OVER 2,000 possible development sites across the District were considered when Bradford’s draft local plan was being drawn up.

Last Monday a public consultation started on the Bradford Local Plan - a document that sets out where future development should, and should not be built between now and 2038.

Government targets call for the District to deliver 1,700 new homes a year - over 30,000 in the life of the plan.

But in a briefing with the Telegraph & Argus last week, one of the officers who helped draw up the plan said the Council has resisted government requests to deliver 2,300 houses a year, something they felt was “not deliverable.”

The plan sets out 325 housing sites that could help meet the target. This includes 7,000 homes in the city centre, but also includes a number of Green belt sites.

If approved, it will be the first time Bradford has had an integrated Local Plan since 2005.

The public consultation will ask people for their opinions on the different housing sites. However, the with the annual housing numbers Bradford has to deliver being fixed by Government, it means that if a suggested site proves unpopular and is not included in the final plan, the homes allocated on that site will have to be accommodated somewhere else in the District.

In a briefing with the T&A Andrew Marshall, Planning & Transport Strategy Manager said hundreds of possible sites had been discounted before the draft was released last week.

Hundreds of possible housing sites proposed as Bradford plans for next 15-20 years

He said: “We have to make sure we have the right sorts of development on these sites.

“It is about influencing investment in housing, but also influencing investment in infrastructure too.

“There are lots of sites that haven’t been progressed. When you consider we had upwards of 2,000 sites suggested, and we’ve got it down to about 325. There is a lot of work behind what we have looked at. This consultation is a great chance for people to look at these proposals.”

He said the Council was happy to hear suggestions of any possible development sites that may have been missed, adding: “We want to find out what people like and don’t like, as well as things they would like to see.”

He said it would still take a couple of years for the plan to go through its different drafts and become official policy.

The houses have to reflect the needs of Bradford, Mr Marshall said, with accessible homes and housing suitable for an ageing population built on some sites and properties built for young professionals and families built in other areas. He added: “Each site will still have to come through as a full planning application.”

He also told the Telegraph & Argus that a site’s inclusion in the plan at such an early stage of the process is not a guarantee that it would get planning permission.

Until the plan is adopted, a site’s inclusion would only be given “limited weight” when it came to the planning process. He added: “If someone progresses a site in Green Belt it would still be classed as not appropriate and the plans would be tested against current policies.”

Government housing targets had urged a 35 per cent “uplift” in housing targets in the 20 biggest cities in the UK - including Bradford.

That would have taken the annual housing target for the District from 1,700 new homes a year to 2,300 - with many of the extra 35 per cent having to be built in the city of Bradford.

But Mr Marshall said the Council did not see this as achievable. He added: “We felt we couldn’t accommodate that 35 per cent uplift. It would have been an extra 10,000 units in the period of the plan. It wouldn’t be achievable without going into Green belt. As it is we are having to go into Green belt to meet the lower numbers.

“We would struggle to meet that extra 10,000 in the city centre - we have already increased the number of houses for the city centre. If we didn’t deliver them there, we’d have to deliver them somewhere else.”

He said the Council was currently delivering around 1,500 homes a year, and around 70 per cent of this was on brownfield sites.

Once the Local Plan is in place it would make it much more unlikely that developers would be able to build on sites not included in the plan. Mr Marshall said: “We haven’t had a five year housing plan in place recently. Once this is approved, it will strengthen the process to stop developments in areas we don’t think are suitable.

“It gives a bit more certainty to communities. They may not be overjoyed about their areas experiencing growth, but it gives them certainty as to where they will be.”

When asked why Green Belt sites are still being included in the plan, he said filling every urban space with housing would not provide a good quality of life for people living there. He said: “You have to have a balance. You can’t pile all the development in urban areas. On some level a section of green space in an urban area is more important to people living there than a Green Belt site.

“You have to look at some other sites that are still sustainable and can be delivered.”

He said some Green Belt sites did little to support the function of the Green Belt - enhancing green space and ensuring biodiversity, He added; “Some Green Belt sites are poor quality and have low bio diversity. Some brownfield sites may be green spaces, even if they are not classed as green fields, and these have an importance to their local communities. We have to deliver on the right locations and be sensitive to how housing impacts on local communities.

“A lot more Green Belt sites were put forward to us by landowners, but we resisted many of them.”

He said that in early drafts of the plan 11,000 homes would be delivered in Green Belt. The current proposals are for 5,000 homes on Green belt sites. This could be reduced further if more brownfield sites became available.

Councillor Alex Ross Shaw, Executive for Regeneration, Planning and Transport, said: “The thing to remember is whenever we deliver a housing site on Brownfield it removes pressure from the Green Belt.”

He referred to plans for housing at High Point and New Bolton Woods as an example of brownfield developments the Council has supported.

People have until March 24 to comment on the plans. To have your say and see the full list of sites, visit https://bradford.oc2.uk/document/20.

The Telegraph & Argus will be looking at what the local plan will mean for different areas of the District in a series of articles in the coming days and weeks.