AD1/H - Turner Lane

Object

Representation ID: 8819

Received: 15/03/2021

Respondent: Heather Tysoe

Construction traffic would disrupt the area.

Waste collectors often do not empty bins on the allotted day but on the next day due to full trucks.

The speed limit- 20mph is not followed, new housing and increased parking on the road will exacerbate that, increasing traffic, pollution, noise and the risk of accident and injury.
Parking issue - parking on pavements, making driving difficult and pavements difficult to use for those with prams or mobility issues.
Site unsuitable as it will put pressure on stressed roads, shops, medical centre and primary school.
Schools - oversubscribed.
flood risk - due to house building and ground springs. The site is essential to maintain good flow of water off the moors and the bypass.
Noise or pollution barrier would be required between the houses and the road.
Impact on footpath.
Destruction of local wildlife and the refuge provided by the hedges from the road.
More suitable brown belt pieces of land should be considered.
Proposals disproportionately large for Addingham which has been allocated a bigger percentage of houses than the surrounding villages.

Object

Representation ID: 9864

Received: 19/03/2021

Respondent: Adam Driver

•Access only via Moor Lane and Moor Park Drive.
•The additional housing will create too much traffic causing the area to be unsafe. The roads are narrow and have parked cars leading to cars waiting to pass.
•Increase of around 648 journeys per day and there is a risk of somebody being hit by a car on these narrow streets.
•Additional households will require 181 school places and 543 people needing a doctor.
•Increase in Addingham’s population with be 13.6%. Supportive of proposals in Ilkely providing additional school places and GPs are made available. Based on 283 additional dwellings in Ilkely having 3 occupants, the increase in population would be 5.7% much lower than Addingham’s 13.6%.
•This increase in population in Addingham will be damaging for the environment. Further infrastructure will be needed and likely to be built on green belt land.
•These proposals will see the green belt in this part of the Wharf valley diminished.

Comment

Representation ID: 9879

Received: 16/03/2021

Respondent: Dr Carol Miles

AD1/H Turner Lane 20 houses Acceptable
I hope that any houses built would :
• be carbon neutral
• be built with a Sustainable Urban Drainage System
• allow for the retention of mature trees and drystone walls
• allow for the creation of protected riparian zones
• not be overlarge buildings out of scale with others around them , such as have been built at the end of Bark Lane, on the site of the old police house in Park Crescent, in the middle of Sidebeck Road, and at 31A Bark Lane behind numbers 11 and 15 The Acres. These either completely destroy privacy or block out lovely views from public spaces in the village, one of Addingham’s most attractive features
• include affordable homes for local young people to buy.

Object

Representation ID: 9888

Received: 16/04/2021

Respondent: Jeffery & Julie Tucker

Moor Lane isn't suitable for increased traffic.
The by-pass is a dangerous road which is already too busy

The new houses are not sustainable, they are a mile from Addingham centre and so Moor Lane will bear the extra traffic on this. It is already too busy and will become very unsafe. The extra cars will increase noise, congestion, pollution and injury risk. Nobody ahears to the current speed limit. The current drainage system cannot cope as things are so and when it rains they completely overflow and come out of the drains in the road, we will be at risk of flooding from this. In addition the majority of houses already on Moor Lane do not currently have adequate parking facilities and so cars currently travel between two parked cars on either side of the road which is already dangerous so this will a lot worse.

Object

Representation ID: 10033

Received: 16/03/2021

Respondent: Mr M Wilcock

a; It is unacceptable to be developing on Green Belt land, in a village that is unable to cope. the much loved character of the village would be lost.
b; Already the traffic using this area does not observe the 20 mile limit. Most new housing would consist of two cars, increasing pollution
c; The drainage system is at a maximum and will increase the risk of flooding.
d; Addingham does not have the facilities for a much increased population. A basic bus service, no trains anymore. What schools will the children attend ? there is only a Primary School that is at capacity, further education involves travel to Ilkley or Skipton.

It is obvious that Bradford has brown sites that would be more suited to regeneration, close to schools and transport, than destroying precious green land in Addingham.

Object

Representation ID: 10077

Received: 27/04/2021

Respondent: John Gamble

I am appalled and dismayed to hear of these proposed developments. We are astounded that Green field sites and Green belt sites are intended to be decimated with new housing. We need to keep these limited areas as open land for the well being of everyone. It has been so noticeable and essential in these difficult COVID times.
The existing road network would be deluged with additional traffic and during the construction stage noise ,pollution and heavy plant equipment accessing sites would be extremely detrimental to the environment and the well being of the existing residents.
Schools in the area are already fully subscribed, there is no justification to impose such major developments in such a pleasant area. In a nutshell it would ruin what is now a wonderful township and for what.

Object

Representation ID: 10155

Received: 15/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Peter Tapper

•Understand that some housing is required, but no reasons for building on Green Belt and floodplains.
•What consideration has been given to the build quality of new housing to fit with existing period cottages?
•Should be stipulated that new builds must use Yorkshire stone and not the ‘mock stone’ that blights houses built nowadays –important to the integrity of the village and its history.
•This should be used an opportunity to enhance the area.
•Brownfield sites in Keighley should be used to improve this area. Addingham does not need improving. Developments would lead to deterioration of the village.
•Think about the future heritage of the village, instead of destroying it for more dwellings. The quality of areas such as Keighley could be improved.

Comment

Representation ID: 10191

Received: 16/03/2021

Respondent: Thelma M Pacsoo

I would like to express my concern about the level of traffic on the two feeder roads, being Moor Lane and Moor Park Drive that would undoubtedly increase massively, with such a significant number of additional houses,were these plans to be passed.

Both these roads have a 20 mile per hour limit, which it appears, sadly, some drivers currently do not comply, so with more traffic use to such an extent as proposed it is an accident waiting to happen.

The Moor Park estate is in the majority a development of bungalows, with only the later, higher section additions being houses. The residents in the bungalows, by their very nature are mainly of the older generation and as well as the actual risk of accidents, the increased level of pollution would adversely effect their health and well being.

Object

Representation ID: 10424

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Lynne Walder

Green Belt site AD1/H; will encroach into the countryside and impact the character and uniqueness of Addingham.

Object

Representation ID: 10760

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Michael Brookfield

- the access to the proposed site is inadequate the road leading to Moor Park Drive is very small.
- in the last 4 years there has been problems with the drainage which will only increase with more properties being built.
- loss of green space with this proposed development

Object

Representation ID: 11255

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Dr Vanessa Taylor

- The proposed developments on Green Belt land are not sustainable locations for more development.
- The loss of these Green Belt sites, will result in encroachment of development into the countryside, adversely affecting the view, environment and character of the village, which does not accord with Policy SP4:
- Location of Development and SP15 Creating Healthy Places. The sites are a significant distance from local amenities
- Development likely to significantly increase traffic and car journeys as most people will need to drive to local amenities and ‘principal’ towns for shopping, work and schools contrary d policy TR1(a) to deliver car-light and car-free developments

Object

Representation ID: 11418

Received: 17/03/2021

Respondent: Mr David Parker

Number of people: 2

There are already concerns of flooding in the village and these can only be worsened by the replacement of soakaway fields at the top of the village with urbanisation and it’s resultant increased run-off.

The development is out of proportion to the size of the village. The local infrastructure is inadequate for the increased demands imposed by so many new households.

The increased urban sprawl would mean Addingham lose part of it’s ‘picturesque village charm’. The beautiful greenbelt with faraway views to be replaced by wall to wall housing estates. Another small part of England’s National Heritage would inevitably be destroyed.

Object

Representation ID: 11549

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Ms Bridget Attia

- Loss of Green Belt land and building on Greenfield sites.
- Creating urban sprawl and spreading the village into a huge housing development, reducing the village community.
- Increasing traffic flow
-An increase in noise, congestion, pollution and health impacts

Object

Representation ID: 11748

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Jennifer Bonner

Addingham is a small village and the main street in Addingham is already congested.
A further 81 additional houses with one two or sometimes three cars will increase the noise congestion and pollution in this beautiful village at the edge of the Dales.
I STRONGLY OBJECT to the proposals for the houses that may be built in Turner Lane and Moor Lane.
The roads leading to these sites are already very busy, there is a 20 mile a hour limit on Moor Lane, and Moor Park Drive and vehicles are often parked on both sides of the road. My concern is for the safety of residents in these streets.
There is a mix of elderly residents and young families and extra cars would certainly be very dangerous on these roads.
Extra houses would also put pressure on services in Addingham, I understand the class sizes at the school are quite large and Ilkley Grammer school is already oversubscribed.

Object

Representation ID: 11794

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Darren Abbott

•Over 20 year traffic on Main Street has increased.
•Although the developments are on the fringe of the village traffic will increase as people travel to school, amenities, additional trades people. Increased traffic will bring increased noise/pollution. This affects sleep and health.
•Great concerns over the loss of green space that acts as a natural run off and soak up in times of high rainfall.
•Many properties in the village have flooded over the last decade and this is increased.
•No consideration has been given to these residents in terms of implementing additional flood defences.
•The visual loss of greenspace is a significant objection. Views from the surrounding hill show Addingham as a village. Increased residential sprawl would spoil this.

Object

Representation ID: 11983

Received: 20/03/2021

Respondent: Dr. Tom Wade

My reasons for objection is as follows:

• Access will be via Moor Lane, an overcrowded road with a lot of through traffic for a residential street. Potential for over 100 extra cars will make the road unsafe particularly for the children who live and play on it.

• Building on green belt land is likely to significantly and irreversibly damage natural habitats and eco systems within the village which will contribute to a rise in carbon footprint. This is against local and national government forward view. There is brown belt land that should be considered first.

• Village amenities are over a mile from the proposed site - seems illogical for family houses

• Addingham is hugely congested with multiple traffic problems at points through the historic village. Infrastructure should be considered well in advance of any new houses. The local school does not have capacity to take more children.

Object

Representation ID: 12003

Received: 20/03/2021

Respondent: Kelli Zezulka

I would like to formally register my objection to the proposed building plans in Ilkley (IL1/H, IL2/H, IL3/H and IL4/H), Burley-in-Wharfedale (BU1/H and BU2/H), and Addingham (AD1/H, AD2/H, AD3/H, AD4/H, AD5/H, AD6/H, AD7/8 and AD8/H), particularly those that are proposed on current green belt sites.

The current infrastructure of all three of these areas will not support further housing developments and the concomitant rises in population. The proposals would significantly change the character of these towns and the surrounding areas -- the Ilkley proposals and the Burley Sun Lane proposal, in particular, would devastate the local environment and wildlife.

None of this building should be allowed to go ahead, and no building should be allowed on green belt sites across the district full stop.

Object

Representation ID: 12112

Received: 19/03/2021

Respondent: Mike & Janet Cooper

Number of people: 2

Building on Greenbelt should not be allowed destroying views and the openness of the village.

The opportunity for sprawl, will be uncontrollable and the outstanding views over the open fields towards Beamsley will be lost forever.

AD1/H is too far from the village amenities for families to walk into the village and back up the steep hill, car journeys will increase dramatically on already busy village streets.

AD6/H was refused planning a few of years ago, nothing has changed the reasons put forward then are still valid for all greenbelt sites.

The total number of new dwellings proposed for Addingham is disproportionate to the size of the village.

There is no supporting infrastructure for the village. No train station, no secondary school, poor bus links, most commuting is by car already. 300 extra cars in the village is contrary to pollution targets.

If there is no option to using greenbelt land there are better sites closer to the village.

Object

Representation ID: 12210

Received: 19/03/2021

Respondent: Mel Morgan-Davis

Moor Lane has seen detrimental impact from
additional housebuilding in recent years.
Theoretically a 20 mph zone, speed limits are broken by cars travelling to the top of the road, children are used to playing in what was previously a quiet road, the current situation is an accident waiting to happen.
Impact of increased traffic flow
Impact on flow through the village on Main Street and Bolton Road.
It would seem that no-one has seriously looked at the overall traffic problems in the village - as evidenced by your other proposals - the two to the west and particularly the east would also hugely add to volume in the village. Proposal AD5/H, proves that there is a complete and utter disregard for traffic flow, children's safety (it's a narrow much-used walkway for children attending school) and environmental/wildlife issues.
Permitted parking (reasonably required by residents) create bottlenecks and traffic is brought to a standstill.
Implications on overall traffic problems from additional traffic

Object

Representation ID: 12233

Received: 19/03/2021

Respondent: Sarah Simpson

ADH/1 - Turner Lane - I oppose this as this is off a really small road near the park in a lovely green area where people walk near. The only access to it is via Moor Lane and Moor Park Drive. These roads were not built for such amount of traffic and are becoming a rat run already with large amounts of traffic. This is a peaceful area with lots of wildlife which will be destroyed if built on.

Object

Representation ID: 12291

Received: 19/03/2021

Respondent: Alison Dixon

I object to the proposed building of houses at Moor Lane, Turner Lane and Parsons Lane.
The local schools are over-subscribed, children would have to be bused to other areas.
Drainage system cannot cope now and my own garden is subject to flooding.
Increased numbers of cars as the transport system is almost non-existent.
Building on Green Belt is detrimental to peoples health, well being and natural surroundings which in these times is vital.
Addingham is becoming a long sprawling village and can barely cope.
I am sure it is not necessary to fill every field with houses.

Object

Representation ID: 12791

Received: 21/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Olive Hirst

I am writing to strongly object to the proposed housing developments you are planning at the top of Moor Lane and Moor Park Drive.
Traffic is already an issue on these roads and I object to building on Green Belt land.
Furthermore, we are constantly encouraged to take the country air for our mental and physical health. Turner Lane, in particular, and Moor Lane are well used by dog walkers which is currently done in safety and peace.
I am also concerned about the natural habitat. Curlew’s nest and forage at site AD6 which would are protected by the South and North Pennine Special Protection Areas; building here would impact on their population.

Object

Representation ID: 12795

Received: 21/03/2021

Respondent: Graham & Elaine Jolly

I am disappointed to learn of plans to allow a further 81 houses to be built here!
There is already 18 new houses completed and a further 6 more currently being built! This is a village not a town, transport options are few no trains and a limited bus service, so obviously the new residents are going to use the car for school runs, shopping etc. Its 20 MPH on our road another reason I chose it!

It will make it too busy, too noisy, and more pollution for everyone!

Please stop it! We STRONGLY object to these building plans.

Object

Representation ID: 12929

Received: 21/03/2021

Respondent: Eric Hemsley

Impact on the village community/infrastructure.
Traffic congestion/parking.
Traffic increases from tourists to Bolton Abbey.
Parking on Main Street creates difficulties in navigating through the village especially for buses.
Narrow road access to school.
Welfare of the villagers.
No businesses in the village to provide increase to local employment. Commuters drive to Ilkley and park to use the station. Ilkley is lacking in long period parking provision.
Schools - inadequate.
Extra healthcare facilities needed.
Impact on fauna and wildlife, deers birds such as owls, curlews, otters, loss of greenfields.
Need to reduce carbon footprint.
Site AD1/H, would mean access would filter through Turner Lane, Manor Park Drive and Manor Drive culminating at the junction of Old Skipton Road and Silsden Road at the junction near to the Craven Heifer. This junction would need considerable alterations particularly for any vehicle turning up Silsden Road, the alternative is excess traffic down the Main Street

Object

Representation ID: 12975

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Ms Julie Melechi

- object to AD1/H
- add to sprawl and encroachment into green belt
- negative impact on character of the village
- loss of important green spaces
- unsustainable development located long way from services
- impact on local highway network/safety

Object

Representation ID: 12981

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Ann & Graham Bacon

Number of people: 2

Addingham is a "Local Service Centre” with a level of housing to satisfy local need mainly. The increase to 181 from 75 is totally unacceptable. The large use of greenfield sites will increase the burden on drains and roads. These are a major problem already.

We object strongly to AD1/H, AD2/H, AD3/H and AD4/H. AD5/H is a rich wildlife site which should be designated as such. The original 75 dwellings could have been accommodated in mainly brownfield sites which had been suggested by a local group who spent a lot of time. They were sensitive to the needs of the village.

Object

Representation ID: 13204

Received: 21/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs V C Fisher

I am writing to object to these four sites at the top of Addingham Village, where 81 houses are proposed to be built. Six houses are being built and 18 houses have recently been completed, along with the 81 now proposed, making a total of 105 houses. This becomes a housing estate which is disproportionate to the rest of the village and all on Green Belt land.
The majority of housing on Moor Park Drive is bungalows, occupied by elderly people, the road is narrow and the speed limit is 20mph. The number of extra vehicles using this road will make it unsafe, with more noise, pollution and congestion. These houses will be a mile from the village centre and people will use their cars to shop/work.
There many reasons to object to this development but the main one for me is the volume of traffic on Moor Park Drive.

Object

Representation ID: 13464

Received: 21/03/2021

Respondent: John & Lesley Hutchinson

Do not believe there is evidence of need to build 181 houses or anything approaching this number in Addingham.

All sites are Green Belt. NPPF states there should be “exceptional circumstances” before changing Green Belt boundaries and that inappropriate development is harmful to it and approved only in “very special circumstances”.

Council has not provided sufficient justification providing “exceptional circumstances” why sites should be considered or detailing “very special circumstances” for releasing them.

NPPF requires that before concluding exceptional circumstances exist, the Council should demonstrate it has fully examined all other reasonable options for meeting development needs.

Highlights the Council must identify a housing need requirement for a particular settlement, so that housing growth numbers can be justified. This has not been explored sufficiently. No evidence that Addingham’s housing need warrants releasing land for up to 181 houses. No justification that all other possible options have been considered.

Object

Representation ID: 14005

Received: 21/03/2021

Respondent: Timothy Pratt

We all know the current drainage system cannot cope with the current number of houses in Turner Lane and Moor Lane. We will see an increased risk of flooding.


160 extra cars making several journeys a day will significantly increase noise, congestion, pollution and risk of injury.

People already do not adhere to the 20mph speed limit on Moor Lane. Our children will be at risk of injury or worse with increased traffic.

Building on these sites will mean the loss of Green Belt land. It will greatly diminish the setting of the village from the Western side, spoiling the character and appearance of Addingham.


Addingham has been allocated too many houses overall. It is a small village with limited services but has been allocated a bigger percentage of new houses than any other. This will put pressure on Addingham Primary School. Ilkley Grammar School is already oversubscribed.

Object

Representation ID: 14205

Received: 20/03/2021

Respondent: Cherry & David Bartlett

Number of people: 2

-Conflict with BDLP seeing to protect green spaces and “minimises the use of Green Belt land”.
-Object to use of green belt sites
-If available, land should be used for sport and recreation particularly those at the west end of the village where such facilities are very limited or community orchards/ tree planting to be part of the Northern Forest/additional allotments.
-Prioritise brownfield sites in Bradford and empty retail premises in centres.
-Limited employment opportunities in Addingham.
-Lead to increase in commuting.
-Lack of public transport services
-Parking issues in Ilkley
-Green travel -no safe cycle routes between Addingham and other towns. These should be developed before any additional housing is approved.
-Education - capacity issues at Ilkley Grammar School
-Infrastructure - current water/sewage issues in Ilkley when the Wharfe floods.
-Internet - higher demand due to people working from home
-Concerns re assessment of effects on the sensitive local environment