| |
|
|||
|
||||
|
|
IMPORTANT PLEASE READ This website and forum has been living on borrowed web server time for years. At the end of this month silsden.net in it's present form will cease to exist, BUT there is a new silsden.net in the making, and a new forum, and lots of exciting new things coming to this space. Peter |
back
to General Forum | back to forum index | login
|
sign
up | help
| latest topics | search
Replies in this thread : 52
Page : 1 2
<< next page next page >>
Author |
Topic : John Gliddle blogspot on a 1000 houses. |
|
| midway |
With who's selling the land. www.johngliddle.blogspot.com/2018/07/changing-pastoral-landscape-for-ever.html |
|
| Peter |
Read more about this 'enabling' road here www.silsden.net/forum/philboard_read.asp?id=9510 We are well on the way to getting our Bradford allotted 1200 new houses with the Belton Road and Riverside developments, and the other sundry developments which have taken place since April 2013 (when the count started). We don't need our greenbelt destroyed yet. This application was described as an enabling road to the school, this description has been removed from the application, as has the phase two part of this application which would take the road through to Hawber Lane, Just imaging 1000 new houses on Banklands and no bypass, all that traffic going through Silsden or trying to get out of Howden Road (plus the new school traffic), They won't build any shops so every trip will involve getting the car out.  Further reading www.silsden.net/forum/philboard_read.asp?id=9498 |
|
| Peter |
The route of the road has been changed .... Consultees criticised the off-shoot road which was shown going into the top of the school ground - it now goes down to the bottom of Hawbercote Lane (and the entrance to the new school). The map used is very misleading and appears to show a crossroads which goes on to an alternate road into Silsden, this is NOT true, the road is a cul-de-sac. The exit will be Banklands Lane - Dale View and onto Bolton Road. This junction has been described by Highways as "being far from ideal". With this proposed plan it will have the potential of directing the vehicles of 1000 households out of the Dale View / Bolton Road junction. It looks to be quite a wide road which avoids some of the mature trees which have TPOs on them. It will still destroy many mature trees which have TPOs  |
|
| Peter |
PS The complete map news.silsden.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/18_02201_MAF-RED_LINE-5214921.pdf |
|
| Corky Yorky |
quote PS The complete map news.silsden.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/18_02201_MAF-RED_LINE-5214921.pdf ...and wait for phase II. It might be gone for now..but you can be sure it’ll come back!!! |
|
| victor |
Peter have you noticed that the plans are dated 22nd of May, why do we only see them now ?. |
|
| Corky Yorky |
this post has been edited 1 time(s) quotePeter have you noticed that the plans are dated 22nd of May, why do we only see them now ?. I know peter can speak for himself..but Victor.. my view is they are desparately trying to exploit any situation to gain somehow an upperhand. Constantly changing the goal posts is obviously one tactic they are doing to purposely confuse the public! Does anyone know or believe that they will try and get into the fields above Brunthwaite because i dont think their is phase II in at the moment? |
|
| midway |
Don't worry Corky Yorky what's going on here isn't exploitation but desperation on part of the planners. |
|
| Corky Yorky |
quoteDon't worry Corky Yorky what's going on here isn't exploitation but desperation on part of the planners. Thanks Midway..had my suspicions on that as well....but we need joined up strategic thinking not reactional based crap..shut up and make do.. decisions: This is our town and our lives they are meddling with! |
|
| victor |
Of the four properties on Hawber cote lane not one has been informed that the cul-de-sac together with Banklands lane and Dale view is to be turned into a rat run for a new housing estate. |
|
| Peter |
quoteOf the four properties on Hawber cote lane not one has been informed that the cul-de-sac together with Banklands lane and Dale view is to be turned into a rat run for a new housing estate. You should make your objections know to Bradford here planning.bradford.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?keyVal=P9A6USDHMVP00&activeTab=summary |
|
| victor |
After asking Mr Currie the planner why we have not been informed, he said that we would be notified this week. |
|
| midway |
ENOUGH IS ENOUGH The planning office of BMDC seem to recommend most of the new housing applications for approval in Silsden in order to comply with government housing targets, and have no regard for the people who will suffer this environmental catastrophe, or the evidence of their own eyes,The planners nonsensical decisions means that most of the available land in Silsden will be filled with new houses, transforming and overwhelming local facilities and creating more traffic congestion on local roads.What is being created in Silsden is effectively a moderate size new town. Worse it is being created in an ad hoc manner with no extra infrastructure. |
|
| victor |
midway the traffic problems will not only be for Hawber cote lane Banklands lane and Dale view but for Middleway etc as more cars will enter the school from the new estates. |
|
| mayflower |
As Midway said.....Enough is enough!!! Bradford have no idea of the traffic chaos this will cause!! Or maybe they just choose to ignore it !! |
|
| cannopa |
Perhaps someone could educate a newbie here... - Why are the plans to build the new school on this greenfield site at the top of town rather than use an existing brownfield site where the mill was, opposite Aldi, with the access already there? - Do we know who owns this land and what the plans are for it? TIA |
|
| Corky Yorky |
quotePerhaps someone could educate a newbie here... - Why are the plans to build the new school on this greenfield site at the top of town rather than use an existing brownfield site where the mill was, opposite Aldi, with the access already there? - Do we know who owns this land and what the plans are for it? TIA Cannopa..you are opening a can of worms here!! Many, many, many people wanted that site to be used for the school: However Bradford dismissed it because, it being a brownfield site, it would cost them more! Consequentially they chose the cheaper greenfield site. Now how stupid is that? Bradford should have taken the initiative and built on the Brownfield site. It would have shown a forward thinking authority, where people rightly acknowledge that the costs of developing on these sites may cost more to the tax payer due to clean up costs, but are warranted, as they can often be on key sites. Bradford have very sadly let Silsden down and are now in a process of not only developing a school in a tight spot, but are as a consequence going to be severely adding to the traffic problems in Silsden, without just cause. The location you speak about would have been ideal for the school, as its position is relatively central to its pupil catchment and all traffic could have been accommodated easily, allowing for easy passage on for those that work in the Aire Valley or further a field to get on trains etc, allowing Silsden Town and streets to be less congested. Sadly that ain’t going to be the case because Bradford MDC and their Cllrs cannot think strategically, unless its about voters! ..anyone else want to add to this? |
|
| cannopa |
Thanks Corky, that explains a lot. Of course they have to be frugal with public money but I wonder what the difference in costs was to build on the mill site; and what other considerations they took into account. I guess it should be in the minutes somewhere. Perhaps they should have put it to a referendum to the Silsden population! |
|
| midway |
this post has been edited 1 time(s) Well cannopa it's a long story. A long long time ago, back in 1965 it was decided silsden needed a new secondary school, a suitable site was found, that being at Drabble house farm. well the owners didn't want to sell, but it was compulsory purchased anyway. our local council could do things like that then, it was for the good of the community, |
|
| skippy |
Everybody seems to be forgetting bfd do not own the old weavestyle site it is owned by a property company who paid a few million for it,it would cost the best part of 10 million to buy today,as midday said bfd already had this site therefore that is the reason they are putting the school there,it may not be suitable but its coming so sorry but get used to the idea and try to liaise with the planners to get the best out of what seems to be a bad decission we cobbydalers new donkeys years ago that the school was going here. |
|
| Corky Yorky |
quoteEverybody seems to be forgetting bfd do not own the old weavestyle site it is owned by a property company who paid a few million for it,it would cost the best part of 10 million to buy today,as midday said bfd already had this site therefore that is the reason they are putting the school there,it may not be suitable but its coming so sorry but get used to the idea and try to liaise with the planners to get the best out of what seems to be a bad decission we cobbydalers new donkeys years ago that the school was going here. Skippy.. what you need to do is stop and think that it is folk coming into the town that pays your wages. Without them you have no business. So thinking that being born and bred in Silsden means you are somehow superior has to stop. You are no different to anyone else whatsoever.. in fact it could work against you. |
|
| gazzer |
quote quoteEverybody seems to be forgetting bfd do not own the old weavestyle site it is owned by a property company who paid a few million for it,it would cost the best part of 10 million to buy today,as midday said bfd already had this site therefore that is the reason they are putting the school there,it may not be suitable but its coming so sorry but get used to the idea and try to liaise with the planners to get the best out of what seems to be a bad decission we cobbydalers new donkeys years ago that the school was going here. Skippy.. what you need to do is stop and think that it is folk coming into the town that pays your wages. Without them you have no business. So thinking that being born and bred in Silsden means you are somehow superior has to stop. You are no different to anyone else whatsoever.. in fact it could work against you. Skippy is spot on.And there are enough people already in Silsden to pay his wages.Fact is Silsden Urban District Council settled on this piece of land for a school years ago. Today thae site is not suitable for a school but as ever with Bradford Council and Silsden, its the cheapest option even if it is stupid. |
|
| Peter |
The field in question was going to be the site of a secondary school for Silsden. The new school will be a junior school and the field originally designated for a secondary school will become a football pitch. The new school will be built on adjoining fields. As a secondary school - secondary children would have been quite capable of walking to school by themselves Junior children will need escorting to school and in these times parents will take them in cars. |
|
| midway |
quoteWell cannopa it's a long story. A long long time ago, back in 1965 it was decided silsden needed a new secondary school, a suitable site was found, that being at Drabble house farm. well the owners didn't want to sell, but it was compulsory purchased anyway. our local council could do things like that then, it was for the good of the community, When Silsden and Cross Hills needed a new school I think it was in 1967 West Riding County Council agreed the school should be built in Cross Hills on the basis Silsden School Children would always get free school transport. |
|
| gazzer |
quote quoteWell cannopa it's a long story. A long long time ago, back in 1965 it was decided silsden needed a new secondary school, a suitable site was found, that being at Drabble house farm. well the owners didn't want to sell, but it was compulsory purchased anyway. our local council could do things like that then, it was for the good of the community, When Silsden and Cross Hills needed a new school I think it was in 1967 West Riding County Council agreed the school should be built in Cross Hills on the basis Silsden School Children would always get free school transport. It is correct it was agreed but when Bradford Council decided to implement charges the paperwork relating to the agreement had been lost when Bradford Council took over from Silsden Urban District Council. |
|
| Pennypeck |
Are you sure about the year? If it coincided with the opening of South Craven School, I think that was around 1959 / 1960. |
|
| Pennypeck |
Further to the above, South Craven opened in June 1957 at a cost of £120,000 (per Wikipedia). |
|
| robin |
Silsden County Secondary Modern ceased to exist in 1967 and became Silsden Annex to South Craven School. All first year pupils attended Silsden for their first year. Moving to Cross Hills afterwards. |
|
| victor |
Some people want to blame Bradford for everything, well in 1972 the Conservative government in an act of parliament changed local government in England and Wales. Bradford met was told which part of Yorkshire was to be in Bradford, and the Conservative government is ordering them to build over 40000 more houses. Try putting the blame on Conservatives for a change. |
|
| Fred |
It's not the Conservative Government wanting 42,000 new houses in Bradford but the Labour controlled Bradford Council (Hinchcliffe, Ross-shaw and the paid planning officers) who have set that housing target - the Government figure is now 28,000. |
|
| victor |
this post has been edited 2 time(s) Fred I think you will find that it is 42000, but a few weeks ago the government said it should be reduced to 28000 in two years time. Developers are working on the 43000 and councils have to abide by this for the next two years. |
|
| Fred |
Victor, I think you will find Leeds (and other councils) have reduced their targets BUT Bradford Labour run council need the money, and their policy is to raise money through council taxes. Hence the push to build as many houses as they can over the next two years. |
|
| gazzer |
quoteSome people want to blame Bradford for everything, well in 1972 the Conservative government in an act of parliament changed local government in England and Wales. Bradford met was told which part of Yorkshire was to be in Bradford, and the Conservative government is ordering them to build over 40000 more houses. Try putting the blame on Conservatives for a change. Stop defending Bradford Council, anybody can see what they are doing to Silsden.And yes as said other councils have acted now. Leeds City Council has made a u-turn on its controversial housing targets, slashing projections of new homes needed in the city over the next decade by 21 per cent. The authority had originally predicted it needed to build 70,000 new homes by 2028, a figure that was backed up by an independent Government inspector. But after a major review involving community groups and housebuilders among others, it admits the number may now be slashed to 55,000. The timescale for the revised target would also be 2033 - five years longer- to take account of updated projections. The climbdown comes after years of debate, and a raft of objections from communities which feared the impact of huge swathes of development, much of it on green belt land, on their doorsteps. The council’s housing bosses today insisted the numbers were always likely to be reviewed, as they were based on supply and demand and the latest available population forecasts. Read more at: https://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/news/politics/u-turn-on-leeds-housing-targets-as-inflated-numbers-are-slashed-by-a-fifth-1-8650948 |
|
| victor |
All I did was quote what one of our local councillors told me only two weeks ago. And gazzer I do have a right to have an opinion on Bradford council, just like you. I am totally against the new houses and the access but it is the local land owners that who are to blame, why are they not getting any stick ?. |
|
| gazzer |
quoteAll I did was quote what one of our local councillors told me only two weeks ago. And gazzer I do have a right to have an opinion on Bradford council, just like you. I am totally against the new houses and the access but it is the local land owners that who are to blame, why are they not getting any stick ?. It was the Council who in 1998 decided to build an Eastern By-pass with all the land inside the new road being developed for 1,500 houses threatening compulsory purchase orders "to fulfil the towns expansion". What do you expect landowners to do sell to the highest bidder or wait and see what the council offer.These landowners will have had a value put on their land back then so who can blame them for selling.The main thing to remember is Bradford Council came up with the plan and its now moving ahead, except Bradford Council will not build the by-pass |
|
| midway |
let's hope they are looking very closely into what they are being offered, how much is the respect from your neighbours worth. |
|
| Replies in this thread : 52
|
|
events sale / wanted general have your say looking for.. skippy greengrass |
|
DON'T FORGET THE SUBJECT IS >>>>>>>> Forums Home > General Forum > John Gliddle blogspot on a 1000 houses. |
|||
|
<< HOME PAGE < RETURN ^ PAGE TOP ^ | ||
 |
|||
|
webenquiries to |
||
18/07/2018 : 17:30:38 
20/07/2018 : 10:30:41 
20/07/2018 : 13:20:32