A COUNCILLOR has questioned whether unreliable bus services should be considered when planning where houses should be built.

The issue was raised during a planning meeting where plans for over 130 houses on land off Rooley Crescent were being discussed.

There has been a long planning history regarding the site, with an initial plan for over 140 homes refused by Bradford Council.
 

Applicants Caddick Land appealed this decision, and while a planning inspector dismissed this appeal, they did not agree with Bradford Council’s reason to refuse the application.

The plans were re-submitted, and approved by the Council’s Regulatory and Appeals Committee last year.

Last month the application returned to the committee due to Caddick wanting to make a number of changes.

This included scrapping the one-bed homes planned as part of the development, meaning the number of units would be reduced from 146 to 133, and alter the amount of water flow off the site – near the M606.

There had been numerous objections to this latest application, particularly from residents of Rooley Crescent who have raised serious concerns over the development.

However, planning officers said these objections were to aspects of the scheme that had already been approved, and not these amendments.

Members were told that one reason the development had eventually been approved was due to the planning inspector’s claims that there was a regular bus route to and from the site.

Councillor Sinead Engel (Lab, Clayton and Fairweather Green) said: “What is the definition of a reliable bus route? Especially considering we have seen the frequency of many routes decrease in the past few years?”

She was told that at least two bus services an hour was classed as frequent.

Cllr Engel said cancellations meant that even if services are scheduled, they often don’t turn up, adding: “In Clayton there are supposed to be four buses an hour, but often people are standing at stops for an hour and a half.

“There is a difference between a bus on a timetable and what is physically happening.”

Hannah Lucitt, major developments manager on the Council, said: “That is a wider conversation about the British transport system. We have to rely on the times in front of us.”

Objector Saqib Shah said the developer was looking to reduce the number of one bed homes due to “economic greed”.

Planning officer Malcolm Joy replied: “Why a developer wants to do something is not a material planning consideration. Applicants are entitled to do that.”

During the meeting both members of the committee and the objectors voiced concern that nobody from the Council’s flood team had attended the meeting – despite one of the changes being related to drainage of the site.

They were told that an officer had been due to attend, but for some unknown reason had not shown up to the meeting.

The amendments to the application were approved.