The report of the Assistant Director - Planning, Transportation and Highways (Document “AX”) considers an outline application for a development of up to 250 dwellings, including means of access, on land to the South of Thornton Road, Bradford – 17/06423/MAO.

 

Recommended –

 

(1)       That the application be approved for the reasons and subject to the conditions set out in the Assistant Director - Planning, Transportation and Highways’ technical report.

 

(2)       That the grant of planning permission be subject also to the completion of a legal planning obligation under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, or such other lawful mechanism for securing the heads of terms as may be agreed in consultation with the Interim City Solicitor, in respect of:

 

(i)            On site affordable housing provision of up to 20% of the total number of units to be offered at an affordable rent by a Registered Provider,

(ii)          Relocation of the bus stop on Thornton Road and the implementation of Traffic Regulation Orders for the extension of the 30mph speed limit and double yellow line ‘no waiting at any time’ parking restrictions across the site frontage at the expense of the applicant,

 

the legal planning obligation to contain such other ancillary provisions as the Assistant Director - Planning, Transportation and Highways (after consultation with the Interim City Solicitor) considers appropriate.

 

                                                                        (John Eyles – 01274 434380)

 

The report of the Assistant Director - Planning, Transportation and Highways (Document “AX”) considered an outline application for a development of up to 250 dwellings, including means of access, on land to the South of Thornton Road, Bradford – 17/06423/MAO. A range of plans and photographs were displayed.

 

The Assistant Director reported on the substance of additional representations received since the publication of his technical report and explained that:

 

·         In relation to the planning permission granted in February 2009 for a hybrid development; conditions associated with this development had been discharged so in theory it was live rather than expired.

·         Should the Committee be minded to approve the application, revisions were proposed to conditions in respect of timescales and reserved matters along with the imposition of an additional condition in relation to approved plans.

·         The applicant had agreed to meet the full contribution for affordable housing and there was also a need for a Traffic Regulation Order to be funded. Taking this, as well as the distance and relationship of the Great Northern Railway Trail to the site, into account it was not considered appropriate to seek an additional contribution from the developer in this regard.

 

A Ward Councillor made the following comments:

 

·         He was representing the views of the vast majority of the residents of Thornton Village.

·         It was appreciated that the main issue for consideration at this point was the proposed means of access to the site.

·         Paragraph 38 of the National Planning Policy Framework stated that key amenities should be within walking distance. It was considered that this application had not given due consideration to this issue; there was already considerable pressure on local infrastructure.

·         A two metre wide footway was proposed along the frontage of the site but the land in the middle was not owned by the applicant, this gap was potentially dangerous.

·         It was questioned what the impact would be if public footpath numbers 32 and 34 were not diverted.

·         The assertion in relation to the level of traffic accidents was of concern; Thornton Road was a busy through route with schools at either end. This proposal would lead to the introduction of 250+ additional cars which would exacerbate existing safety concerns and increase emissions.

·         The pylons were a cause for concern, no details had been submitted in this respect.

·         It was clear that officers could not guarantee that there was no contamination so detailed tests should take place across the site before any work commenced.

·         It was not true to say, as in the officer’s report, that there were no significant implications for the ward.

·         The Committee was urged to refuse the application.

 

The Assistant Director commented that:

 

·         As this was an outline application details of the layout had not been submitted and the pylons would be taken into account at Reserved Matters stage. He did not believe that there were any particular standards that restricted development adjacent to pylons.

·         Numerous conditions were proposed to be imposed in relation to potential contamination and the site would have to be addressed as a whole.

·         It was accepted that every development would have an impact on the ward in which it was located.

·         The Education Department had a planning programme for the provision of school places. Facilities such as doctors and dentists fell outside the planning system and it was anticipated that these would develop as needed.

·         In terms of traffic it was calculated that there would be a net reduction in traffic movements in the a.m. peak in comparison with the allocated employment use and an additional 50 movements in the p.m. peak.

·         The Highways Engineer was comfortable with the proposals for the footway along the site frontage and was satisfied that a 2 metre width could be delivered across the majority of its length.

·         The land was allocated for employment use.

 

A representative of the Great Northern Railway Trail (GNRT) Group  was given the opportunity to address the Committee:

 

·         The importance of the relevance of the Trail to this application and how the site could connect to the trail should be recognised.

·         The GNRT was an off road cycling and walking route linking Bradford, Keighley and Halifax; it was part of the National Cycle Network.

·         3 miles of the route was already open and Thornton linked with Queensbury.

·         It was important to find safe ways to travel without reliance on cars.

·         The Trail could provide the opportunity for sustainable travel.

·         The applicant’s Travel Plan did not even acknowledge the existence of the GNRT; the Committee was urged to look into how this omission could be rectified.

·         The footway could be continued to a point where a connection could be made with the Trail; this could be included in the Section 106 agreement

·         A link to the GNRT would be in the interests of future occupants of the development.

 

The applicant’s agent was in attendance at the meeting and said that:

 

·         The site had been first allocated as employment use in 1998. He was very familiar with the site having been involved over a 10 year period.

·         The advice of the professionals had to be relied upon in terms of matters such as traffic.

·         It was understood that significant amounts of material had been imported previously to deal with site levels.

·         Despite best efforts being made to market the site it had not proved possible to attract the interest of developers for employment use. It was considered that it was an expensive site being located a bit too far away from the motorway network.

·         A commitment had been given to provide up to 20% affordable housing.

·         Thornton had been identified as an area for growth..

·         The layout would be considered very carefully, including the implications of the pylons, to provide a sensible and deliverable scheme.

·         A Phase 2 investigation of contamination had been undertaken for the previous application and the fill since that point had to be clean and inert material. A comprehensive review of the site would be undertaken.

 

In response to a question from a Member of the Committee about the issue of connection with the GNRT he said that there was a good existing network of public footpaths in the area, one of which crossed the site. A previous application had included a proposed diversion of this but the intention now was to design the development around it or just adjust it slightly. New footways were also to be provided along the site frontage and this would assist in providing good connections to Thornton Village. He was unable to ask the applicant, at this point, if further efforts could be undertaken to connect into the GNRT but he considered that it was inevitable that if the applicant was asked to fund a link this would affect the resources available for affordable housing.

 

The Assistant Director suggested that this could be investigated and considered further as an application for the Reserved Matters progressed.

 

Resolved –

 

(1)       That the application be approved for the reasons and subject to the conditions set out in the Assistant Director - Planning, Transportation and Highways’ technical report subject to the deletion of Condition 1 and its replacement with the 3 conditions below:

 

(i) Time scale

Application for approval of the matters reserved by this permission for subsequent approval by the Local Planning Authority shall be made not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this notice.

 

Reason: To accord with the requirements of Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990. (as amended)

 

            (ii) Time scale

The development to which this notice relates must be begun not later than the expiration of two years from the date of the approval of the matters reserved by this permission for subsequent approval by the Local Planning Authority, or in the case of approval of such matters on different dates, the date of the final approval of the last of such matters to be approved.

 

Reason: To accord with the requirements of Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990 (as amended).

 

            (iii) Reserved Matters

Before any development of each phase is begun plans showing the:

(i) appearance,

            (ii) landscaping,

            (iii) layout, and,

iv) scale within the upper and lower limit for the height, width and length of each building stated in the application for planning permission in accordance with article 3(4)

 

must be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

 

Reason: To accord with the requirements of Article 3 of the Town and Country Planning (General Development Procedure) Order 1995.

 

and the imposition of an additional condition as follows:

 

            Approved plans

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

 

Drawing number 10188 01 A dated October 2017 showing the Location Plan and received on the 17th November 2017

Drawing number 10188 06 A dated 25^th July 2017 showing the Indicative Site Layout and received on the 17th November 2017

Drawing number 10188 07 A dated 25^th July 2017showing the Footpath and Culvert Diversions and received on the 17th November 2017

Drawing number 10188 08 A dated 25^th July 2017 showing the Housing Mix and received on the 17th November 2017

Drawing number 10188 09 showing the Existing Block Plan and received on the 17th November 2017

Drawing number 10188 10 showing the Development Density Calculation and received on the 17th November 2017

Drawing number 10699/P01A dated November 2017 showing the Landscape Opportunities and Constraints and received on the 17th November 2017

Drawing number 10699/P02A dated November 2017 showing the Strategic Landscape Masterplan as Proposed and received on the 17th November 2017

Drawing number CBO-0434-001 A dated 18^th September 2017 showing the Proposed Access Arrangements and received on the 17th November 2017

Drawing number SSS 7582 A dated 4^th July 2017 showing the Site Survey (1 of 6) and received on the 17th November 2017

Drawing number SSS 7582 A dated 4^th July 2017 showing the Site Survey (2 of 6) and received on the 17th November 2017

Drawing number SSS 7582 A dated 4^th July 2017 showing the Site Survey (3 of 6) and received on the 17th November 2017

Drawing number SSS 7582 A dated 4^th July 2017 showing the Site Survey (4 of 6) and received on the 17th November 2017

Drawing number SSS 7582 A dated 4^th July 2017 showing the Site Survey (5 of 6) and received on the 17th November 2017

Drawing number SSS 7582 A dated 4^th July 2017 showing the Site Survey (6 of 6) and received on the 17th November 2017

 

Save where measures are required by the conditions set out elsewhere on this permission, which shall take precedence over the above documents.

 

Reason: In the interests of amenity and for the avoidance of doubt as to the terms under which this planning permission has been granted, in accordance with policy P1 of the Local Plan for Bradford.

 

(2)       That the grant of planning permission be subject also to the completion of a legal planning obligation under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, or such other lawful mechanism for securing the heads of terms as may be agreed in consultation with the Interim City Solicitor, in respect of:

 

(i)            On site affordable housing provision of up to 20% of the total number of units to be offered at an affordable rent by a Registered Provider,

(ii)          Relocation of the bus stop on Thornton Road and the implementation of Traffic Regulation Orders for the extension of the 30mph speed limit and double yellow line ‘no waiting at any time’ parking restrictions across the site frontage at the expense of the applicant,

 

the legal planning obligation to contain such other ancillary provisions as the Assistant Director - Planning, Transportation and Highways (after consultation with the Interim City Solicitor) considers appropriate.

 

(3)       That the Reserved Matters application be submitted to this Committee for determination.

 

ACTION:       Assistant Director - Planning, Transportation and Highways

                        Interim City Solicitor