BU2/H - Scalebor House, Moor Lane

Object

Representation ID: 5575

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Tom Archer

In summary therefore the development of this site for residential purposes is not considered to be a suitable, available or deliverable option on the grounds of land ownership, access, housing need and Green Belt considerations and I strongly object to the proposals for any residential development on the site. There is a restriction on title constraining the subject site to use as grazing land, there is no viable access solution and the site meets 3 of the 5 Green Belt criteria with no exceptional circumstances for Green Belt release.

Object

Representation ID: 5587

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Peter Jenkins

In summary therefore the development of this site for residential purposes is not considered to be a suitable, available or deliverable option on the grounds of land ownership, access, housing need and Green Belt considerations and I strongly object to the proposals for any residential development on the site. There is a restriction on title constraining the subject site to use as grazing land, there is no viable access solution and the site meets 3 of the 5 Green Belt criteria with no exceptional circumstances for Green Belt release.

Object

Representation ID: 5964

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Susan Collins

BU2/H SCALEBOR HOUSE
Principal objections:
This would be another large development to impact adversely upon the village and its environment.
Key impacts would be:
• Elimination of a largely open green area closely adjacent to the village and existing housing and with potential impact on the wider greenfield and Greenbelt areas
(no details are provided in the Development Plan of how the stated ‘distinct landscape setting will be conserved and enhanced’ will be achieved)
• High density housing and occupation, out of keeping with that of the adjacent former Scalebor hospital estate and other nearby properties
• Further adverse impact on local infrastructure and services. with few compensatory provisions – in particular on roads, village access and parking, public transport, schools and medical facilities
• A resultant total of 610 new residential units in the village – exceeding the Remaining Allocation Requirement of 541 units

Object

Representation ID: 6044

Received: 01/03/2021

Respondent: Kathleen Smith

I object to the proposed housing developments on green belt land in Ilkley, Addingham and Burley in Wharfedale.

Apart from destroying the environment, are there plans to increase the infrastructure to accommodate the large numbers of residents who will occupy the houses. Our schools are full and the existing residents have difficulty getting an appointment at our doctors' surgeries.

The traffic through Ilkley is horrendous and parking is impossible at the weekends.

During the week people travel to Ilkley to take the train into Leeds or Bradford and park their cars on the roads outside resident's houses making peoples lives a misery.

If these proposals go ahead, no doubt in the future Addingham, Ilkley and Burley will become one if further development is allowed.

Please take into consideration the views of the people who live in these areas and reject any further development on green belt land.

Object

Representation ID: 8157

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: CPRE West Yorkshire

In line with our comments on policy SP5, we object to these site allocations:

BU1/H
BU2/H

Object

Representation ID: 10997

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Savia Lorain Hughes

Sun Lane and Scalebor House are both green field sites. Surely priority on building should be for brown field sites closer to the need in inner city Bradford where unoccupied residences are available along with brown field sites which should have priority for use.

Both Sun Lane and Scalebor access/exit on to roads needs to be considered especially during peak hours and with limited infrastructure ability (narrow roads, pinch points, etc)

Object

Representation ID: 11393

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Isabel Joyce Russell

The Sun Lane and Scalebor housing proposals are totally impractical and against current policy - it appalls me that residents are presented by such poor planning proposals: building on green belt when brown field sites available and also placed nearer to available job opportunities, thus less travel to work.

Both sites unsuitable 1) flood plain 2) on a hill. Both locations are inhabited with wild life, rare birds and plants and Sun Lane in particular an outdoor reserve for local residents to walk without driving anywhere. Then, the support services are inadequate for such an enormous developments. Not sufficient school places, access to transport and carparking for rail travel...already a problem, The Surgery would not be able to cope without expansion. I could go on but we have been objecting about Sun Lane for several years now and all such previous objections I support again in making this latest objection.

Object

Representation ID: 12002

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: 15949

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Robert Whiting

I'm particularly concerned about the impact that the proposed 610 homes will have on village infrastructure.
I'd like to comment on the proposed site BU2/H - Scalebor House Field. This field is used for sledging It was perfect because there is a very substantial slope diagonally across the field, from Ron Lawton Crescent down to the railway end of the copse. This is a very unsuitable site for housing particularly for older age group people, many of whom will not be fit enough to scale the heights to the proposed access point without using motor vehicles. Wildlife frequents the field and use it as a wildlife corridor to the south of the railway.
• Curlews
• Brown Hares
• Roe and Sika deer
• Buzzards and Sparrow Hawks
• Tawny Owls
• Substantial numbers of small mammals, shrews and voles which are food for the raptors
• Numerous bird species

Object

Representation ID: 16540

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Martin Dellar

The proposed Scalebor allocation would take housing delivery in Burley over and above identified need.
Other areas of the district are yet to fulfil 50% of their allocations, much of which is brownfield.
There are no exceptional circumstances that could justify the development.
Development of the site would breach the durable Green Belt boundary established by the railway line and would create a settlement expansion outside the current settlement pattern, thereby creating unrestricted sprawl.
Ownership issues, the site is considered to be undeliverable, and it is also considered to be unsuitable in highways and Green Belt terms.
The site currently meets 3 of the 5 Green Belt criteria as defined in the NPPF:
The Scalebor site was redeveloped for housing as it was a major developed site in the Green Belt and was a brownfield site. This should not now permit an extension of the existing estate in to adjacent greenfield.
Access to the site is not currently possible.
The proposed site is subject to a restrictive covenant limiting its use to grazing land without the consent of all existing Scalebor residents.

Object

Representation ID: 17006

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Alice Nicol

Objection to the site on the following grounds:

- Housing Need
- Green Belt harm
- Access
- Restrictive Covenant

In summary therefore the development of this site for residential purposes is not considered to be a suitable, available or deliverable option on the grounds of land ownership, access, housing need and Green Belt considerations and I strongly object to the proposals for any residential development on the site. There is a restriction on title constraining the subject site to use as grazing land, there is no viable access solution and the site meets 3 of the 5 Green Belt criteria with no exceptional circumstances for Green Belt release.

Object

Representation ID: 17327

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Niall Cahill

•Proposed developments are on green belt further contributing to the urbanisation of lower Wharfedale.
•Area is recognised as a scenic and sensitive natural landscape. Increasing development will take away this natural landscape and habitats for wildlife. Development will reduce the small wildlife corridors between the villages.
•Concern about the reduced amount of green belt between Burley-in-Wharfedale and Ben Rhydding. This would impact on the character of the area and increase urbanisation.
•Concerns about the safety of future residents from the risks of flooding. Sun Lane and Coutances Way sites are prone to flooding.
•Concerns of impact on local infrastructure, particularly secondary school places. Additional proposed developments will increase demand on places, the impacts of which haven’t been addressed.
•Road safety and congestion concerns at the Sun Lane and Coutances Way sites. These are already congested roads and additional traffic will make this worse.

Object

Representation ID: 17529

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Neville Megaw

In summary, the development of this site for residential purposes is not considered to be a suitable, available or deliverable option on the grounds of land ownership, access, housing need and Green Belt considerations and I strongly object to the proposals for any residential development on the site.

There is a restriction on title constraining the subject site to use as grazing land, there is no viable access solution and the site meets 3 of the 5 Green Belt criteria with no exceptional circumstances for Green Belt release.

As a local resident on the Scalebor Park, I strongly object to the proposal and feel that a more appropriate site could be found to meet the need of Bradford Council's long term housing plans. With many young families already living on Scalebor Park additional vehicles accessing the site could put the safety of these young people at risk

Object

Representation ID: 18244

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Gayle Cardwell

The proposed site would take housing delivery in Burley in Wharfedale over and above identified need.

The NLP report in the the Statement of Common Ground for the CEG/Sun Lane planning inquiry (agreed and signed by Bradford Council) - concludes that the site prevent unrestricted sprawl, prevents neighbouring villages from merging and assists in safeguarding the countryside.

Access concerns

Restrictive covenant

In summary therefore the development of this site for residential purposes is not considered to be a suitable, available or deliverable option on the grounds of land ownership, access, housing need and Green Belt considerations and I strongly object to the proposals for any residential development on the site. There is a restriction on title constraining the subject site to use as grazing land, there is no viable access solution and the site meets 3 of the 5 Green Belt criteria with no exceptional circumstances for Green Belt release.

Object

Representation ID: 18488

Received: 25/06/2021

Respondent: Justin Holley

•Green Belt should only be used once Brownfield sites have been exhausted. With the Climate Emergency, the Council’s own Brownfield sites should be pursued for development. Sites on the Brownfield Register should be considered for meeting the housing targets. The release of BU2/H from the Green Belt does not stand up to scrutiny. The site does not meet the noted exceptions for allowing development in the Green Belt as set out in the NPPF and would have a greater impact on the openness of the Green Belt than the existing development at Scalebor.
•Any housing development will directly reduce the quantity of water retained by the land and increase the surface water catchment resulting in run-off into the surrounding areas (including increasing flows in Rushy Beck and the probability of flooding at Station Road.
•Ilkley Grammar is already at capacity will not be able to sustain the catchment’s needs created from development at the sites in Ilkley and Burley. There is no action in the plan to deal with this.
•Existing roads are unsuitable and inadequately construction for any additional traffic. They are narrow with a regular abundance of street parking, children using them and repairs.

Object

Representation ID: 19385

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: John McCabe

I wish to add my support to Burley Parish Council relating to the issues regarding the proposal in the plan to allocates 625 new homes for Burley in Wharfedale, including 500 homes at Sun Lane (planning permission now approved) and 110 at Scalebor House.

It is totally unsustainable for the many reasons listed by Burley Parish Council in their report especially those relating to medical provision and education for a village of this size as well as taking into consideration the number of additional vehicles this will generate on local roads which are already at saturation point.

Object

Representation ID: 19388

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Jenefer McCabe

I wish to add my support to Burley Parish Council relating to the issues regarding the proposal in the plan to allocates 625 new homes for Burley in Wharfedale, including 500 homes at Sun Lane (planning permission now approved) and 110 at Scalebor House.

It is totally unsustainable for the many reasons listed by Burley Parish Council in their report especially those relating to medical provision and education for a village of this size as well as taking into consideration the number of additional vehicles this will generate on local roads which are already at saturation point.

Comment

Representation ID: 19881

Received: 01/04/2021

Respondent: Natural England

The site lies in proximity to the South Pennine Moors (Phase 2) SPA and has potential to lead to the loss of functionally linked land for SPA birds.

We welcome the approach taken in the draft plan, SPD and assessments to loss of functionally linked land.

The council has a copy of a model to identify the suitability of sites for SPA golden plover and recommend that allocations are screened against this dataset taking the following approach:

• Maximum Training Sensitivity plus Specificity (MTSS) layer: full survey for Golden Plover likely to be required. The WY Ecology Service SPA Bird Survey Methodology should be followed.

• Minimum Training Presence (MTP) layer or 10 Percentile Training Presence (10PTP) layer: scoping survey to determine if a full Golden Plover full survey required. A desk based survey may be sufficient for sites within the MTP whereas a walkover survey may be required for sites within the 10PTP;

• Not within an area of predicted presence: No survey required for Golden Plover.

Where loss of functionally linked land cannot be ruled out at this stage we recommend that allocation requirement text in the plan sets out survey and mitigation requirements clearly.

Object

Representation ID: 21604

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Bradford District Ward Councillor (Conservative)

BU2/H - Scalebor House, Moor Lane (110)
Object to the inclusion of this site based upon:-

• The restrictive covenant on this land which seems to suggest it can only be used for grazing purposes without the consent of all Scalebor residents, a most unlikely situation!

• Currently categorised as Green Belt

• 500 houses have recently been approved for Sun Lane which will have a massive impact on the nature of the village plus put pressure on the roads and other local infrastructure. Any further housing in Burley in Wharfedale is unnecessary and would be hugely damaging to the nature of the village and its amenities.

• Access is poor.

Object

Representation ID: 22388

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Vivienne McCabe

I wish to add my support to Burley Parish Council relating to the issues regarding the proposal in the plan to allocates 625 new homes for Burley in Wharfedale, including 500 homes at Sun Lane (planning permission now approved) and 110 at Scalebor House.

It is totally unsustainable for the many reasons listed by Burley Parish Council in their report especially those relating to medical provision and education for a village of this size as well as taking into consideration the number of additional vehicles this will generate on local roads which are already at saturation point.

Comment

Representation ID: 24892

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: CEG Land Promotions Ltd

Agent: Lichfields

CEG are surprised that land at Scalebor House, Moor Lane is proposed as a preferred housing allocation under Policy SP5, site reference BU2/H and identified as having the potential to deliver 110 houses over the plan period.

The conclusions reached in identifying the site as a preferred allocation are wholly contrary to the position agreed with CBMDC in the consideration of this site as part of the evidence to the call-in Inquiry into the proposals by CEG at Sun Lane/Ilkley Road.

The Alternative Site Assessment (2016) and Updated Alternative Site Assessment (April 2019), as agreed in full by CBMDC (and thus the Council's position to the Inspector and Secretary of State), concluded the following in respect of the Scalebor site:
1 The site is unsuitable in Green Belt terms on the basis that it breaches the railway line, which provides a strong and defensible boundary to Burley-in-Wharfedale, and would conflict with the purposes of including land within it by creating sprawl and encroachment into the countryside.
2 The site is unsuitable in highways terms on the basis that no suitable access can be delivered due to the private status of Highlands access road, poor visibility along Moor Lane, and a lack of viable alternative access options.
3 That the site is undeliverable on the basis that the site is subject to a restrictive covenant, imposed by the Secretary of State, preventing use of the land in question for anything other than grazing land. The restrictive covenant can only be lifted with the consent of numerous and multiple landowners, being the Secretary of State and multiple residents of the
neighbouring Scalebor Park development.

Object

Representation ID: 28303

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Nina Valentine

Building on Green Belt is completely un-necessary. There are plenty areas of brown land that could be built on.

It throws on eco-system into chaos, destroying wildlife and cherished countryside areas. Areas that have been loved for generations and due to their Green Belt status

Would bring an overload of pressures on the area – overcrowding in schools, traffic on country lanes not built to withstand heavy traffic, and overflow to the existing sewage system. These elements combined will add to air and environmental pollution. These effects combined will add to destroying the local environment.

Building on site BU2/H would be travesty, a field well-known and loved by local people.

Want Green Belt to stay green and protected.

Object

Representation ID: 28598

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Member of Parliament (Conservative)

Agent: Deborah Davies

BU2/H - Scalebor House, Moor Lane (110)

I object to the inclusion of this site because:

• It is green belt
• I understand there is a restrictive covenant on this land which seems to suggest it can only be used for grazing purposes without the consent of all Scalebor residents.
• Access is poor.
• Although there is a railway station nearby trains are usually full at peak times.
• 500 houses have recently been approved for Sun Lane which will have a massive impact on the nature of the village plus put pressure on the roads and other local infrastructure. I feel any further housing in Burley in Wharfedale is unnecessary and would be hugely damaging to the nature of the village.

Comment

Representation ID: 28617

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Environment Agency

Site in Flood Zone 1 ONLY
Mitigation should be set above the 1 in 100 plus cc level for the site as suitable for the proposed vulnerability classification (EA standing advice should cover this).

If the site is considered Greenfield then surface water discharge rates post development should be restricted to the pre development Greenfield discharge rate. If the site is considered Brownfield then there should be a 30% reduction in surface water discharges, or restricted to Greenfield rates, there should be no increase in brownfield surface water discharge rates post development. So as to support prevention of cumulative increases to flood risk and should be in line with SuDs design principles.

For developments near ordinary watercourses we would recommend an 8 metre easement strip along the length of the riverbank, or a 45degree angle from the bed in the case of culverts, to be kept clear of permanent structures such as buildings. This is to maintain access to the riverbank for any improvements or maintenance. A Flood Defence Consent may be required for the LLFA for works in/affecting an ordinary watercourse.

For main rivers, we generally require an 8 metre easement strip along the length of the riverbank to be kept clear of permanent structures such as buildings, or a 45degree angle from the bed in the case of culverts. This is to maintain access to the riverbank for any improvements or maintenance. Environmental Flood Risk Activity Permits may be required for development near rivers.

It is possible the sites within close proximity to Flood Zones 3b, 3 and 2 may be subject to future risk identified within the SFRA (to follow) which may affect its allocation or how development should be sequentially laid out on the site.

Consideration must be made to making space for water and providing betterment in terms of flood risk management where ever possible.

Object

Representation ID: 29031

Received: 23/04/2021

Respondent: Abi Lafbery

•The additional contribution of homes at Scalebor would mean that Burley would exceed its housing allocation. Other areas of the district are yet to fulfil 50% of their allocations, much of which is brownfield, which according to the Local Plan is the priority. The opposition to the Scalebor development is well-founded on the basis of sustainability, referred to in question 118 and as defined by the NPPF, Section 2. Achieving sustainable development, Paragraphs 7 to 14. There are no exceptional circumstances that could justify the development on this site.