Silsden Cam Bookmark and Share

<< HOME PAGE  < RETURN

Donate to Yorkshire Air Ambulanceback to EVENTS - ANNOUNCEMENTS - MEETINGS | back to forum index | login | sign up | help | latest topics | search


Forums Home > EVENTS - ANNOUNCEMENTS - MEETINGS > MEETING in the TOWN HALL - Thurs 27 SEPT at 7pm

  

Replies in this thread : 15

Author

Topic : MEETING in the TOWN HALL - Thurs 27 SEPT at 7pm

Peter
Website Member
Posts : 4827

Website Member

24/09/2018 : 17:15:19      reply with quote




The enabling road will open the land (Banklands - which are the fields above Silsden, to towards the Nab) and allow LOTS of houses to be built.

More information
planning.bradford.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?keyVal=P9A6USDHMVP00&activeTab=summary

This will be your chance to ask questions about this proposed enabling road. Your Ward Councillors and Bradford's senior Planning Officer and senior Highways Officer will be in attendance to inform and answer your questions.

There have been over 200 objections to these proposals which threaten to change the face of Silsden as we know it.

PLEASE ATTEND AND LET'S STOP THIS ROAD - it's not about the school IT'S ABOUT BUILDING another 1000 houses.








click for more information

gazzer
Website Member
Posts : 3165

Website Member

24/09/2018 : 18:28:15      reply with quote


Keighley News have the day wrong

"UP-TO-DATE information will be given about a controversial Silsden road plan during a public meeting tonight."

www.keighleynews.co.uk/news/16899454.public-meeting-to-hear-truth-bout-silsden-road/
click for more information

Peter
Website Member
Posts : 4827

Website Member

26/09/2018 : 13:10:01      reply with quote





TOMORROW THURSDAY AT 7pm



click for more information

Peter
Website Member
Posts : 4827

Website Member

27/09/2018 : 13:06:06      reply with quote






TONIGHT

7pm

TOWNHALL








click for more information

Corky Yorky
Website Member
Posts : 241

Website Member

27/09/2018 : 23:05:37      reply with quote


this post has been edited 1 time(s)

Wish i hadnít wasted my time attending!

I have decided that i will not attend anymore of these silly sessions that basically answer nothing!

I didnt want to hear about planning processes and i didnt want to hear about meaningless traffic surveys!

At the end of the day the application is for houses to be built by the enabling road!

My concern was that if the road does get built and the housing figures by Bradford are reduced will any scheme be viable ? Inaddition is it not unfair that an enabling road could be built and left as an eyesore for many years before any houses are built! Should we as a community put up with that, especially when the environment and our favourite walks have been destroyed?
Unfortunately i was not one of the lucky ones to be able to have a say!

There was a lot of bullshit and a lot of waffling by the two guys from Bradford!

At one point the chief planner (guy on the left) started telling us about the requirements of The Barratt houses on Belton rd and how they had to adhere to certain regulations etc..
What he blatantly didnt say is that these regulations were never properly met because the environmetal impact statement/survey was not submitted till after the proposal was granted. He also stated how planning determined that a high percentage of the traffic from the site wouldnít go into Silsden Town Centre..but in the Environmental Statement it has to address how the development fits in locally to the community!

As i say it was two and half hours of my wasted time?

click for more information

gazzer
Website Member
Posts : 3165

Website Member

28/09/2018 : 08:03:06      reply with quote


Two council employees making stuff up as they went along. Mr John Eyles repeatedly said the school application and this enabling road were two seperate issues and should not be connected. He then said he personally raised the enabling road at the last minute at the school planning meeting because it was relevent.
Mr Eyles said, with an almost straight face that Silsden are getting lots of houses because we have the services whilst Oxenhope is not getting many because the roads cant cope.
Mr John Rowley said the transport studies are correct or they wouldnt be used. A 10 year old could drive a coach and horses through the school traffic survey.

Mr Eyles has dismissed the letter from the lady who does not want the road on her land.He said her claim she did not know about is void because she had contacted the council previously. If he read the letter he would she the claim is the road was known about but NOT that it would cross her land.

Mr Eyles said if these houses are built in the future rainwater run off will be stored in holding tanks...dug deep under the road! There is nothing in the plans for the road for tank,Are they really going to dig up a new road?

Mr Eyles said he will not personally gain from this development.This was strange because nobody else mentioned that point.

click for more information

gazzer
Website Member
Posts : 3165

Website Member

28/09/2018 : 08:13:33      reply with quote


Mr Eyles said the council are legally bound to consider this application because the land is safeguarded for housing and if they did not the developer could sue the council. However a condition of this land becoming safeguarded is that a bypass is built but he says the council are not bound by this. I assume that is because we do not have the money to sue.

In 1998 a Department of Environment Goverment Inspector said this land would be safeguarded for housing on condition a bypass was built paid for by developers. This was adopted by Bradford Council in its 1998 Unitary Development Plan.

In 2005 Bradford Council adopted a Replacement Unitary Development Plan which carried over the plans for a bypass. This RUDP from 2005 is current.

I would urge people to object to this scheme stating Bradford Council must adhere to RUDP(2005)
click for more information

gazzer
Website Member
Posts : 3165

Website Member

28/09/2018 : 08:18:46      reply with quote


this post has been edited 1 time(s)

I wonder how many people at the meeting understood what the council employees were talking about when saying people could download an app and find out the latest changes to applications.They just assume everybody has a smartphone
click for more information

hat
Website Member
Posts : 405

Website Member

28/09/2018 : 09:30:51      reply with quote


Donít think anyone at the top table covered themselves in glory last night. The highways guy mumbled and waffled, the planning one at least engaged but clearly wanted to kill time talking about anything but the matter in hand. Why the other councillors were even there Iíve no idea. Cllr Naylor did his best to manage the room but there was no clear agenda or purpose for the meeting set out, and no discussion about what happens following this meeting.

The most revealing comment for me came right at the end from planning when he said they donít normallly hold this kind of meeting. So my question is, what makes this little road, which on the surface goes from nowhere to nowhere and isnít even on the alignment of the bypass, so important to them that they felt this meeting was necessary?
click for more information

gazzer
Website Member
Posts : 3165

Website Member

28/09/2018 : 10:21:01      reply with quote


quote
posted by hat
Why the other councillors were even there Iíve no idea.
Cllr Whittiker asked a decent question and Rickard checked his phone often but never spoke.Guess he maybe able to claim expenses
click for more information

JackoW
Website Member
Posts : 3

Website Member

28/09/2018 : 10:29:51      reply with quote


Donít know if many people heard at the end as we were leaving Councillor Naylor advising people to send in objections because himself and Councillor Whitaker have been made ward councillors and sit on planning committees so are not allowed to have any input on the application and can not attend the meetings at bradford
Looks like they have been stitched up
If they canít do anything it was a waste of time voting them on
click for more information

Peter
Website Member
Posts : 4827

Website Member

28/09/2018 : 11:32:47      reply with quote


quote
posted by JackoW
Donít know if many people heard at the end as we were leaving Councillor Naylor advising people to send in objections because himself and Councillor Whitaker have been made ward councillors and sit on planning committees so are not allowed to have any input on the application and can not attend the meetings at bradford
Looks like they have been stitched up
If they canít do anything it was a waste of time voting them on
I must correct the above before the rumours start.

We voted for our Ward Councillors to represent us in Bradford (Councillors Naylor, Whittaker and Rickard).

Bradford have changed the rules for Ward Councillors such that if they are on a Planning Committee they cannot comment on a planning application in their own ward.

All three of our Ward Councillors sit on Bradford Planning Committees.

This situation where all three Ward Councillors sat on planning committees was never envisaged when the exclusion from commenting on a planning application was put into force.

What does it mean?

When a planning application like the enabling road comes up in committee we cannot be represented by our Ward Councillors, which leaves a member(s) of Silsden Town Council and you and me, the public able to speak for or against the planning applcation.

And here is the problem

In a committee planning meeting Ward Councillors get 5mins each to represent us, an STC Councillor gets 5mins (if there is more than one STC councillor the 5mins must be shared. Members of the public get 5mins to speak, but this time must be shared between the number of people that wish to speak.

The time allocated for each group of speakers is strictly controlled, when the timed 5 minutes is up you are not allowed another word.

So the Bradford ruling of Ward Councillors not being able to talk at planning meetings robs us of 15 minutes of representation at planning meetings held for the Craven Ward.



click for more information

hat
Website Member
Posts : 405

Website Member

28/09/2018 : 12:13:04      reply with quote


quote
posted by gazzer
quote
posted by hat
Why the other councillors were even there Iíve no idea.
Cllr Whittiker asked a decent question and Rickard checked his phone often but never spoke.Guess he maybe able to claim expenses
She did, but she didnít follow it up and then never spoke another word

Only interesting news was that the school is out to tender but if they donít start by march next year itís unlikely to be ready for the 2020 school year start which is already 2 years later than planned
click for more information

Peter
Website Member
Posts : 4827

Website Member

01/10/2018 : 13:57:07      reply with quote




FROM THE MEETING ABOUT THE ENABLING ROAD.....





About 120 residents attended:


The new school is due to open in September 2020

In the future, secondary age pupils are likely to be sent to Keighley (not South Craven)

The access to the new Silsden School DOES NOT depend on this road being given planning permission.

The enabling road although it goes to the school is not being built for the school, but for housing.

The enabling road if built will enable 500 new houses to be built. This is a first phase, do not expect that to be the final number.

Bradford said the road will not allow access onto Hawbercote Lane / Banklands lane / Bolton Road..... note this point.

The road is an access road and not part of the bypass. The bypass will take a higher route but has to be paid for by Bradford (collecting S106 money from developers). Will we ever get a bypass? or just access roads that will never cross the canal?

It was mentioned that the road will be extendend on to Hawber Lane (phase II), this has been removed from the current application.

The greenfield to be used for the enabling road and ultimately houses, the land known as Banklands, is safeguarded land ie safeguarded for building - to be used before land designated as greenbelt. Bradford representitives stated they did not have the required Government requirement of a 5 year housing land supply and had to look at using safeguarded land. There was not an adequate explaination of the use / availability of brownfield land within Bradford, or in Silsden.

Bradford carry out traffic surveys but only general ones which are used to varify the traffic surveys submitted by developers are within an acceptable value. Apparently traffic surveys are only carried out in working periods (ie not during school holidays). Several members of the audience gave evidence to the contrary.

Bradford view is the volume of traffic through Silsden is not high enough at the moment to need a bypass.



click for more information

gazzer
Website Member
Posts : 3165

Website Member

01/10/2018 : 14:48:05      reply with quote


The council can say what they want about the need for a bypass.The fact is a Government inspector said in 1998 a bypass was required and had to be paid for by developers.Bradford adopted that fact in its 1998 Unitary Development Plan and carried it over into the Replacement Unitary Development Plan in 2005, still in use today.

Bradford should have collected money from the Belmont Road scheme, the scheme to the left of Bolton Road but also from the developers of the school site.Obviously that is the council itself. It should also collect money from development of the site of the enabling road and any future housing development on this site.

click for more information

Peter
Website Member
Posts : 4827

Website Member

04/10/2018 : 12:31:36      reply with quote


The KN report on the meeting

https://www.keighleynews.co.uk/news/16952814.silsden-road-fears-aired/
click for more information

Replies in this thread : 15

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 > EVENTS - ANNOUNCEMENTS - MEETINGS > MEETING in the TOWN HALL - Thurs 27 SEPT at 7pm  


<< HOME PAGE  RETURN  PAGE TOP ^  

  , © silsden.net 2017

webenquiries to