LP1041, Land at West Street & Halifax Road
Below you will find our suggested comments to help you through the commenting process. Please remember that these are our suggested comments and we would advise adding your own thoughts and suggestions too.
The Local Plan is divided into sections. We hope that you find the information below helpful
In this first section Calderdale Council asks if you believe the Local Plan is Legally Compliant.
Do you consider the plan to be Legally Compliant?
Our suggested comment is YES
But if you believe that the Local Plan is not legally compliant you should give details in the box provided
In this second section Calderdale Council asks if you believe the Local Plan is Sound
Do you consider the plan to be Sound?
Our suggested comment is NO
The comments below will provide details why SNLPF believe the plan is not sound - you can if you wish use these comments
Below are my comments as to why I consider the Local Plan is unsound
Highways Development Management
Highways Development Management say that West Street is suitable for the proposed level of development - “traffic impact would be minimal for this number of dwellings”. However, they have only looked at this site in isolation, they have failed to take account of existing local conditions and development proposals on nearby sites.
Highways DM have failed to consider that West Street has become an often-used cut-through for traffic from Brighouse and Denholmegate Road towards Shelf and Bradford, trying to avoid the frequent delays at Shelf roundabout.
West Street is a narrow, single track road because residents have to park at the side of the road. It has a 20mph speed restriction, speed humps and a pinch point; all measures designed to restrict traffic speed and flow along it. There is only one footpath, on the north side, opposite to the proposed site entrance, so pedestrians would have to walk in the road to access the site. If a second footpath was built it would make the road even narrower. As it is cars have to cross over the double yellow lines to pass each other. For two cars to pass side by side, one car must use the space that would be required for a second footway.
In their comments for sites LP782 and LP1543 (495 houses proposed), Highways DM have stated that there will be an impact on West Street and the adjacent Cross Lane, from traffic using Cockhill Lane. They have failed to reflect these concerns in their assessment of LP1041, stating only that there will be minimal impact on West Street for a site of this size (i.e. 20 houses proposed).
A suggested roundabout at the junction to the site with West Street and Cockhill Lane will be on a bend with restricted visibility and would further impede two-way traffic flow.
In early 2018, the school pick up bus service on West Street was withdrawn due to congestion issues from resident’s necessarily parked cars.
The site is made up of an area of UK BAP Priority Habitat, Open Space and Wildlife Corridor, all of which the council claims to want to increase and protect by various policies in the Local Plan. Development will either destroy or minimise all of these designations to the point where they become ineffective as Green Infrastructure. What is the point of having these policies if the Plan allows development that is directly contrary to them.
The site is part of the Wildlife Habitat Network (WHN) and links the Ancient Woodland of Sun Wood to the south east and Cockhill Clough (Greenbelt) to the northwest. Cockhill Clough has been filtered from the local plan due to its importance as a link in the WHN but development on the site will destroy the link between these areas of Green Infrastructure.
The Sustainability Assessment only scores 3 ‘positive’ outcomes out of 17 but one of these positive results is based on the seriously flawed Accessibility scores so must be disregarded (see my Accessibility comments above).
How can the site be regarded as sustainable when it has only 2 positive scores out of a possible 17?
The site currently has several designations within the RCUDP i.e. Primary Employment, Open Space Urban and Wildlife Corridor. The site assessment acknowledges that access is not possible from the south (A6036 Primary route) and that the UK BAP priority habitat, along with the hedgerow on the northern boundary, must be enhanced and retained. The western portion of the site is designated as Primary Employment, of which there exists very little in Shelf, despite the proposed number of new houses. Because of the above constraints, the remaining developable portion is isolated from any means of access, contrary to comments made by Highways Development Management, and is therefore NOT DELIVERABLE.
The site assessment correctly identifies the existence of non-designated assets in and along the dry-stone wall forming the northern site boundary, namely a horse trough and a mounting block. The horse trough is most likely to be affected by development as it is located at the most likely access point from the site onto West Street as suggested by Highways DM.
The water trough is fed by an old water pipe, believed to be from the dam in Cockhill Clough. Although no longer used, the water from the trough is likely to have discharged into Sun Wood Clough Water Course which runs through the site, thus forming part of a linear link between the various water features mentioned.
The water trough also forms part of a series of stone features (trough, mounting block and the GdII listed Stone Chair opposite the Duke of York Public House) along the south side of West Street. Removal or even re-location of these assets will destroy their significance.
In this third section Calderdale Council asks if the Local Plan complies with the Duty to Co-operate
DUTY TO CO-OPERATE
Do you consider that the plan complies with the Duty to Co-operate?
Our suggested comment is YES
But if you feel that the Local Plan does not comply with the Duty to Co-operate, you should give details in the box provided
In this section, Calderdale Council asks you to suggest the modifications you believe necessary to make the Local Plan sound.
You may use the suggested comment below but you can also add your own comments
This site should be removed from the Local Plan
In this final section, Calderdale Council asks if you would like to take part in the Oral part of the Examination. If you have provided suggested modifications to make the Local Plan sound, you may wish to take part.
If you do wish to take part, you should answer YES to the Oral Examination question. You should also give your reasons for attending
Please note that the examination is open to the public and you can attend as a spectator only.
Commenting on site LP1041 is now complete
f you wish to comment on another site please return to our Proposed Sites Page and select that site to see our suggested comments.