hits counter
  • ads
  • Why have Kirklees planning extended the planning application for Balderstone hall field; Someone had to ask the question…?;;; However this is the third time Bellway’s have got it badly wrong,

    By pmadmin
    In Bellway Homes
    Mar 27th, 2018
    0 Comments
    722 Views

    I have explained in detail to Kirklees planning that local residents who are against this application can-not book their holidays and plan for this year because they are worried they will miss the opportunity to speak on this none sustainable application. HOW MANY MORE CHANCES DO BELLWAY NEED TO GET IT RIGHT AND SUSTAINABLE?????

    Someone had to ask the question…?;;; However this is the third time Bellway’s have got it badly wrong, it looks like in some areas KMC Planning have had to design the site for them wow?

    Why have Kirklees planning extended the application time>>>>>>>>

    Local planning authorities should look for solutions rather than problems, and decision-makers at every level should seek to approve applications for sustainable development where possible. Local planning authorities should work proactively with applicants to secure developments that improve the economic, social and environmental conditions of the area. On this basis where issues are identified, we agree an appropriate timescale for the applicant’s to respond to issues raised in relation to planning applications.

    Questions which have been put to the developer “Bellway’s” by Kirklees planning department bast on residents comments objections as follows>>>>>

     

    • First, we need to understand the drainage aspect of the development and how the soak-aways would react to the low-level existing boundary properties.
    • what would the relationship be with sUDS and existing old coal workings?
    • The re-emergence of groundwater on and beyond the site downstream.
    • Some information in terms of ongoing maintenance of the SuDS located in private gardens.
    • The relationship of new plots and existing old coal workings.
    • Access to the retaining wall at the rear of Hepworth Close
    • we need to understand how the development would interact with, and potentially affect, school pick up and drop off times. We nee
    • At this stage with attention paid to the site entrance which is particularly featureless
    •  consider how best to use the area of POS to the north of the hedgerow
    • move/substitute plot no1 for a dwelling type with a bit more character?
    • Plot 21 has a prominent/blank side elevation facing the road.
    • Detail how you intend to distinguish between private spaces and public spaces (especially where front gardens abut the carriageway)
    • Please make sure houses ‘turn corners’ effectively and that there are main windows overlooking the street on corner plots
    • There are areas in front of dwellings where trees planting could be incorporated in order to promote green streets.
    • There appears to be a desire line which across the lower part of the site behind properties on Hepworth Close. A footpath link from the end of the proposed cul-de-sac to the existing public footpath to the south would assist.
    •  considered view that policy D5 of the UDP should be given full weight as it is not a policy for the supply of housing. Nevertheless, it should be weighed against the wider benefits of the scheme and the fact that the Council are currently unable to demonstrate a 5-year housing land supply.
    • In terms of the impact on heritage assets; you submit that the application would result in less than substantial harm on the setting of Grade II listed Balderstone Hall. Paragraph 14 of the NPPF requires that where the development plan is absent silent or relevant policies are out-of-date, planning permission should be granted unless any adverse impact of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits.

    Regards

    S Benson

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Comments are closed.