Silsden Cam Bookmark and Share

<< HOME PAGE  < RETURN

Donate to Yorkshire Air Ambulanceback to Have Your Say !!!! | back to forum index | login | sign up | help | latest topics | search


Forums Home > Have Your Say !!!! > New Development at the top of Bolton Road

  

Replies in this thread : 6

Author

Topic : New Development at the top of Bolton Road

Daffoldil
Website Member
Posts : 2

Website Member

22/08/2018 : 20:17:29      reply with quote


this post has been edited 2 time(s)

I can say with a high degree of knowledge with respect to the ethics (or lack of them) by the property company who has recently posted its boarding near the old tannery corner.

I would ask the locals not only to object strongly to the development of the land at the top of the Bolton Road but should the planners approve it that pressure needs to be brought to bear on the planners and your councilors to sure adherence to the planning application.

Case 1. Box Tree Cottage - 3 storey house built where 2 storey houses were submitted. Bradford council told the said property developer to pull them down. Developer appeals and guess what?, houses are still there.

Case 2. Grove Mill Housing development. The existing mill is demolished with out planning consent. Suggest you read the T&A as the planning people were totally unaware this was proposed and gave statement they were dismay about what the developer had done and expected them to be a bit more responsible - What a joke!!

Case 3. Hats off to Craven Planners. They took the said developer to court on breach of planning consent, but lost. Said property developer throw huge amounts of money to challenge.

Case 4 Houses in Harden - Boo-who time. Said property developer says it can not afford to pay its section 106 money.

Case 5. Hainworth Wood Road (Keighley) . Recent discussions with a number of locals state they were promised a play area for the local kids (Section 106). and the said property developer failed to deliver.
A local council grant has now paid for this.

Case 6. Questions needs to be to Mr Veri** involvement with Acorn Business Centre (ABC)at Snaygill which suddenly went under and surprise, surprise set up as Airedale Business Centre (ABC). At least they didn't need to change the letterhead.

The ironic thing is that the said property developer has not done any thing illegal but morally........

Whilst this posting may be seen as being a bit anti " Said Developer'. any company that submits plans, throws them away, builds what they want, is openly prepare to take on the planners and throw money to fight them in court, reneges on section 106 commitments, then we do want this developer within a hundred miles of Silsden.

Equally, the planning people and councilors need to stand up to the mark and ensure that any developer does exactly to the plans submitted.



click for more information

Corky Yorky
Website Member
Posts : 241

Website Member

22/08/2018 : 20:29:10      reply with quote


this post has been edited 1 time(s)

It may be wrong, but i was told by a reasonable source, that the said developer had also bought some of the supposed ‘affordable’ houses on Elliott St, from his own company to tick off boxes saying that they were bought up to ‘folk that could afford them! Consequentially they are/were either let or sold on..at a higher price!

On another point..Is planning permission required for the rediculous boarding blight we have to put up with on entry to our Town?
click for more information

Daffoldil
Website Member
Posts : 2

Website Member

22/08/2018 : 20:46:45      reply with quote


Looks like said property developer and got 'Strike 1'!

Checking Bradford Councils planning advice which states:-

You may need to apply for advertisement consent to display an advertisement bigger than 0.3 square metres (or any size if illuminated) on the front of, or outside, your property (be it a house or business premises).

Therefore, you are unlikely to need consent for a small sign with your house/building name or number on it, or even a sign saying 'Beware of the dog'.

Temporary notices up to 0.6 square metres relating to local events, such as street parties and concerts, may also be displayed for a short period. There are different rules for estate agents' boards, but, in general, these should not be bigger than 0.5 square metres.

The planning regime for larger, professional adverts, signs for businesses and so on is complex though all outdoor advertisements must comply with five 'standard conditions'.

Checking Councils planning application list, I can see no mention of an application.

Come on Bradford council, do your bit
click for more information

midway
Website Member
Posts : 1673

Website Member

22/08/2018 : 21:49:37      reply with quote


"The developers have it all their own way. They take on community after community with their financial muscle. The odds are stacked against the communities because the council will presume in favour of development and has set itself an unnecessarily high target. Communities object but because they are small groups of local people they don't have the resources to win. Many communities don't stand a chance. The T&A is full of reports of groups with valid concerns over inappropriate plans in their locality. Too often the answer is we have to build somewhere and this is as good a place as any its divide and conquer or in this case divide and develop". A quote from the T&A comments page, but i think it's appropriate. O! buy the way i have objected. about four times.
click for more information

gazzer
Website Member
Posts : 3165

Website Member

24/09/2018 : 10:42:15      reply with quote


Skipton Properties at it again

www.keighleynews.co.uk/news/16898607.village-homes-plan-is-revised/

THE developer behind a Harden housing scheme has agreed to fund local facilities in a bid to push the scheme forward.

But Skipton Properties says it will have to drop the planned affordable housing provision from the development.

The Cross Hills-based company already has outline planning permission to build houses on land off Keighley Road, in Harden.

But more detailed plans for the site, that would see 28 properties built on the field, were refused by Bradford Council’s regulatory and appeals committee in July.

The company had originally agreed to provide £107,000 worth of contributions to the local area, including money towards schools and the nearby St Ives estate.

There would also be payments to create a village green space.

But earlier this year the company said that “abnormal costs” to develop the site made the existing plans unviable, which meant the firm was no longer able to still provide the financial contributions.

This claim did not go down well with members of the committee, who said taxpayers should not subsidise property developers, leading to them refusing the plans.

Now the company has submitted a second application for the site, agreeing to fund local facilities.

But it will now be dropping the plans for six of the units on site to be classed as affordable.

The application says the changes mean the company’s profit margin for the site will be reduced from 20 per cent to 17.23 per cent.

The altered contributions, which come to the same amount as the originally-agreed contributions, include £46,708 to either Harden Primary School or Cullingworth Primary School and £20,419 towards the St Ives estate.

Originally the company was due to pay £31,893 towards providing Metro bus passes to residents of the estate.

Instead, Skipton Properties has proposed to pay that money to improve facilities at Harden Village Hall.

The application says: “The village hall is in need of investment in its infrastructure.

“The contribution will therefore benefit all the residents of the proposed scheme and the wider community of Harden.”

The plans still include a village green.

A financial report included in the application reveals that in total, Skipton Properties will spend £7,045,670 on developing the site, and the contributions. And in total it will make £1,466,805 profit.
click for more information

BubbyVee
Website Member
Posts : 51

Website Member

25/09/2018 : 12:02:40      reply with quote


Oh dear is that all they are making??
Shall we have a wipe round for the poor developer?
click for more information

gazzer
Website Member
Posts : 3165

Website Member

25/09/2018 : 13:48:17      reply with quote


quote
posted by BubbyVee
Oh dear is that all they are making??
Shall we have a wipe round for the poor developer?
So thats £1.5m profit from 28 houses or over £53,000 profit for each house.


So how much are these builders making that are building houses in hundreds in Silsden? And how much are they paying to our community?
click for more information

Replies in this thread : 6

Post Reply

login

refresh page   

latest topics

events
sale / wanted
general
have your say
looking for..
skippy greengrass

DON'T FORGET THE SUBJECT IS >>>>>>>>   Forums Home > Have Your Say !!!! > New Development at the top of Bolton Road  


<< HOME PAGE  RETURN  PAGE TOP ^  

  , © silsden.net 2017

webenquiries to