Planning Policy Framework Core Strategy Replacement Unitary Development Plan

Page 124 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

19/01268/MAF

Former site of Otto House, Ingleby Road, Bradford

Page 125 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

Appendix 1 5th December 2019

Ward: Great Horton Recommendation: TO GRANT PLANNING PERMISSION SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS

Application Number: 19/01268/MAF

Type of Application/Proposal and Address: This is a full application for the construction of 167 two, three and four bedroomed, 2 storey traditional residential homes on the former site of Otto House, Ingleby Road, Bradford.

Applicant: Mr Brian Reynolds (Gleeson Redevelopment)

Agent: N/A

Site Description: The site is located to the north west of the junction of Ingleby Road and Northside Road and currently comprises a vacant site with the former Grattan Headquarters building having recently been demolished. To the west is another cleared site (formerly Rentokill) whilst to the north is a vacant site together with a small industrial unit. To the east of the site are mainly residential with Wickes DIY store located beyond the north eastern corner of the site. To the south is a mix of residential properties, an ambulance station, recreation field and a school. Vehicular accesses to the site exist on both Ingleby Road and Northside Road.

Relevant Site History: Outline planning permission was granted on the 31st January 2013 under reference 12/01722/MAO for the demolition of the existing buildings on the site and the subsequent residential development of up to 400 units. This earlier consent related to a larger site comprising the current application site and the adjacent former Rentokill site. This permission was subject to a Section 106 Legal Agreement where the Heads of Terms were:

Education – the payment of a commuted sum of £1,325,000 to be used towards enhancing the primary school infrastructure in the Great Horton or adjoining local election Wards of the Council.

Recreation – the provision of a grass football pitch on the south side of Northside Road together with a playing field management plan

Highways – the payment of £5,000 as a Traffic Regulation Contribution that should be used towards the provision of a box junction at the junction of Ingleby Road and Northside Road.

Page 126 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

Outline planning permission was granted on the 7th March 2016 under reference 15/04130/MAO for the construction of circa 220 residential units. This permission was subject to a Section 106 Legal Agreement where the Heads of Terms were:

Education: The payment of a commuted sum of £4135 per dwelling (the precise number of dwellings will be determined at Reserved Matters Stage) to be used towards enhancing the educational infrastructure at both Lidget Green Primary and Parkside Secondary Schools.

Recreation: The provision of a grass football pitch on the south side of Northside Road together with a playing field management plan.

Highways: The payment of £8,000 as a Traffic Regulation Contribution that should be used towards the provision of a box junction at the junction of Ingleby Road and Northside Road.

The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF): The National Planning Policy Framework is a material planning consideration on any development proposal. The Framework highlights the fact that the purpose of the planning system is to contribute to the achievement of sustainable development and that there is a presumption in favour of sustainable development which can deliver:- i) Planning for prosperity (an economic role) - by ensuring that sufficient land of the right type and in the right places is available to allow growth and innovation; ii) Planning for people (a social role) - by promotion of strong, vibrant and healthy communities by providing an increase supply of housing to meet the needs of present and future generations and by creating a good quality built environment with accessible local services; iii) Planning for places (an environmental role) - by protecting and enhancing the natural, built and historic environment, adapting to climate change including moving to a low-carbon economy.

As such the Framework suggests local planning authorities should approve development proposals that accord with statutory plans without delay.

The Local Plan for Bradford: The Core Strategy for Bradford was adopted on 18 July 2017 though some of the policies contained within the preceding Replacement Unitary Development Plan (RUDP), saved for the purposes of formulating the Local Plan for Bradford, remain applicable until adoption of Allocations and Area Action Plan development plan documents. The site is not allocated for any specific land-use in the RUDP but is located within the defined Thornton Road Employment Site (Ref: BW/E6.2). Accordingly, the following adopted saved RUDP and Core Strategy policies are applicable to this proposal.

Replacement Unitary Development Plan Policies: E3 Protecting existing employment land and buildings in urban areas E6 Employment zones

Core Strategy Policies: P1 Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development SC1 Overall Approach and Key Spatial Priorities

Page 127 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

SC4 Hierarchy of Settlements SC9 Making Great Places TR1 Travel Reduction and Modal Shift TR2 Parking Policy TR3 Public Transport, Cycling and Walking HO5 Density of Housing Schemes HO6 Maximising the Use of Previously Developed Land HO8 Housing Mix HO9 Housing Quality HO11 Affordable Housing EN2 Biodiversity and Geodiversity EN5 Trees and Woodland EN7 Flood Risk EN8 Environmental Protection EN12 Minerals Safeguarding DS1 Achieving Good Design DS2 Working with the Landscape DS3 Urban Character DS4 Streets and Movement DS5 Safe and Inclusive Places ID2 Viability ID3 Developer Contributions

Parish Council: There is no Parish Council in the Great Horton Ward.

Publicity and Number of Representations: The application was publicised by press notice, site notice and neighbour notification letters. The expiry date for the publicity exercise was the 26th April 2019.

As a result of the publicity exercise 5 representations have been received objecting to the proposal. Of these 5 objections 3 have been received from the Ambulance Station located on Northside Road.

Summary of Representations Received: Highways:  The additional traffic will impact on the access and egress for the Ambulance station resulting in delayed response times thereby impacting on the public  Increase in traffic on an already busy road especially with the recently opened Kings Science Academy

Residential amenity:  Potential impact on proposed dwellings through the noise generated by the adjacent building to the north occupied by Purdie Dish Ends  A Noise Attenuation Scheme should be agreed to be incorporated within the dwellings to minimise potential impact of the adjacent building

Other:  The site could be used as a cemetery and could take up to 50 years to fill

Consultations:

Page 128 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

Highways DC (Non-transport Assessment) – No objection to the proposal subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions together with the securing of Traffic Regulation Orders relating to the prevention of on-street parking on Northside Road and the provision of a “yellow box junction” at the junction of Northside Road and Ingleby Road

West Yorkshire Combined Authority – No objection to the principle of the development but the Developer should fund a package of sustainable travel measures such as discounted MetroCards (Residential MetroCard Scheme) for all or part of the site at a cost of £83,583.50p

Drainage – No objection subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions relating to the discharge of foul and surface water

Landscape Design Unit – No objection subject to the imposition of an appropriate condition relating to the provision of a detailed schedule of Landscape Management and Maintenance Plan

Biodiversity Team – No objection subject to the imposition of a condition to secure the additional landscaping together with the provisions of a Landscape and Ecology Management Plan which ensures the management of all ecology features and habitats for at least 10 years after the development, as well as plans to secure the long term management of them Planning Policy –

Sport & Leisure – The proposal will have a significant impact on the existing facilities in the vicinity of the site. If the developer is to incorporate open spaces within the site they will need to provide a maintenance agreement for its future management or pay the Council a commuted sum for a 25 year period should they wish to Council to maintain the areas in the future

Education (Client Team) –At primary school level there are currently few places in every year group at the schools easily accessible from the site (Princeville, Lidget Green, St Williams Catholic, Farnham, Horton Grange, Copthorne and Whetley) although not every school has space and no individual school has room in every year group. At secondary school level all the schools easily accessible from the site (Dixons Kings, Dixons Allerton and Bradford Girls Grammar School) are overcrowded or full and therefore the Council would need to increase the number of secondary school places in this area

West Yorkshire Police – No objection to the principle of the development but comments on specific aspects of the layout including boundary treatment, natural surveillance of parking areas and security of the dwellings

Yorkshire Water Land Use Planning – No objection to the proposal subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions relating to the disposal of foul and surface water drainage

Environmental Health Air Quality – No objection to the proposal in relation to air quality subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions relating to the provision of electric vehicle charging points for each dwellings with an off-street parking space and the submission of a dust management plan

Page 129 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

Environmental Health Land Contamination – No objection subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions relating to further site investigations, remediation and verification, importation of materials, and, the discovery of unexpected contamination

Summary of Main Issues: 1. Principle of development 2. Visual amenity 3. Residential amenity 4. Highway safety 5. Drainage 6. Trees 7. Secured by design 8. Contaminated land 9. Biodiversity issues 10. Affordable housing 11. Community Infrastructure Levy 12. Other issues

Appraisal: The scheme proposes the construction of 167 dwellings with there being a mix of 2 (54), 3 (102), and, 4 (11) bedrooms in size. The layout includes a mix of semi-detached and detached dwellings. Vehicular access to the site will be taken from both Northside Road and Ingleby Road.

1. Principle of development

Paragraph 7 of the National Planning Policy Framework states that the purpose of the planning system is to contribute to the achievement of sustainable development. At a very high level, the objective of sustainable development can be summarised as meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. Paragraph 8 goes onto state that achieving sustainable development means that the planning system has three overarching objectives, which are interdependent and need to be pursued in mutually supportive ways and these include identifying and co-ordinating the provision of infrastructure (economic objective) and by fostering a well-designed and safe built environment, with accessible services and open spaces that reflect current and future needs and support communities’ health, social and cultural well-being (social objective), and, to contribute to protecting and enhancing our natural, built and historic environment; including making effective use of land, helping to improve biodiversity, using natural resources prudently, minimising waste and pollution, and mitigating and adapting to climate change, including moving to a low carbon economy (environmental objective).

Paragraph 11 of the National Planning Policy Framework states that development proposals should be determined in accordance with an up-to-date development plan without delay.

Policy HO5 of the Core Strategy states that in order to meet both the objectives of delivering housing growth and managing that growth in a sustainable way developers will be expected to make the best and most efficient use of land. Densities should normally achieve at least a minimum density of 30 dwellings per hectare although higher densities would be possible in areas well served by public transport.

Page 130 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

Policy HO8 of the Core Strategy states that the Council will ensure that a mix and balance of housing is provided to meet the needs of the District’s growing and diverse population. All large sites will be expected to incorporate a mix of housing types, sizes, prices and tenures and the mix should be based on both market demand and evidence of local need within the District’s SHMA.

The principle of residential development on the site has previously been established through the granting of outline planning permission under references 12/01722/MAO and 15/04130/MAO. Since these permissions were issued there has been no material change in circumstances that would impact on the principle of development no longer being acceptable.

The scheme proposes the construction of 167 dwellings with there being a mix of 2 (54), 3 (102), and, 4 (11) bedrooms in size. The layout includes a mix of semi-detached and detached dwellings. The tenure of the dwellings will all be private sale as a viability appraisal has been submitted which shows that the site cannot accommodate the provision of any affordable housing without being economically unviable (see Section 10 of the report below). As such it is considered that the proposal satisfies the requirements of policy HO8 with regards to providing a mix and balance of house types to meet the demands of the area.

The application site is 5.3 hectares in size and the scheme proposes 167 dwellings. This equates to a density of 31.5 dwellings per hectare. This density meets the minimum policy requirement of 30 dwellings per hectare as identified in policy HO5.

Overall therefore it is considered that the development of the application site with a residential development scheme accords with the principles of sustainable development articulated through the National Planning Policy Framework and the policies contained within the Core Strategy and that the amount of development proposed would make an efficient use of the land without compromising design imperatives. The principle of residential development is considered acceptable subject to the detailed consideration in the following sections of this report.

2. Visual amenity

The National Planning Policy Framework states in paragraph 124 that the creation of high quality buildings and places is fundamental to what the planning and development process should achieve. Good design is a key aspect of sustainable development, creates better places in which to live and work and helps make development acceptable to communities. Paragraph 127 states that planning policies and decisions should ensure that developments: a) will function well and add to the overall quality of the area, not just for the short term but over the lifetime of the development; b) are visually attractive as a result of good architecture, layout and appropriate and effective landscaping; c) are sympathetic to local character and history, including the surrounding built environment and landscape setting, while not preventing or discouraging appropriate innovation or change (such as increased densities); d) establish or maintain a strong sense of place, using the arrangement of streets, spaces, building types and materials to create attractive, welcoming and distinctive places to live, work and visit;

Page 131 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee e) optimise the potential of the site to accommodate and sustain an appropriate amount and mix of development (including green and other public space) and support local facilities and transport networks; and f) create places that are safe, inclusive and accessible and which promote health and well-being, with a high standard of amenity for existing and future users46; and where crime and disorder, and the fear of crime, do not undermine the quality of life or community cohesion and resilience.

Paragraph 130 states that permission should be refused for development of poor design that fails to take the opportunities available for improving the character and quality of an area and the way it functions, taking into account any local design standards or style guides in plans or supplementary planning documents. Conversely, where the design of a development accords with clear expectations in plan policies, design should not be used by the decision-maker as a valid reason to object to development.

Policy DS1 of the Core Strategy states that planning decisions should contribute to achieving good design and high quality places through, amongst other things, taking a holistic, collaborative approach to design putting the quality of the place first, and, taking a comprehensive approach to redevelopment in order to avoid piecemeal development which would compromise wider opportunities and the proper planning of the area.

Policy DS2 of the Core Strategy states that development proposals should take advantage of existing features, integrate development into wider landscape and create new quality spaces. Wherever possible designs should, amongst other things, retain existing landscape and ecological features and integrate them within developments as positive assets, work with the landscape to reduce the environmental impact of the development, and, ensure that new landscape features and open spaces have a clear function, are visually attractive and fit for purpose, and have appropriate management and maintenance arrangements in place.

Policy HO9 of the Core Strategy states that new housing should be of high quality and achieve good design, should be accessible and easily adaptable to support the changing needs of families and individuals over their lifetime and provide private outdoor space for homes.

The layout of the site is such that the main spine roads within the site run parallel to Northside Road with dwellings fronting onto them. Dwellings also front onto Northside Road and Ingleby Road thus giving a positive frontage from the main public vantage points. The layout comprises detached and semi-detached dwellings which is within keeping with the general character of the area. The dwellings are all to be 2 storeys in height which is again in keeping with the area.

In terms of materials the Applicant is proposing a mix of brick for the whole site. Whilst some brick is considered acceptable within the main body of the site it is considered that the dwellings fronting onto both Northside Road and Ingleby Road should be constructed using (artificial) stone as the existing dwellings fronting onto these roads are constructed of stone. This will ensure that visual character of the streetscenes is not detrimentally impacted upon.

Page 132 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

The layout of the development and the designs of the proposed dwellings are considered acceptable, subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions with particular reference to materials, and will be not be visually detrimental to the character and appearance of either the streetscene or the wider locality and the requirements of policies DS1 and DS2 of the Core Strategy are therefore satisfied.

3. Residential amenity

Policy DS5 of the Core Strategy states that development proposals should make a positive contribution to people’s lives through high quality, inclusive design by, amongst other things, not harming the amenity of existing or prospective users and residents.

The site is bounded to the south by Northside Road and to the east by Ingleby Road. To the east is a vacant site (formerly occupied by buildings associated with Rentokill as the last occupier) and to the north is a commercial building occupied by Purdie Dish Ends Ltd and open land extending down to the Bradford Beck. Also to the south on Northside Road is an ambulance station.

The separation distances to the dwellings on Northside Road and Ingleby Road are principally main elevation to main elevation with separation distances of a minimum of 31 and 40 metres respectively. These distances are significantly greater than the separation distances recommended by policy guidance and as such it is not considered that the residential amenities of the occupiers of the existing dwellings will be adversely affected.

Internally within the site the land levels do slope downwards from south to north which will result in the proposed dwellings being at different floor levels. Taking this into account the separation distances between the proposed dwellings are in excess of the policy requirement and are therefore considered to be acceptable and will not result in the residential amenities of the occupiers of those dwellings being adversely affected.

Adjacent to the northern boundary of the site is an existing commercial premise occupied by Purdie Dish Ends Ltd. This building does have the potential to generate noise due to the type of operation carried out. A Noise Report has been submitted in support of the application and found to be acceptable by the Council’s Environmental Health Department. The report recommends that suitable glazing and ventilation is installed and suggests the recommended standards which should be met. A condition is proposed to ensure that the development is carried out in accordance with these recommended standards.

In order to help mitigate any noise impacts the Applicant is proposing to incorporate a landscaped buffer zone between the commercial premises and the rear gardens of the nearest proposed dwellings. The landscaped strip will be approximately 14½ metres in depth. A landscaping plan has been submitted which identifies the mix of species to be planted in this area and to ensure it establishes properly an appropriate condition is recommended with regard to its implementation. The area will also be located outside the domestic curtilages of the proposed dwellings and will be managed by a separate management agreement and this will ensure its future retention. A condition is proposed which will secure the provision of the management agreement.

Overall it is considered that the layout of the development is such that the residential amenities of the occupiers of both the proposed dwellings and those existing dwellings

Page 133 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee that abut the site will not be adversely affected by the proposal and the requirements of policy DS5 of the Core Strategy are satisfied.

4. Highway safety

Paragraph 102 states transport issues should be considered from the earliest stages of development proposals such that, amongst other things, the potential impacts of development on transport networks can be addressed, and, opportunities to promote walking, cycling and public transport use are identified and pursued.

Paragraph 109 of the National Planning Policy Framework states that development should only be prevented or refused on highways grounds if there would be an unacceptable impact on highway safety, or the residual cumulative impacts on the road network would be severe. It goes onto state in paragraph 110 that applications for development should: a) give priority first to pedestrian and cycle movements, both within the scheme and with neighbouring areas; and second – so far as possible – to facilitating access to high quality public transport, with layouts that maximise the catchment area for bus or other public transport services, and appropriate facilities that encourage public transport use; b) address the needs of people with disabilities and reduced mobility in relation to all modes of transport; c) create places that are safe, secure and attractive – which minimise the scope for conflicts between pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles, avoid unnecessary street clutter, and respond to local character and design standards; d) allow for the efficient delivery of goods, and access by service and emergency vehicles; and e) be designed to enable charging of plug-in and other ultra-low emission vehicles in safe, accessible and convenient locations.

Policy TR1 of the Core Strategy seeks to reduce the demand for travel, encourage and facilitate the use of sustainable travel modes, limit traffic growth, reduce congestion and improve journey time reliability whilst policy TR2 seeks to manage car parking to help manage travel demand, support the use of sustainable travel modes, meet the needs of disabled and other groups whilst improving quality of place.

It is proposed to access the application site from both Northside Road and Ingleby Road although there will be no internal link between the 2 accesses. The dwellings fronting onto Northside Road will have direct access to the driveways from the road. However, dwellings fronting onto Ingleby Road will be served off private drives leading off the internal access roads. As with the previous planning permissions on the site for residential development the Applicant is proposing to incorporate a new “yellow box junction” at the junction of Northside Road and Ingleby Road together with a Traffic Regulation Order along Northside Road to prevent on-street parking within the visibility splays of the new main access road into the site and around the access to plots 93-97.

The Highways Department have not raised an objection to the proposal I terms of the layout, level of parking or the impact on the highway network that will result due to the increased traffic generated by the development. Appropriate conditions are recommended.

Page 134 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

The West Yorkshire Combined Authority have not raised an objection to the principle of the development but state that the Developer should fund a package of sustainable travel measures such as discounted MetroCards (Residential MetroCard Scheme) for all or part of the site at a cost of £83,583.50p to encourage the use of other more sustainable modes of transport than the private car. As an alternative to the provision of Residential MetroCards the Council does now seek the provision of Electric Vehicle Charging Points within the curtilage of each dwelling that has an off-street parking space and these are normally secured via a condition attached to a planning permission. It is considered that the provision of electric vehicle charging points represents a betterment of the scheme as the charging points are in situ permanently rather than, for example, the Residential MetroCard Scheme which is only for 1 year and there being no guarantee the users will renew them at the end of that period. As such it is recommended that the provision of the bus shelters and the Residential MetroCard Scheme not be sought in this instance.

Overall therefore, in highway terms, there is no objection to the proposal and the proposal satisfies the requirements of policy TR1 of the Core Strategy.

5. Drainage

Paragraph 163 of the National Planning Policy Framework states that when determining any planning applications, local planning authorities should ensure that flood risk is not increased elsewhere. Paragraph 165 states that major developments should incorporate sustainable drainage systems unless there is clear evidence that this would be inappropriate. The systems used should: a) take account of advice from the lead local flood authority; b) have appropriate proposed minimum operational standards; c) have maintenance arrangements in place to ensure an acceptable standard of operation for the lifetime of the development; and d) where possible, provide multifunctional benefits.

Policy EN7 of the Core Strategy states that the Council will manage flood risk pro- actively which policy EN8 states that proposals for development will only be acceptable provided there is no adverse impact on water bodies and groundwater resources, in terms of their quantity, quality and the important ecological features they support.

In relation to the drainage of the site the Applicant proposes to connect to the mains sewer with regard to the discharge of foul water whilst with regard to the disposal of surface water it is intended to connect to an existing watercourse. The discharge of surface water to the Bradford Beck to the north of the application site will require pipes to be laid in third party land or connection into the main sewer in Ingleby Road and subsequent discharge into the Bradford Beck. A Requisition application has been made by the Applicant to Yorkshire Water to begin the process of drawing up the scheme and its subsequent implementation by Yorkshire Water. Yorkshire Water does have the power to lay pipes in third land under their permitted development rights. It has been confirmed by the Applicant that Yorkshire Water will be undertaking the drainage works outside the application site.

The drainage proposals have been fully considered by the Lead Local Flood Authority and Yorkshire Water and no objections have been raised subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions.

Page 135 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

Overall therefore there is no objection to the proposal on drainage grounds and the proposal satisfies the requirements of policies EN7 and EN8 of the Core Strategy.

6. Trees

Policy EN5 of the Core Strategy states that the Council will seek to preserve and enhance the contribution that trees and areas of woodland cover make to the character of the district.

There are a number of trees located along the boundaries of the site with the majority being located along the western boundary separating the site from the adjacent undeveloped site. These trees are identified as having an important function not only visually but also in protecting views into the site thereby minimising the visual intrusion onto the gardens of any dwelling backing onto this joint boundary. A number of these trees are to be retained and the dwellings can be sited far enough away from the trees to ensure their future retention. Appropriate protection will be required during the construction phase of the development and this will be secures through a condition.

As part of the proposal additional tree planting is to take place as part of the creation of a landscaped buffer along part of the northern boundary of the site. The creation of this buffer zone will more than compensate for the loss of any trees within the site that are required to be removed.

As such therefore there is no objection to the proposal will regards to the impact on the existing trees in the vicinity of the site and the proposal therefore satisfies the requirements of policy EN5 of the Core Strategy.

7. Secured by Design

Paragraph 91 of the National Planning Policy Framework states that Planning decisions should aim to achieve healthy, inclusive and safe places which are safe and accessible, so that crime and disorder, and the fear of crime, do not undermine the quality of life or community cohesion – for example through the use of clear and legible pedestrian routes, and high quality public space, which encourage the active and continual use of public areas.

Policy DS5 of the Core Strategy states that development proposals should make a positive contribution to people’s lives through high quality, inclusive design. In particular they should, amongst other things, be designed to ensure a safe and secure environment and reduce the opportunities for crime.

The West Yorkshire Police Architectural Liaison Officer has not raised an objection to the principle of the development but has raised a number of comments on specific aspects of the proposal with these being as follows:

Boundary treatment: The rear plot dividers are to be 1500mm high timber fencing which provides adequate security for the dwellings. With regards to plots 145, 146 and 150 the plans show that the existing boundaries are being retained. If the fence is in a poor state of repair or below the recommended height of 1800mm, then replacement fencing should be added to the residents boundary to increase security. The plan doesn’t refer to any gated access to the rear gardens. Gates are strongly recommended to restrict

Page 136 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee any stranger access into rear gardens. The west boundary of the site shows the existing stone wall with mature shrubs/hedges. If the height of the wall is below 1800mm as there is the mature planting, the natural border provides the height and privacy. If there are gaps in the planting which could allow access, these should be filled with defensible plants to ensure that no access is gained – the provision of the appropriate boundary treatment is welcomed and provides a safe and secure environment for the future occupiers. With regards to the provision of gates the plans do show a form of enclosure will be provided which restricts access to the rears of the properties. This will again further enhance the security of the domestic curtilages.

Corner plots 52, 55, 153, and, 197 together with plots that have land to the front gardens (such as plots 101/102, 245/246) should include either knee rail fence or shrub planting in order to prevent parking on the corners or parking on the grassed areas. Where there is the land at the front, if these areas are fenced around or include planting separating the space it ensures that each residents takes responsibility and ownership for their own area, otherwise these areas of land can be neglected and be used for littering unless there will be a good management plan to maintain these areas – the inclusion of low level fencing or planting on the front boundaries would provide a sense of enclosure for the residents but would impact on the open plan nature of the streetscene and if they are not maintained properly can result in the appearance of the streetscene becoming unattractive. It is not seen as an essential element in the scheme as it neither adds to the security of the development nor significantly improves the appearance of the streetscene. In this instance therefore it is not recommended that this be secured.

Natural surveillance: The site does promote good natural surveillance with houses orientated to face each other, however, there are a few plots that would benefit from having a small side window in an active room (i.e. lounge or kitchen) that can provide more natural surveillance for the resident to view their own vehicle. This would apply to the following plots; 4, 6, 52, 74, 75, 85, 91, 102, 109, 110, 141, 152 and 165 – the inclusion of a side window is not a guarantee of natural surveillance. The parking spaces do benefit from good natural surveillance from the public highway and this is considered to be sufficient.

External lighting: Each plot should include external lighting above the front and rear access doors such as low energy photo electric cell or dusk until dawn lights with warm white led lights as this will illuminate the entrances – security of dwellings is outside the control of the planning system and is controlled under Building Regulations Approved Document Q. It is therefore up to the developer to accord with the relevant requirements of this document.

Security or dwellings: Doors and windows (including locks) should be to standards that comply with Secured by Design standards. Intruder alarms should also be fitted to the dwellings to further improve security – security of dwellings is outside the control of the planning system and is controlled under Building Regulations Approved Document Q. It is therefore up to the developer to accord with the relevant requirements of this document.

As such therefore there is no objection to the proposal will regards to the provision of a safe and secure environment for the future residents and the proposal therefore satisfies the requirements of policy DS5 of the Core Strategy.

Page 137 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

8. Contaminated land

Paragraph 178 of the National Planning Policy Framework states that decisions should ensure that: a) a site is suitable for its proposed use taking account of ground conditions and any risks arising from land instability and contamination. This includes risks arising from natural hazards or former activities such as mining, and any proposals for mitigation including land remediation (as well as potential impacts on the natural environment arising from that remediation); b) after remediation, as a minimum, land should not be capable of being determined as contaminated land under Part IIA of the Environmental Protection Act 1990; and c) adequate site investigation information, prepared by a competent person, is available to inform these assessments.

Paragraph 179 states that where a site is affected by contamination or land stability issues, responsibility for securing a safe development rests with the developer and/or landowner.

Policy EN8 of the Core Strategy states that proposals which are likely to cause pollution or are likely to result in exposure to sources of pollution (including noise, odour and light pollution) or risks to safety, will only be permitted if measures can be implemented to minimise pollution and risk to a level that provides a high standard of protection for health, environmental quality and amenity.

A Geoenvironmental Appraisal has been submitted in support of the application and has been thoroughly assessed by the Councils Environmental Health Department.

The brief anticipates ‘that more thorough investigation, including additional trial pitting, chemical and geotechnical testing and a mining investigation (drilling of the underlying Elland Flags Sandstone), is likely to be required prior to discharge of planning conditions and to construction.’

The exploratory geoenvironmental appraisal reviews previous reports prepared for the site and describes the findings of the Lithos investigation. The report conclusions include that ‘a more thorough and comprehensive site investigation will be required in order to discharge planning conditions and to provide appropriate advice during construction’. The hotspots of contamination already identified may require further delineation. Environmental Health Department concur with the recommendations which must include the gas monitoring recommended within the report. A site regrade is anticipated and if this does take place there is the potential to expose and move currently unidentified contamination at different levels within the site must be taken into consideration. This should again be taken into consideration in future reports and remediation strategies as should the potential for migration of contamination from adjacent sites should be taken into account in the future site investigation.

The Minerals Team have stated that the site is located in a Minerals Safeguarding Area for sandstone, clay and coal, that is the area has been identified as containing a potential mineral resource. However, with the former quarrying and the fairly constrained site it is highly unlikely to be viable to extract any minerals that maybe present. As such no objection is raised.

Page 138 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

Overall therefore there is no objection to the proposal with regards to ground conditions subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions. The proposal therefore satisfies the requirements of policy EN8 of the Core Strategy.

9. Biodiversity

Paragraph 175 of the National Planning Policy Framework states that when determining planning applications, Local Planning Authorities should ensure that if significant harm to biodiversity resulting from a development cannot be avoided (through locating on an alternative site with less harmful impacts), adequately mitigated, or, as a last resort, compensated for, then planning permission should be refused.

Policy EN2 of the Core Strategy states that development proposals that may have an adverse impact on important habitats and species outside Designated Sites need to be assessed against the impact it will have on habitats and species as well as the extent to which appropriate measures to mitigate any potentially harmful impacts can be identified and carried out.

An Ecological Impact Assessment together with a Biodiversity Net Gain Report have been submitted in support of the application. The reports found that the site supported 3 species of bat with the levels of activity being heavily focussed on the tree-lined western boundary and to a lesser extent within 3 mature trees along the northern boundary of the site. It is suggested in the report that where trees are to be removed from the western boundary then they should be replaced with a native species. The creation of the new planting buffer on the northern boundary of the site will create a new wildlife habitat and will tie up with the 3 mature trees further west thus resulting in an enhanced bat flight line and foraging area along the northern boundary. Additional tree planting within the domestic curtilages will also enhance the tree cover throughout the site and be beneficial to the wildlife.

With regards to breeding birds it is acknowledged that the tree cover within the site has the potential to support small numbers of urban/urban-fringe breeding birds. Vegetation removal shall therefore be undertaken outside of the main bird breeding season (March to August inclusive) if possible. The creation of vegetated buffer on the northern Site boundary, combined with the establishment of gardens, many of which are likely to be planted with trees and shrubs, is likely to result in the creation of habitat which is suitable for a similar range of birds, as occur at present. Furthermore, several of the new residents may establish wild bird feeding stations in their gardens and/ or erect nest boxes on their properties. To enhance the Site for a range of birds of conservation concern 5% of the new properties shall have bird nest boxes attached to them, during construction. In this way, new nesting opportunities shall be created for species such as the house sparrow (Passer domesticus); starling (Sturnus vulgaris); and swift (Apus apus).

The Biodiversity officer has assessed the supporting documentation and have suggested that a well justified net gain analysis has been provided. Additional tree planting, both within gardens and in open areas outside the domestic curtilages, and the provision of ecological enhancements such as integrated bat and bird boxes will ensure that the scheme does provide appropriate ecological benefits to the wider area. An appropriate condition is recommended with regard to securing these benefits during the construction phase and their future maintenance for a 10 year period.

Page 139 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

Subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions to secure the ecological benefits there is no objection to the proposal with regards to ecological impact and the proposal satisfies the requirements of policy EN2 of the Core Strategy.

10. Affordable housing

Policy HO11 of the Core Strategy states the Council will ensure that there is a sufficient supply of good quality affordable housing distributed throughout the District and, subject to viability, will negotiate up to 15% in towns, suburbs and villages.

The site is located in an area where the affordable housing requirement is the on-site provision of up to 15% of the number of units to a Registered Provider for delivery at affordable rent. The provision of the affordable housing would normally be secured via a Section 106 Legal Agreement. However the Applicant has stated that the development cannot incorporate the provision any affordable housing as this would make the development unviable. In support of this the Applicant has submitted a Financial Viability Appraisal that has been independently assessed and has concurred with the conclusion that the development could not support the provision of any affordable housing without have a significant impact on the viability of the proposal.

In this instance therefore it is recommended that no affordable housing is secured as part of the development and through the evidence submitted it is considered that the proposal satisfies the requirements of policy HO11 of the Core Strategy.

11. Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL)

The application site is located within CIL zone 4 which has a liability of £0 per square metre of newly developed floor spaces.

12. Other issues

One other issue has been raised during the publicity exercise that has not been addressed in the earlier sections of this report. This issue, together with the response, is as follows:

The site could be used as a cemetery and could take up to 50 years to fill – the application under consideration is for a residential development scheme. Other possible uses of the site may be considered more suitable by members of the public but these cannot be used as a reason to refuse an application.

Community Safety Implications: There are no other community safety implications other than those referred to in the main body of the report.

Equality Act 2010, Section 149: Section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 states that the Council must, in the exercise of its functions “have due regard to the need to eliminate conduct that this is prohibited by the Act, advancing equality of opportunity between people who share a protected characteristic and people who do not share it, and fostering good relations between people who share a protected characteristic and people who do not share it. For this purpose Section 149 defines “relevant protected characteristics” as including a range of

Page 140 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee characteristics including disability, race and religion. In this particular case due regard has been paid to the Section 149 duty but it is not considered there are any issues in this regard relevant to this application.

Reason for Granting Planning Permission: The scheme provides a residential scheme on an unallocated previously developed site. The scale, form, layout and design of the proposal are acceptable and present no concerns with regard to residential amenity, visual amenity and highway safety. The proposal is considered acceptable and, with the attached conditions, satisfies the requirements of policies E3 and E6 of the Replacement Unitary Development Plan together with policies P1, SC1, SC4, SC9, TR1, TR2, TR3, H05, H06, H08, H09, H11, EN2, EN5, EN7, EN8, EN12, DS1, DS2, DS3, DS4, DS5, ID2, and, ID3 of the Local Plan for Bradford, and, the relevant paragraphs of the National Planning Policy Framework.

Conditions of Approval: 1. Time limit The development to which this notice relates must be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this notice.

Reason: To accord with the requirements of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990 (as amended).

2. Approved plans The development hereby approved shall only be carried out in accordance with the following plans:

Drawing showing the Arboricultural Impact Assessment dated November 2018 and received by the Local Planning Authority on the 21st March 2019; Drawing showing the Tree Constraints Plan and received by the Local Planning Authority on the 21st March 2019; Drawing number S8983 showing the Site Survey and received by the Local Planning Authority on the 21st March 2019; Drawing number 201/1F showing the 201 Dwelling Type and received by the Local Planning Authority on the 21st March 2019; Drawing number 202/1F showing the 202 Dwelling Type and received by the Local Planning Authority on the 21st March 2019; Drawing number 212/1 showing the 212 Dwelling Type and received by the Local Planning Authority on the 21st March 2019; Drawing number 301/1G showing the 301 Dwelling Type and received by the Local Planning Authority on the 21st March 2019; Drawing number 3028-0-000 showing the Site Location Plan and received by the Local Planning Authority on the 21st March 2019; Drawing number 303/1E showing the 303 Dwelling Type and received by the Local Planning Authority on the 21st March 2019; Drawing number 304/1E showing the 304 Dwelling Type and received by the Local Planning Authority on the 21st March 2019; Drawing number 307/1B showing the 307 Dwelling Type and received by the Local Planning Authority on the 21st March 2019; Drawing number 309/1E showing the 309 Dwelling Type and received by the Local Planning Authority on the 21st March 2019;

Page 141 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

Drawing number 310/1D showing the 310 Dwelling Type and received by the Local Planning Authority on the 21st March 2019; Drawing number 311/1A showing the 311 Dwelling Type and received by the Local Planning Authority on the 21st March 2019; Drawing number 313/1 showing the 313 Dwelling Type and received by the Local Planning Authority on the 21st March 2019; Drawing number 314/1 showing the 314 Dwelling Type and received by the Local Planning Authority on the 21st March 2019; Drawing number 315/1 showing the 315 Dwelling Type and received by the Local Planning Authority on the 21st March 2019; Drawing number 401/1G showing the 401 Dwelling Type and received by the Local Planning Authority on the 21st March 2019; Drawing number 403/1H showing the 403 Dwelling Type and received by the Local Planning Authority on the 21st March 2019; Drawing number SD-100 Rev D showing the Boundary Treatments – 1800mm High Timber Fence and received by the Local Planning Authority on the 21st March 2019; Drawing number 06.01 showing the Longitudinal Sections (Sheet 1 of 4) and received by the Local Planning Authority on the 31st May 2019; Drawing number 06.02 showing the Longitudinal Sections (Sheet 2 of 4) and received by the Local Planning Authority on the 31st May 2019; Drawing number 06.03 showing the Longitudinal Sections (Sheet 3 of 4) and received by the Local Planning Authority on the 31st May 2019; Drawing number 06.04 showing the Longitudinal Sections (Sheet 4 of 4) and received by the Local Planning Authority on the 31st May 2019; Drawing number 08.01 showing the External Works Layout (Sheet 1 of 4) and received by the Local Planning Authority on the 31st May 2019; Drawing number 08.02 showing the (Sheet 2 of 4) and received by the Local Planning Authority on the 31st May 2019; Drawing number 08.03 showing the (Sheet 3 of 4) and received by the Local Planning Authority on the 31st May 2019; Drawing number 08.04 showing the (Sheet 4 of 4) and received by the Local Planning Authority on the 31st May 2019; Drawing number 2994/1 Rev B showing the Detailed Landscape Proposals and received by the Local Planning Authority on the 13th June 2019; Drawing number 2994/2 Rev B showing the Detailed Landscape Proposals and received by the Local Planning Authority on the 13th June 2019; Drawing number 03.01 showing the Section 104 Layout (Sheet 1 of 2) and received by the Local Planning Authority on the 5th September 2019; Drawing number 03.02 showing the Section 104 Layout (Sheet 2 of 2) and received by the Local Planning Authority on the 5th September 2019; and, Drawing number 3028-0-001 Rev Q showing the Proposed Site Layout and received by the Local Planning Authority on the 5th September 2019.

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt as to the terms under which this planning permission has been granted since amended plans have been received.

3. Vehicular/pedestrian access Before any part of the development is brought into use, the proposed means of vehicular and pedestrian access hereby approved shall be laid out, hard surfaced, sealed and drained within the site in accordance with the approved plan and completed to a constructional specification approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Page 142 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

Reason: To ensure that a suitable form of access is made available to serve the development in the interests of highway safety and to accord with Policies DS4 and DS5 of the Local Plan for Bradford.

4. Off-street car parking Before any individual dwelling is first occupied, the off street car parking facility relating to that dwelling unit shall be laid out, hard surfaced, sealed and drained within the curtilage of the site. This shall be in accordance with constructional details, including those of the proposed gradient and surfacing of the driveways, which shall first have been submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to accord with Policy TR2 of the Local Plan for Bradford.

5. No mud on highway The developer shall prevent any mud, dirt or debris being carried on to the adjoining highway as a result of the site construction works. Details of such preventive measures shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before development commences and the measures so approved shall remain in place for the duration of construction works on the site.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to accord with policies DS4 and DS5 of the Local Plan for Bradford.

6. Wheel washing facilities Before any development commences on site, full details of arrangements for wheel cleaning of construction vehicles and equipment, including the location of such a facility in relation to the highway and arrangements for disposal of contaminated surface water shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The details and measures so approved shall be installed, maintained in good operational condition and used for wheel cleaning whilst ever construction or delivery vehicles are leaving the site.

Reason: To prevent mud being taken on to the public highway in the interests of highway safety and to accord with policies DS4 and DS5 of the Local Plan for Bradford.

7. Construction Plan Notwithstanding the provision of Class A, Part 4 of Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995, or any subsequent legislation, the development hereby permitted shall not be begun until a plan specifying arrangements for the management of the construction site has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The construction plan shall include the following details: i) full details of the contractor's means of access to the site including measures to deal with surface water drainage; ii) hours of construction work, including any works of demolition; iii) hours of delivery of materials; iv) location of site management offices and/or sales office; v) location of materials storage compounds, loading/unloading areas and areas for construction vehicles to turn within the site; vi) car parking areas for construction workers, sales staff and customers;

Page 143 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee vii) the extent of and surface treatment of all temporary road accesses leading to compound/storage areas and the construction depths of these accesses, their levels and gradients; viii) temporary warning and direction signing on the approaches to the site

The construction plan details as approved shall be implemented before the development hereby permitted is begun and shall be kept in place, operated and adhered to at all times until the development is completed. In addition, no vehicles involved in the construction of the development shall enter or leave the site of the development except via the temporary road access comprised within the approved construction plan.

Reason: To ensure the provision of proper site construction facilities on the interests of highway safety and amenity of the surrounding environment and its occupants and to accord with policies TR1, TR3, DS4, and, DS5 of the Local Plan for Bradford.

8. Unexpected contamination If, during the course of development, contamination not previously identified is found to be present, no further works shall be undertaken in the affected area and the contamination shall be reported to the Local Planning Authority as soon as reasonably practicable (but within a maximum of 5 days from the find). Prior to further works being carried out in the identified area, a further assessment shall be made and appropriate remediation implemented in accordance with a scheme also agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure that the site is remediated appropriately for its intended use and to comply with policy EN8 of the Local Plan for Bradford.

9. Materials importation A methodology for quality control of any material brought to the site for use in filling, level raising, landscaping and garden soils shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to materials being brought to site.

Reason: To ensure that all materials brought to the site are acceptable, to ensure that contamination/pollution is not brought into the development site and to comply with policy EN8 of the Local Plan for Bradford.

10. Site Investigation Scheme Prior to development commencing, a further Phase 2 site investigation and risk assessment methodology, to assess the nature and extent of any contamination on the site, whether or not it originates on the site, must be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors and to comply with policy EN8 of the Local Plan for Bradford.

11. Site Investigation Implementation Prior to development commencing the Phase 2 site investigation and risk assessment, in addition to that already submitted, must be completed in accordance with the

Page 144 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee approved site investigation scheme. A written report, including a remedial options appraisal scheme, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure that the site is remediated appropriately for its intended use and to comply with policy EN8 of the Local Plan for Bradford.

12. Remediation strategy Prior to construction of the development commencing on site, a detailed remediation strategy, which removes unacceptable risks to all identified receptors from contamination, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The remediation strategy must include proposals for verification of remedial works. Where necessary, the strategy shall include proposals for phasing of works and verification. The strategy shall be implemented as approved.

Reason: To ensure that the site is remediated appropriately for its intended use and to comply with policy EN8 of the Local Plan for Bradford.

13. Remediation verification A remediation verification report, including where necessary quality control of imported soil materials and clean cover systems, prepared in accordance with the approved remediation strategy shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the first occupation of each phase of the development (if phased) or prior to the first occupation of any part of the development (if not phased).

Reason: To ensure that the site is remediated appropriately for its intended use and to comply with policy EN8 of the Local Plan for Bradford.

14. Domestic Electric Vehicle Recharging Points Before the date of first occupation every household on the development shall be provided with access to a purpose built EV charging point. The charging points shall be provided in accordance with a scheme submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall meet at least the following minimum standard for numbers and power output:-

 A Standard Electric Vehicle Charging point (of a minimum output of 16A/3.5kW) provided at every residential unit that has a dedicated parking space  One Standard Electric Vehicle Charging Point (of a minimum output of 16A/3.5kW) for every 10 unallocated residential parking spaces  Buildings and parking spaces that are to be provided with charging points shall not be brought into use until the charging points are installed and operational.  Charging points installed shall be retained thereafter.

Reason: To facilitate the uptake and use of low emission vehicles by future occupants and reduce the emission impact of traffic arising from the development in line with the council’s Low Emission Strategy, policy EN8 of the Bradford Local Plan and National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).

15. Materials Before development above damp proof course commences on site, arrangements shall be made with the Local Planning Authority for the inspection of all external facing and roofing materials to be used in the development hereby permitted. The samples shall

Page 145 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee then be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the development constructed in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To ensure the use of appropriate materials in the interests of visual amenity and to accord with policy DS1 of the Local Plan for Bradford.

16. Landscape scheme implementation In the first planting season following the completion of the development or as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, landscaping and new tree planting shall be implemented at the site in accordance with the approved Detailed Landscape Proposals drawings referenced 2994/1 Rev B and 2994/2 Rev B dated 07 Dec 18 and received by the Council on the 13th June 2019.

Any trees or plants comprising the approved landscaping becoming diseased or dying or which are removed or damaged within the first 10 years after the completion of planting shall be removed immediately after the disease/death and a replacement tree or planting of the same species/specification shall be planted in the same position no later than the end of the first available planting season following the disease/death of the original planting.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and to accord Policies EN5, DS2 and DS3 of the Local Plan for Bradford.

17. Landscape management programme Prior to occupation of any part of the development, a schedule of landscape maintenance for a minimum period of 10 years shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The schedule shall include a plan to define all communal hard and soft landscaped areas to be maintained under the maintenance regime, an outline of maintenance works to be undertaken and the frequency of those work, together with details of responsibilities for implementing the maintenance regime by a Management Company or other agency. It shall provide email, postal address and telephone contact details of such a company or agency.

Landscape maintenance of the identified areas shall subsequently be carried out in accordance with the approved schedule for the period agreed.

Reason: To ensure effective future maintenance of the landscaped areas in the interests of visual amenity and to accord with Policies DS2, DS3 and DS 5 of the Local Plan for Bradford.

18. Biodiversity enhancements The development shall be carried out in accordance with the biodiversity enhancement recommendations contained within both the Ecological Impact Assessment reference 424.03044.00107 and dated June 2019 and the Biodiversity Net Gain Report reference 424.03044.00107 and dated September 2019. A timetable for the implementation of the recommendations shall first be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before the development hereby permitted commences above damp proof course on site.

Reason: To enhance the biological value of the site and to accord with policy EN2 of the Local Plan for Bradford.

Page 146 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

19. Retention of garages Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (or any subsequent equivalent legislation) the integral garages within the dwelling(s) hereby permitted shall remain available for the purposes of garaging and no subsequent alterations to convert these garages to primary residential accommodation addition shall be carried out without the express written permission of the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure these facilities remain for parking purposes, in the interests of amenity and highway safety and to accord with Policies TR2, DS4 and DS5 of the Local Plan for Bradford.

20. Implementation of tree protection fencing The development shall not begin, nor shall there be any demolition, site preparation or ground works, nor shall any materials or machinery be brought on to the site, nor any works carried out to any trees that are to be retained on the site until the tree protection fencing and other tree protection measures have been installed in the locations and in strict accordance with the specifications and details shown on the submitted Arboricultural Impact Assessment and associated drawings.

No ground works, development or demolition shall begin until the Local Planning Authority has inspected and given its written confirmation that the agreed tree protection measures have been installed in accordance with those details.

Reason: To ensure that trees are adequately protected prior to development activity beginning on the site in the interests of amenity and to accord with Policy EN5 of the Local Plan for Bradford.

21. Traffic Regulation Order The development shall not be brought into use until all reasonable endeavours have been undertaken to promote a Traffic Regulation Order to restrict parking on Northside Road together with a yellow box junction at the junction of Northside Road and Ingleby Road as identified on the approved plans. Reasonable endeavours shall constitute instructing the Council to proceed with the required Traffic Regulation Order and paying all reasonable costs incurred in processing the aforementioned Order.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to accord with Policy TR2 of the Local Plan for Bradford.

22. Noise attenuation measures The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the recommendations contained within the Memorandum from SLR Consulting Ltd dated 10th October 2019 and referenced 403.03044.00108 in relation to the standards for glazing and ventilation to be installed in the residential dwellings.

Reason: In the interests of the amenities of occupiers of surrounding properties and air quality and to accord with policies DS3, DS5 and EN8 of the Local Plan for Bradford.

23. Separate system of foul and surface water The site shall be developed with separate systems of drainage for foul and surface water on and off site.

Page 147 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

Reason; In the interest of satisfactory and sustainable drainage and to accord with policy EN7 of the Local Plan for Bradford.

24. Means of disposal of surface water drainage No piped discharge of surface water from the application site shall take place until works to provide a satisfactory outfall, other than the existing local public sewerage , for surface water have been completed in accordance with details submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority .

Reason: To ensure that the site is properly drained and in order to prevent overloading, surface water is not discharged to the foul sewer network and to accord with policy EN7 of the Local Plan for Bradford.

25. Surface Water Drainage Maintenance and Management If the surface water drainage scheme isn’t going to be adopted by Yorkshire Water, the development shall not begin until a Maintenance Plan for the surface water drainage scheme has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Lead Local Flood Authority. Once built, the drainage scheme shall be maintained thereafter, in accordance with the approved Plan.

Reason: In the interest of satisfactory drainage and to accord with policy EN7 of the Local Plan for Bradford.

26. Temporary drainage strategy Notwithstanding the drainage details contained in the supporting information, no groundworks to the development shall commence until a temporary drainage strategy outlining the drainage arrangements for different construction phases of the project has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall thereafter only proceed in strict accordance with the approved temporary drainage strategy.

Reason: In the interest of satisfactory drainage and to accord with policy EN7 of the Local Plan for Bradford.

27. Disposal of foul water drainage The development shall not begin until details of a scheme for foul and surface water drainage have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The maximum surface water discharge rate, off-site, shall not exceed 100 litres per second. The scheme so approved shall thereafter be implemented in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: In the interests of the amenity of future occupiers, pollution prevention and the effective management of flood risk and to accord with Policies DS5, EN7 and EN8 of the Local Plan for Bradford.

Footnote: 1. YALPAG The applicant should have regard to:  YALPAG (formerly YAHPAC) ‘Technical Guidance for Developers, Landowners and Consultants. Development on Land Affected by Contamination’  YALPAG ‘Verification Requirements for Cover Systems’ if remediation or quality control of imported soil materials is required, and

Page 148 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

 YALPAG (2016) guidance on ‘Verification Requirements for Gas Protection Systems’ if gas protection is necessary. Current editions of these documents are available on the Bradford MDC website https://www.bradford.gov.uk/planning-and-building-control/planning- applications/planning-application-forms/

Page 149 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 10/

Report of the Assistant Director (Planning, Transportation & Highways) to the meeting of Regulatory and Appeals Committee to be held on 5th December 2019 Y

Subject:

A Reserved matters application requesting consideration of access, appearance, landscaping, layout and scale for a residential development of 12 dwellings (pursuant to outline approval reference 18/01604/MAO).

Summary statement: Outline planning permission for the construction of 12 dwellings was granted by the Regulatory and Appeals Committee on 22nd August 2018. The resolution required that any Reserved Matters application must be submitted to the Regulatory and Appeals Committee for determination. The resolution also required that any reserved matters application for the layout of the development should explore all possible opportunities for the provision of parking to cater for existing residents.

This reserved matters application seeks consideration of access, appearance, landscaping layout and scale. The proposed layout includes additional car parking provision to assist in reducing the demand for on street car parking in the locality.

The Reserved Matters application is recommended for approval subject to the conditions included within the report at Appendix 1.

Julian Jackson Portfolio: Assistant Director (Planning, Transportation & Highways) Change Programme, Housing, Planning and Transport Report Contact: John Eyles Overview & Scrutiny Area: Major Development Manager Phone: (01274) 434380 Regeneration and Economy E-mail: [email protected]

Page 151 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

1. SUMMARY The Regulatory and Appeals Committee are asked to consider the recommendations for the determination of planning application reference 19/02329/MAR made by the Assistant Director (Planning, Transportation and Highways) as set out in the Technical Report at Appendix 1.

2. BACKGROUND Attached at Appendix 1 is a copy of the Officer’s Report which identifies the material considerations of the proposal.

3. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS All considerations material to the determination of this planning application are set out in the Officer’s Report at Appendix 1.

4. FINANCIAL & RESOURCE APPRAISAL There are no financial or resource implications arising from the development.

5. RISK MANAGEMENT & GOVERNANCE ISSUES No implications.

6. LEGAL APPRAISAL The determination of the application is within the Council’s powers as Local Planning Authority.

7. OTHER IMPLICATIONS All considerations material to the determination of the application are set out in the technical report at Appendix 1.

7.1 EQUALITY & DIVERSITY In writing this report due regard has been has been taken of the need to eliminate unlawful discrimination, harassment and victimisation, advance equality of opportunity between different groups and foster good relations between different groups, in accordance with the duty placed upon Local Authorities by Section 149 of the Equality Act 2010.

The context of the site, the development scheme proposed and the representations received have been reviewed to identify the potential for the determination of this application to disadvantage any individuals or groups of people with characteristics protected under the Equality Act 2010.

The outcome of this review is that there is that there is not considered to be any sound reason to conclude that the proposed development would have a significantly detrimental impact on any groups of people or individuals with protected characteristics. Full details of the process of public consultation undertaken and a summary of the comments made are attached at Appendix 1.

7.2 SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS The development meets the sustainability criteria outlined in relevant national and local planning policies. The site is located in close proximity to Highgate Road, which provides nearby public transport connections to access facilities and services further afield. The development would not result in either the formation of a new settlement or significant sprawl of an existing settlement. No adverse sustainability implications are

Page 152 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee therefore foreseen.

7.3 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS IMPACTS The development of new buildings and land for residential purposes will invariably result in an increase in greenhouse gas emissions associated with both construction operations and the activities of future users of the site. Consideration should also be given to the likely traffic levels associated with this development. Consideration should also be given as to whether the location of the proposed development is such that the use of sustainable modes of travel would be best facilitated and future greenhouse gases associated with activities of the residents are minimised.

It is accepted that the proposed development would result in greenhouse gas emissions. However, it is considered that such emissions are likely to be relatively lower than would be the case for alternative, less sustainable locations.

In order to encourage sustainable travel the approved Outline Planning Permission is subject to a planning condition requiring the provision of Electric Vehicle (EV) charging points at a rate of 1 per residential unit in line with the Type 1 Mitigation requirements set out in the Bradford Low Emission Strategy.

7.4 COMMUNITY SAFETY IMPLICATIONS All community safety implications material to the determination of this planning application are set out in the Officer’s Report at Appendix 1.

7.5 HUMAN RIGHTS ACT Articles 6 and 8 and Article 1 of the first protocol all apply (European Convention on Human Rights). Article 6- the right to a fair and public hearing. The Council must ensure that it has taken into account the views of all those who have an interest in, or whom may be affected by the proposal.

7.6 TRADE UNION None.

7.7 WARD IMPLICATIONS The Technical Report at Appendix 1 summarises the material planning issues raised by representations and the appraisal gives full consideration to the effects of the development upon residents within Queensbury Ward.

7.8 AREA COMMITTEE ACTION PLAN IMPLICATIONS None.

7.9 IMPLICATIONS FOR CORPORATE PARENTING None.

7.10 ISSUES ARISING FROM PRIVACY IMPACT ASSESMENT None.

8. NOT FOR PUBLICATION DOCUMENTS None.

9. OPTIONS The Committee can approve the application as per the recommendation contained

Page 153 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee within Appendix 1, or refuse the application.

If the Committee decides that the application should be refused, it may refuse the application. In which, case the reason(s) for refusal would have to be given, based upon development plan policies or other material planning considerations.

10. RECOMMENDATIONS This reserved matters application is recommended for approval, subject to the conditions included within Appendix 1.

11. APPENDICES Appendix 1: Technical Report

12. BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS National Planning Policy Framework 2019 Replacement Unitary Development Plan Local Plan for Bradford Application Reference- 18/01604/MAO

Page 154 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

Page 155 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

Appendix 1 5th December 2019

Ward: Queensbury (ward 20) Recommendation:

To approve the reserved matters subject to the conditions included within the technical report.

Application Number: 19/02329/MAR

Type of Application/Proposal and Address:

A Reserved matters application requesting consideration of access, appearance, landscaping, layout and scale for a residential development of 12 dwellings (pursuant to outline approval reference 18/01604/MAO) on, land at Highgate Road, Queensbury, Bradford with access taken from Woodlands Grove.

Applicant: Heights Developments Ltd

Agent: Mr Richard Langley Langley Architectural

Site Description:

The site is comprised of a broadly rectangular parcel of grazing land with an area of 0.39ha.To the north the site backs onto the garden boundaries of residential properties on Highgate Road. To the east the site abuts the rear garden boundaries of terraced dwellings on Woodlands Road. To the south the site boundary is comprised of a post and rail fence. Public footpath Bradford South 228 runs parallel with the southern boundary and is enclosed by a dry stone wall, beyond which there is agricultural land located within the Green Belt.

Relevant Site History:

18/01604/MAO- Outline application for construction of 12 dwellings with all matters reserved-Granted- 17.09.2018

The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF): The National Planning Policy Framework is now a material planning consideration on any development proposal. The Framework highlights the fact that the purpose of the planning system is to contribute to the achievement of sustainable development and that there is a presumption in favour of sustainable development which can deliver:- i) Planning for prosperity (an economic role) - by ensuring that sufficient land of the right type and in the right places is available to allow growth and innovation;

Page 156 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee ii) Planning for people (a social role) - by promotion of strong, vibrant and healthy communities by providing an increase supply of housing to meet the needs of present and future generations and by creating a good quality built environment with accessible local services; iii) Planning for places (an environmental role) - by protecting and enhancing the natural, built and historic environment, adapting to climate change including moving to a low-carbon economy.

As such the Framework suggests local planning authorities should approve development proposals that accord with statutory plans without delay.

Replacement Unitary Development Plan (RUDP):

Allocation

The site is unallocated, however, the main body of the site was formerly allocated as a Phase 2 Housing Site (Ref: BS/H2.2):

BS/H2.2 WOODLAND ROAD, CLAYTON HEIGHTS 0.83ha Existing site carried forward from the 1998 adopted Plan. Greenfield site.

Proposals and Policies

The following adopted Core Strategy policies are considered to be relevant to the proposed development.

P1- Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development SC1- Overall Approach and Key Spatial Priorities SC4- Hierarchy of Settlements SC6- Green Infrastructure SC9- Making Great Places TR1- Travel Reduction and Modal Shift TR2- Parking Policy TR3- Public Transport, Cycling and Walking HO5- Density of Housing Schemes HO8- Housing Mix HO9- Housing Quality EN5- Trees and Woodland EN7- Flood Risk EN8- Environmental Protection DS1- Achieving Good Design DS3- Urban Character DS4-Streets and Movement DS5- Safe and Inclusive Places ID3- Developer Contributions

Parish Council

Not in a Parish.

Publicity and Number of Representations:

Page 157 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

The application was publicised by press notice, site notice and neighbour notification letters. The expiry date for the submission of comments was 18th July 2019. A total five objections were received. Summary of Representations Received:

General

-No information detailing the heights of the proposed dwellings. -The proposed houses would be built over 2 metres higher than the ground level of the houses in Woodlands Road. -Insufficient school place available in the surrounding area. -Health services in the surrounding area are already overburdened. -A mature flowering cherry tree has been described as a common beech tree. -Brownfield sites should be developed before greenfield land. -The site address is incorrectly described as Land at Highgate Road.

Highways

-Unsuitable access to the development via Woodlands Road and Woodlands Grove. -Pedestrian safety implications for residents of Woodlands Road and Woodlands Grove. -Highway safety implications for Highgate Road. -Loss of amenity and privacy for adjacent residences -Vehicles parked on street on Woodlands Grove and Woodlands Road restrict access to the proposed development and prevent access for larger vehicles such as refuse collections, ambulances and other emergency vehicles. -Increased traffic volume on Woodlands Road and Woodlands Grove is unacceptable. - The junction of Woodlands Road with Highgate Road is on a stretch of road where motorist attempt dangerous overtaking manoeuvres. An increase in the number of vehicle trips will exacerbate problems at the junction and create a significant danger. -Parking on Woodlands Road has worsened since the approval of outline planning permission. - Construction traffic would pose a danger for children and the elderly.

Drainage

-The development will place extra strain on the drainage system

Residential Amenity

-Loss of amenity and privacy for neighbouring residents. -Overbearing impact on properties on Woodlands Road. -Overshadowing impact on properties on Woodlands Road. -Loss of sunlight to properties on Woodlands Road.

Design

-The proposed dwellings are not in keeping with properties in the surrounding area. -Three storey properties are not in keeping with surrounding two storey dwellings. -Green belt land should not be developed.

Biodiversity

Page 158 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

-Harm to biodiversity

Consultations:

West Yorkshire Combined Authority- The developer should make a contribution of £6,006.00 towards the provision of a residential Metrocard scheme.

N.B- The provision of Electric Vehicle charging points was secured by a planning condition imposed on the Outline Planning Permission. The provision of EV charging points was considered to constitute a betterment of the scheme, as charging points are in situ permanently rather than a MertroCard Scheme which is only for 1 year, with no guarantee that residents will renew after that period.

Drainage- The Lead Local Flood authority have no objections to the proposals set out in the Reserved Matters application. The necessary planning conditions were imposed on the outline planning application reference 18/01604/MAO.

Yorkshire Water- Yorkshire Water have no comments to make on the information submitted for this reserved matters application. Foul and surface water drainage proposals covered by condition numbers 6 and 7 from the granted decision notice, can be dealt with via a future discharge of conditions application for the development site.

Rights of Way- Public Footpath No. 228 (Bradford South) runs along the southern boundary of the site, as shown on the plan above. There is also a path linking from this route to Woodlands Avenue along the eastern edge of the site. The footpaths are separated from the site by the existing boundary walls

The existing walls appear to be being replaced with a 1.8 metre timber screen fence to side of plot 1 and the rear of plots 1-6 with 1.2 metre timber screen fencing adjacent to other sections of the paths. .

Replacing a low boundary with a higher close boarded boundary can make paths feel more enclosed and lead to the path feeling less secure and attractive to path users. Generally we would prefer to see a 1.8 metre fence to comprise a 1.5 metre high fence topped with 0.3 metres of trellis to allow for some natural surveillance of the path.

The new fences must be positioned so that they do not encroach into the existing width of the public footpaths

West Yorkshire Police- The boundary treatments shown on the landscaping plan (drawing number 1676-19-007) are acceptable, however in relation to plots 1 to 6 changing the boundaries at the rear of these plots to either a 1500mm high close board fence with 300mm high trellis on the top will allow more surveillance of the existing footpath, alternatively installing an 1800mm high close board fence may allow some surveillance through the gaps in the fence panels.

Gates should be installed for each plot to a height of 1800mm and incorporate some form of locking mechanism such as hasp and staple or pad bolts. Plots 2/3, 4/5, 10/11 should have rear gates moved nearer to the front building line to increase natural surveillance.

Page 159 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

Natural Surveillance: Installing a small side window in plots 6 and 12 will allow more surveillance so that plot 6 can overlook the adjacent land and plot 12 can overlook their parking bay including visitor parking spaces. Open Space: The area of land adjacent to plot 6 is shown to have 1200mm high boundary fence, this should also include a lockable gate for access / maintenance. There should be a management plan for this area to ensure that the land is kept tidy and maintained. Management over the front areas of planting is also required to ensure that these remain tidy. Further matters raised in relation to external on-plot lighting and window and door specifications are not material planning considerations.

Highways- The principle of development has already been accepted with the approval of outline application reference 18/01604/MAO. The following amendments should be made to the Layout Plan (Ref: 1676-18-004 Rev. A) in order for it to be supported by highways:

The road should either be constructed as a traditional estate road (5.5m wide with 2m wide footways on both sides) or as a shared surface road (5.5m wide with 600mm margins all the way round the access road. The footway from Woodlands Grove should extend into the site, past a ramp across the road, and then taper into the shared surface.

The width of the "Private Drive" can be 4.8m however there should be a clear delineation (using a 600mm margin) where the extent of the adoptable road finishes. The existing width of Woodlands Grove would present a pinch point between the development site and Woodlands Road however this would be over a relatively short distance.

The proposed visitor parking arrangement is not acceptable. The parking should be provided contiguous with the highway (forming part of the area to be adopted) and a minimum of 4 spaces would be required for the 12 dwellings. Two of these should be laid out next to Plot 8.

Summary of Main Issues: Access Appearance Landscaping Layout Scale Residential Amenity Further Issues Raised by Representations Other Matters

Appraisal:

Access

Access into the site is taken from Woodlands Grove via Woodlands Road. The acceptability of the access and the number of dwellings to be served by it was established with the approval of the outline planning permission. This matter cannot be revisited as part of the assessment of this Reserved Matters Application.

Page 160 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

The internal highway layout has been amended to reflect the comments made by Bradford Council Highways Development Control. Specifically, the footway from Woodlands Grove is continued into the site, beyond the access ramp and it then tapers into a shared surface road. The shared surface road has an acceptable width of 5.5 metres with a 600mm wide hard margin. A turning head has been provided within the development site to enable larger vehicles to access and egress the site in a forward gear. The proposed 4.8 metre width of the ‘private drive’ is considered to be acceptable and the extent of the adoptable road is delineated by a 600mm hard margin.

Policy TR2 and Appendix 4 of the Core Strategy require the provision of an average of 1.5 off street car parking spaces per unit for residential development. The proposed development would provide two spaces per dwelling and it is therefore considered to accord with the requirements of policy TR2 and Appendix 4 of the Core Strategy.

In considering the outline planning application members of the committee requested that consideration should be given to the provision of a parking layby within the development to reduce inconvenience to existing local residents resulting from parking congestion on Woodlands Grove and Woodlands Road. The proposed layout includes two laybys providing four additional car parking spaces. The additional spaces are considered to represent a-betterment as they would serve to reduce the level of on street car parking required on surrounding streets.

The proposed highway layout is considered to be safe and suitable for all users and the development would not result in an unacceptable impact on highway safety. The proposed development is therefore considered to accord with policy TR2 of the Core Strategy and paragraph 109 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

There is a public footpath (No.228 Bradford South) adjacent to the southern boundary of the site. There is also a path linking from this route to Woodlands Avenue along the eastern edge of the site. The footpaths are separated from the site by the existing boundary walls. The footpath routes would be unimpeded by the proposed development.

Appearance

The proposed development is comprised of 12 semi-detached dwellings constructed of artificial stone at ground floor level and render to the first floor level, beneath artificial slate roofs. The existing terraced and semi-detached properties to the East of the site, on Woodlands Road, are constructed of natural stone to the ground floor and pebble dashed render to the first floor, with a mixture of natural and artificial slate roofs. The existing terraced and detached properties to the north of the site, on Highgate Road, are constructed of natural stone walling beneath a mixture of concrete tile and stone slate roofs.

The area surrounding the site includes a variety of dwelling types and construction materials. As such the design and construction materials of the proposed dwellings are considered to be acceptable subject to the approval of sample materials.

Plots 1-6 would include a pitched roof dormer window to the front and rear roof planes (House Type A), whilst plots 7-12 would include a pitched roof dormer window to the front roof plane only. The dormer windows would be of an appropriate width and would achieve an acceptable degree of separation from both the ridgeline and eaves of each

Page 161 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee dwelling. The use of artificial slate cladding to the cheeks and roof of the dormer windows would be in keeping with the roofing material of the main dwelling. The dormer windows are considered to be an acceptable design feature of the proposed properties and accord with the requirements of policies DS1 and DS3 of the Core Strategy.

Landscaping

The proposed hard landscaping would consist of a block paved shared surface road serving plots 1-8 and a tarmacadam private drive serving plots 9-12. All property driveways would be surfaced with tarmacadam. Garden boundaries would consist of 1.8 metre close boarded timber fencing, with the exception of the rear boundaries of plots 1-6 where the fencing would include a 300mm trellis panel to improve surveillance of the adjacent footpath. The proposed hard landscaping features are considered to be typical of a residential neighbourhood and are acceptable. The proposed soft landscaping would consist of intermittent shrub planting to frontage areas, with grassed gardens to residential curtilages. The soft landscaping is considered to be appropriate for the proposed residential development.

In conclusion the proposed hard and soft landscaping features are considered to be acceptable and would accord with policy DS2 of the Core Strategy.

Layout

The site is self-contained and therefore the development layout is not constrained by the need to continue an existing established pattern of development. Nonetheless, the proposed shared surface road serving plots 1-6 would form a continuation of Woodlands Grove and plots 9-12 would be sited adjacent to the rear of the existing terraced dwellings on the west side of Woodlands Road. In conclusion it is considered that the proposed dwellings would be appropriately, situated and orientated in relation to each other and to existing dwellings outside of the development. The proposal is therefore considered to accord with policies DS3 and DS4 of the Core Strategy.

Scale

The proposed dwellings would have a width of approximately 5.9 metres and a depth of 9.1 metres with an eaves height of 5 metres and a ridge height of 8.5 metres. The proposed dwellings are considered to be of a scale which would be in keeping with the scale of existing properties and the development is considered to accord with the requirements of policies DS1 and DS3 of the Core Strategy.

Residential Amenity

Policy DS5 of the Core Strategy requires that development proposals do not harm the amenity of existing or prospective users and residents.

The submitted development layout ensures that the proposed dwellings would not include any habitable room windows with an unrestricted view within 7 metres of the rear garden boundary of any neighbouring dwelling, or within 17 metres of the habitable room windows of any neighbouring dwelling. As such no adverse overlooking implications are foreseen.

Page 162 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

The proposed dwellings would benefit from appropriately sized amenity areas and bin storage provision for to ensure that prospective residents are afforded an acceptable level of residential amenity.

The proposed development would not harm the amenity of existing or prospective residents in accordance with the requirements of policy DS5 of the Core Strategy.

Further Issues Raised by Representations

The site address is incorrectly described as Land at Highgate Road.

The site description has been updated to clarify its location.

There is no information detailing the heights of the proposed dwellings.

The submitted drawings (1676-19-005, 1676-19-006) have been submitted at a recognised scale of 1:50 and the necessary measuring tools are provided on the public access website to determine the heights of the proposed dwellings.

The proposed houses would be built over 2 metres higher than the ground level of the houses in Woodlands Road.

The proposed houses would not be 2 metres higher than the existing houses in Woodlands Road.

Insufficient school places available in the surrounding area.

The site is located within ‘Residential Zone 4’ which is a nil CIL zone and therefore a contribution towards off site infrastructure provision is not required.

Health services in the surrounding area are already overburdened.

The site is located within ‘Residential Zone 4’ and therefore a contribution towards off site infrastructure provision is not required.

A mature flowering cherry tree has been described as a common beech tree.

It is noted that the tree (T9) nearest plot 9 is incorrectly identified as a beech tree on plan reference 1676-18-004 Rev C. However, the tree was correctly classified as a Cherry Tree within the Arboricultural Method Statement which was submitted in support of the outline planning application. The removal of T9 was considered at the outline application stage at which time the tree was noted to be of moderate quality and its removal was considered to be acceptable.

Brownfield sites should be developed before greenfield land.

The principle of residential development was accepted on this site with the approval of outline application reference 18/01604/MAO. In granting the outline permission it was accepted that the site is greenfield land, as it is not previously developed. Policy HO6 of the Core Strategy aims to prioritise the use of previously developed land for housing and sets a target of 50% of new housing development to be built on previously developed land over the plan period. However, in the absence of a five-year housing

Page 163 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee land supply the use of previously developed land cannot be insisted upon and where a site is considered to occupy a sustainable location there must be a presumption in favour of development in line with paragraph 49 of the NPPF.

Highways

Unsuitable access to the development via Woodlands Road and Woodlands Grove.

The impact of the development on the surrounding highway network was considered in the assessment of the outline planning application. The matter cannot be reconsidered as part of the current Reserved Matters application.

Pedestrian safety implications for residents of Woodlands Road and Woodlands Grove.

The impact of the development on the surrounding highway network was considered in the assessment of the outline planning application. The matter cannot be reconsidered as part of the current Reserved Matters application.

Highway safety implications for Highgate Road.

The impact of the development on the surrounding highway network was considered in the assessment of the outline planning application. The matter cannot be reconsidered as part of the current Reserved Matters application.

Loss of amenity and privacy for adjacent residences

The proposed dwellings are sufficiently separated from the habitable room windows and private amenity areas of neighbouring dwellings to ensure that the development would not have an adverse impact on the residential amenity of neighbouring residents.

Increased traffic volume on Woodlands Road and Woodlands Grove is unacceptable.

The impact of the development on the surrounding highway network was considered in the assessment of the outline planning application. The matter cannot be reconsidered as part of the current Reserved Matters application.

The junction of Woodlands Road with Highgate Road is on a stretch of road where motorist attempt dangerous overtaking manoeuvres. An increase in the number of vehicle trips will exacerbate problems at the junction and create a significant danger.

The impact of the development on the surrounding highway network was considered in the assessment of the outline planning application. The matter cannot be reconsidered as part of the current Reserved Matters application.

Parking on Woodlands Road has worsened since the approval of outline planning permission.

The impact of the development on the surrounding highway network was considered in the assessment of the outline planning application. The matter cannot be reconsidered as part of the current Reserved Matters application.

The development will place extra strain on the drainage system

Page 164 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

The outline planning permission is subject to planning conditions requiring the submission and approval of foul and surface water drainage details. The details will be assessed by the Lead Local Flood Authority prior to approval. It is considered that the planning conditions imposed on the outline planning permission are sufficient to ensure that the development would not place unacceptable strain on drainage infrastructure.

Overbearing impact on properties on Woodlands Road.

The proposed dwellings are adequately separated from existing properties on Woodlands Road to ensure that no adverse overbearing implications would be incurred.

Overshadowing impact on properties on Woodlands Road.

The proposed dwellings are adequately separated from existing properties on Woodlands Road to ensure that no adverse overshadowing implications would be incurred.

The proposed dwellings are not in keeping with properties in the surrounding area.

The proposed dwellings are considered to be of an acceptable design and appearance and would not result in adverse visual amenity implications.

Three storey properties are not in keeping with surrounding two storey dwellings.

The proposed development does not include any three storey units.

Green belt land should not be developed.

The application site is not located in the green belt.

Other Matters

Density

Policy HO5 of the Core Strategy advises that residential development should usually achieve a minimum of 30 dwellings per hectare. The site has an area of 0.4ha and the development of 12 dwellings would provide a density of 30 dwellings per hectare. The proposal is therefore considered to accord with the density requirements of policy HO5 of the Core Strategy.

Housing Mix

The proposed development would provide 12 3 bedroom dwellings. Policy HO8 of the Core Strategy deals with Housing Mix and identifies the provision of family housing as the most important strategic priority for the district. The proposed dwellings would contribute towards meeting the need for family housing provision and the proposed development would accord with the requirements of policy HO8 of the Core Strategy.

Community Safety

Page 165 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

Policy DS5 requires that development proposals are designed to ensure a safe and secure environment and reduce opportunities for crime. The Police Architectural Liaison Officer has reviewed the submitted proposals and, whilst not objecting in principle to the proposed development, has advised that the following amendments would improve the development:

 The rear boundary fencing of plots 1-6 should consist of 1.5 metre close boarded timber fencing with 300mm trellis section on the top, to allow for surveillance of the footpath  Gates should be installed for each plot to a height of 1800mm  Installing a small side window in plots 6 and 12 will improve natural surveillance

The aforementioned amendments have been incorporated into the proposed development. It is considered that there are no grounds to conclude that the proposed development would create an unsafe or insecure environment and the proposal is considered to accord with policy DS5 of the Core Strategy.

Community Infrastructure Levy

The site is located within ‘Residential Zone 4’ which is a nil CIL zone.

Equality Act 2010, Section 149: In writing this report due regard has been has been taken of the need to eliminate unlawful discrimination, harassment and victimisation, advance equality of opportunity between different groups and foster good relations between different groups, in accordance with the duty placed upon Local Authorities by Section 149 of the Equality Act 2010.

The context of the site, the development scheme proposed and the representations received have been reviewed to identify the potential for the determination of this application to disadvantage any individuals or groups of people with characteristics protected under the Equality Act 2010.

The outcome of this review is that there is that there is not considered to be any sound reason to conclude that the proposed development would have a significantly detrimental impact on any groups of people or individuals with protected characteristics.

Reason for Granting Planning Permission:

The proposed development would meet the requirements of Core Strategy policies P1, SC1, SC4, SC6, SC9, TR1, TR2, TR3, HO5, HO8, HO9, EN2, EB3, EN5, EN7, EN8, DS1, DS3, DS5 and ID3 and the application is recommended for approval.

Conditions:

General

1. Approved Plans The development hereby approved shall only be carried out in accordance with the following documents:-

1676-18-004- Revision C- Layout Plan

Page 166 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

1676-19-005- Revision B- House Type A Plans & Elevations 1676-19-006- Revision B- House Type B Plans & Elevations. 1676-19-007- Revision A- Landscaping

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt as to the terms under which this planning permission has been granted.

2. Three Year Time Limit The development to which this notice relates must be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this notice.

Reason: To accord with the requirements of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990 (as amended).

3. PD Rights Removed A-E Notwithstanding the provisions of The Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (or any subsequent equivalent legislation) no development falling within Classes A to E of Part 1 of Schedule 2 of the said Order shall subsequently be carried out to the development hereby approved without the prior express written permission of the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To safeguard the amenities of occupiers of adjoining properties and to accord with Policies DS3 and DS5 of the Core Strategy Development Plan Document.

4. Material Samples Before development above damp proof course commences on site, arrangements shall be made with the Local Planning Authority for the inspection of all external facing and roofing materials to be used in the development hereby permitted. The samples shall then be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the development constructed in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To ensure the use of appropriate materials in the interests of visual amenity and to accord with Policies DS1 and DS3 of the Core Strategy Development Plan Document.

5. Boundary Treatments The boundary treatments as indicated on submitted drawing reference 1676 07 REV A shall be provided in full prior to the first occupation of the residential units and shall thereafter be retained.

Reason: In the interests of amenity and privacy and to accord with Policy DS5 of the Core Strategy.

6. Bin Storage The bin storage areas as indicated on submitted drawing reference 1676 07 REV A shall be provided in full prior to the first occupation of the residential units and shall thereafter be retained.

Reason: To ensure appropriate design arrangements for waste handling and to accord with Policies DS1 and DS5 of the Core Strategy.

Page 167 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

7. Landscaping Scheme

In the first planting season following the completion of the development, or as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, the landscaping proposals and new tree planting shall be implemented at the site in accordance with details shown on the approved Landscape Proposals drawing reference 1676 07 REV A dated February 2019.

Any trees or plants comprising the approved landscaping that become diseased or die, or which are removed or damaged within the first 5 years after the completion of planting shall be removed and a replacement landscape planting using the same or similar species/specifications shall be planted in the same position no later than the end of the first available planting season following the demise of the original landscape planting.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and to accord Policies EN5, DS2 and DS3 of the Core Strategy Development Plan Document.

8. Landscape Maintenance Before any part of the development is brought into use, the developer or successor in title, shall enter into a legal agreement to maintain the said 'internal verges and planting areas within the site in perpetuity' by way of a Management Company. The developer or successor in title shall lay out all those areas within the site in accordance with the approved drawing, and to a constructional specification approved by the Local Planning Authority, as part of those maintenance arrangements to be set out in a Management Maintenance Perpetuity Plan. As and when a phase or the whole development is completed the final verges and planting areas relating to that phase or the whole of the development, whichever shall apply, shall be laid out according to the approved plan.

Reason: To ensure that the areas are adequately maintained for the lifetime of the site in perpetuity, and therefore, will not require the Council to publicly maintain them at any time in the future.

Highways

9. Parking Provision Before any of the dwellings to be constructed are brought into use the proposed car parking spaces to be approved shall be laid out, hard surfaced, sealed and drained within the site as shown on the approved drawing and completed to a specification approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of amenity and highway safety, and in accordance with Policies TR2, DS4 and EN7 of the Core Strategy Development Plan Document and the National Planning Policy Framework.

10. Provision of Access

Before any part of the development is brought into use, the proposed means of vehicular and pedestrian access hereby approved shall be laid out, hard surfaced, sealed and drained within the site in accordance with the approved plan numbered

Page 168 Report to the Regulatory & Appeals Committee

1676 04 REV C and completed to a constructional specification approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure that a suitable form of access is made available to serve the development in the interests of highway safety and to accord with paragraph 35 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

Page 169 This page is intentionally left blank