Former woollen mills could be turned into flats
A planning application has been submitted to redevelop two mill buildings on Bolton Hall Road, together known as Victor Works.
If approved by Bradford Council, 30 flats would be created in the former woollen mills.
A smaller building on the same site would also be converted into two homes, under plans submitted by Mahmood Holdings Ltd.
The company has promised "significant investment" in the site, according to the Local Democracy Reporting Service.
The buildings are part of the New Bolton Woods area, which has been earmarked for more than 3,000 new homes by 2030.
It is part of Bradford Council's plans to make the Canal Road Corridor (CRC) between Bradford and Shipley one of the city's main development areas.
Many of the homes in the area are planned for New Bolton Woods and the former Bolton Woods Quarry sites, although others would be built on smaller brownfield sites in the area.
"The proposed development will see a significant investment to convert the former mills to apartments and the former out-building into two dwellings," the planning application said.
The new mill would have a mix of 24 two-bed flats and six one-bed flats.
A 35-space car park would also be created within the site.
Referencing the Canal Road Corridor development, the application said: "A portfolio of eight sites have been identified as the preferred set of site options for the CRC to meet the housing requirement.
"The council will be supportive of additional proposals for new homes on additional small sites, particularly those that provide a redevelopment opportunity to bring forward land which has been previously used.
"Support will also be provided to developers who wish to develop larger sites and/or buildings for new homes not currently identified."
The developer contacted 150 homes nearby about the plans earlier this year, and the application included some of the feedback, with one resident questioning who the flats would be aimed at.
"The demographic would be for buyers or renters. It has not been decided at this point," it said in response.
Others raised concerns about parking and the developers argued residents would be provided with adequate on-site spaces.
A decision on the application is expected later this summer.
Listen to highlights from West Yorkshire on BBC Sounds, and catch up with the latest episode of Look North.
Bradford Council
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Bloomberg
41 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Summit Is in Talks for $15 Billion Partnership With AstraZeneca
By and Dinesh Nair Save AstraZeneca Plc is discussing a partnership deal with Summit Therapeutics Inc. in which it could pay as much as $15 billion over time to license a lung-cancer drug, according to people familiar with the matter. The companies have been holdings talks regarding the potential partnership over Summit's ivonescimab treatment, the people said, asking not to be identified because that matter is private. Summit has also held discussions with other major pharmaceutical firms, the people said.
Associated Press
an hour ago
- Associated Press
How a tear or two spooked markets and dominated UK's political narrative
LONDON (AP) — The weekly session in which the British prime minister is questioned by lawmakers in Parliament can be an ordeal for the government leader. For Cabinet members, it's usually simply a matter of backing their boss. But on Wednesday the spotlight ended up on Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves during the Prime Minister's Questions session because it became evident that she was crying as she sat beside Prime Minister Keir Starmer. It's not known what triggered the tears, later said to have been personal. They came as Starmer sought to fend off attacks that his year-old government was losing its authority and that he was about to fire Reeves to regain the initiative. Markets spooked Traders got spooked, with the interest rate charged on the U.K.'s 10-year benchmark bond in the markets up sharply, and the pound down. The moves were a sign investors had lost confidence in U.K. financial assets. Reeves had become associated with fiscal discipline, in particular a rule of covering day-to-day government spending with tax revenue, said Andrew Wishart, an economist at Berenberg Bank. 'The markets are concerned that if the Chancellor goes, such fiscal discipline would follow her out of the door,' he added. With Starmer insisting Thursday that Reeves would remain in post, the markets calmed down. Prime minister's weekly ordeal Prime Minister's Questions, or PMQs, can come as close to a gladiatorial contest as is possible in a modern legislative chamber. Very little deference is given to the man or woman holding the highest office in the land. The prime minister is considered the first among equals. Like all other members of Parliament, the prime minister represents one of 650 constituencies. And nowhere is that shared connection more noticeable than at noon every Wednesday in the House of Commons. Starmer stands for half an hour every week to be quizzed by friends and foes. He may get soft balls, but there's always a potential zinger around the corner. The leader of the biggest opposition party, currently the Conservative Party's Kemi Badenoch, has the best chance to knock the prime minister off course. With six questions, she can lay traps and go for the jugular. Typically it's more theater than substance, and the weekly shouting match is consistently the most-watched parliamentary event, viewed around the world, including on C-Span in the United States. This week was fraught This week's session appeared to have more at stake than usual following a chaotic run-up to a welfare reform bill. With scores of Labour lawmakers opposed, Starmer was forced to scrap key planks of the bill — at a cost, politically and economically. For a prime minister, with one of the biggest majorities in history, it was a sign of weakness. Many Labour MPs blame Reeves, for her rigid adherence to her budget rules. As usual, Starmer was flanked to his left by Reeves, who didn't look her usual self, clearly bloated around the eyes. Badenoch showed little mercy, describing Reeves as 'absolutely miserable' and a 'human shield' for Starmer. She asked Starmer whether he could repeat a pledge that Reeves would stay in her post until the general election, which has to take place by the middle of 2029. While praising Reeves' handling of the economy, Starmer didn't give that assurance, and it was around this point that Reeves wiped away a tear. 'How awful for the Chancellor that he couldn't confirm that she would stay in place,' Badenoch responded. The immediate political aftermath Starmer's Downing Street operation faced questions over Reeves' teary appearance. Could it have been hay fever? Had Starmer told Reeves she would be fired for the government's recent woes, which has seen Labour's approval ratings slide? Starmer's press spokesman said it was a 'personal matter,' insisted Reeves was 'going nowhere' and had the prime minister's 'full backing.' Later, Starmer told the BBC that Reeves would be Chancellor for a 'very long time' and that it was 'absolutely wrong' to suggest her distress was related to the welfare U-turn. A day on Images of Reeves' agitated state were emblazoned across newspapers and remained a key item on the news agenda. Starmer repeated on Thursday that Reeves would remain Chancellor 'for years to come' and sought to explain why he hadn't comforted Reeves during PMQs. 'In PMQs, it is bang, bang, bang,' he said at an event where he and Reeves hugged. 'That's what it was yesterday and therefore I was probably the last to appreciate anything going on in the chamber.' Reeves appeared more like her usual self. 'People saw I was upset, but that was yesterday,' she told Sky News. 'I guess the thing that is different from my job and many of your viewers is that when I'm having a tough day, it's on the telly.'
Fast Company
an hour ago
- Fast Company
Leaders, here's how to close the gap between your words and actions
It's one thing to declare, 'We care about our people.' It's entirely different to prove it in messy, unscripted moments, especially when no one is watching. Too often, corporate messaging about empathy and respect falters under pressure. We proclaim well-being, then demand overtime. We champion inclusion, then maintain biased systems. We insist on dignity, then terminate employees over Zoom. This disconnect, which I call corporate message incongruency, erodes trust, corrodes culture, and ultimately undermines everyone's performance. The Cost of Incongruency When organizations fail to live up to their own rhetoric, employees notice, and they don't stay quiet about it. A 2024 study found that perceiving corporate hypocrisy (characterized by gaps between stated values and actual behavior) is strongly linked to increased employee cynicism, disengagement, and a higher risk of turnover. Meanwhile, only 23% of workers worldwide are engaged in their work, according to Gallup—meaning the vast majority are either emotionally detached or actively disengaged. Executives often overestimate their impact. In its 2024 Well-Being at Work Survey conducted in the U.S., U.K., Canada, and Australia, Deloitte found that 90% of executives believe working for their company 'has a positive effect on worker well-being, skills development, career advancement, inclusion and belonging, and [employees'] sense of purpose and meaning.' At the same time, just 60% (or fewer) of workers agree, according to the survey. That gap isn't just a miscommunication; it's a structural signal. And when leaders default to convenience over care in high-stakes moments, the message reverberates far beyond a single event. Consider the now-infamous 2021 Zoom layoffs at where 900 employees were let go in a terse three-minute video. The backlash was swift and severe, spotlighting a painful truth: When corporate actions contradict their stated values, their reputation takes a hit. There Doesn't Have to Be a Disconnect Most misalignment stems from good intentions, not malice. But business values must be lived in practice, not just in glossy branding. And regardless of your role—whether you're a CEO, director, manager, or individual contributor—you have the power to bridge the gap. 1. Audit intent versus impact. Start with brutal honesty. Map your organization's stated values against real moments where behaviors diverge—vacation policies that go unused, diversity statements that don't reflect candidate slates. In my leadership sessions, consistently mapping these dissonances reveals opportunities to realign, rather than rebrand. Invite feedback from across levels and treat misalignment not as a failure, but as data. 2. Lead with ritual integrity. Values don't stick—they ritualize. Meaningful, small-scale rituals reinforce intent: a weekly check-in circle to honor well-being, 'no-meeting' afternoons to protect focus, transparent sharing of equity data even when it stings. Culture is less magic and more habit. These rituals become touchpoints for trust and vehicles for transformation. 3. Embed accountability. Accountability is the bridge from talk to trust. Expand success metrics to include psychological safety, sense of belonging, and alignment of personal narratives, a practice I call story audits. Nearly 85% of large U.S. employers offer workplace wellness programs; despite this, anticipated improvements in well-being are not being realized, indicating a mismatch between investment and outcomes. Measuring the invisible matters because it makes visible what is valued. This grassroots approach doesn't just uncover pain points; it creates buy-in and shared ownership for change. 4. Empower action at all levels. Aligned culture isn't a top-down decree; it's a distributed commitment. Empower 'alignment champions' across departments. At one biotech firm I advised, peer-led story circles uncovered voice imbalances more effectively than any digital survey and enabled real-time corrections. 5. Normalize vulnerability and repair. Inevitably, we slip. The question isn't whether it happens, but what happens next. Acknowledge missteps publicly. Leaders who say 'I was wrong' often deepen trust more than those who avoid the subject. Vulnerability is strength, not weakness. Repair strengthens culture when it's visible and sincere. Cultural congruence isn't a quarterly campaign; it's a daily practice. Every decision, conversation, and interaction carries a message. When we treat values as design principles rather than billboards, we build systems that reinforce them. Words shape our intentions, but actions shape our outcomes. Try this in your next meeting: Ask, 'Where are we out of sync, and what might it take to realign?' It's a simple question, but it signals a profound commitment. When organizations align their words with their actions, they do more than retain loyalty. They earn trust.
