IL1/H - Ben Rhydding Drive, Wheatley Grove

Object

Representation ID: 1115

Received: 09/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Michael Truluck

The infrastructure in Ilkley simply isn’t able to cope with so many more dwellings:

1. Transport - coming to Ilkley from Burley on the A65 is already terrible at rush hours
2. Schools are oversubscribed especially IGS
3. Parking in town is a nightmare on the weekends
4. Ilkley is a spa town, with lots of heritage and a rural appeal
5. The approach into Ilkley will be unsightly and built-up compared to the lovely landscape today

As a result adding more dwellings is going to make Ilkley undesirable as these issues will worsen and adversely affect the quality of life for the existing residents of Ilkley.

Object

Representation ID: 1124

Received: 10/03/2021

Respondent: Mr John Collier

The area designated IL1/H destroys a significant part of the green belt. This sort of development should be minimised as valuable access to such areas is becoming scarcer. The field in question has footpaths through it and is a valuable link on foot to walks below the golf course and to The Drive. These paths are well used, especially so in these lockdown times and provide a valuable leisure activity for many.
On a more general point, there has been considerable infill of housing within Ilkley in recent years which seems not to be included at all in the development plan. The other development sites designated have much less detrimental aspects than IL1/H.
Facilities in Ilkley are limited in terms of schooling and, I believe, also in sewage arrangements in this area.
Green Belt should be maintained at all costs!

Object

Representation ID: 1127

Received: 10/03/2021

Respondent: Grizelda Collier

Insufficient medical and school provision.
Sewerage has risen in gardens in the Drive and Moorfield Road following housing development in the Drive, demonstrating a sewage problem.
More cars create more danger and pollution.
Insufficient jobs in Ilkley means more commuters.
A green belt area which should be protected and saved for future generations.
Plenty of brown belt areas in Bradford could be developed ie disused mills.

Object

Representation ID: 1146

Received: 13/02/2021

Respondent: Mr Russell Donnelly

Urban sprawl
BMC should pursue more suitable brownfield sites

Object

Representation ID: 1153

Received: 10/03/2021

Respondent: Mr J Paul Milnes

The local infrastructure is already overloaded.
Additional traffic in this area when the road is already massively overcrowded will be hazardous.
This also has to be considered in the context of the new garden centre which creates traffic chaos in its own right.
Even more risk to emergency services delays such as urgent cardiac transfer to Leeds.
Creation of urban sprawl and a huge negative for tourism.
Green space is a lifeline for many and at times of mental health crisis and must be preserved for the enjoyment of both locals and visitors.

Object

Representation ID: 1168

Received: 18/02/2021

Respondent: Mr Alan Breese

Loss of green belt land
Loss of fields will increase standing water and flooding
Traffic- railway bridge is single lane and need for traffic lights as road is very busy
Impact on trees and wildlife

Object

Representation ID: 1172

Received: 18/02/2021

Respondent: Christopher & Laura Cross

Number of people: 2

Loss of green belt- contrary to national guidance
Depriving community of natural amenity
Loss of habitat and impact on rare species (curlew)
Increased flooding
Unviable access - single track under railway bridge
Lack of local infrastructure- school places, drainage, transport
Constraints would prohibit delivery of affordable homes
Proposal does not take account of number of dwellings which have already been built in the area

Object

Representation ID: 1175

Received: 18/02/2021

Respondent: Ildiko Timmons

Loss of green belt, trees, habitat, farmland and footpaths.
Access would be via Wheatley Grove which is steep and narrow. Increase in pollution, noise, danger and congestion

Object

Representation ID: 1179

Received: 19/02/2021

Respondent: Mr Anthony Elston

Loss of green belt- breach of 4 of the 5 purposes
No evidence that brownfield sites have been prioritised in the Plan- missed opportunity for other areas with derelict sites
Flooding
Poor access- narrow road and steep
No provision for additional school places

Object

Representation ID: 1210

Received: 22/02/2021

Respondent: Ms Lorna Bird

Ilkley is a conservation area
Loss of greenbelt- potential for merging of Ben Rhydding and Burley
Brownfield sites in Bradford should be utilised
Climate impact- increase of flooding
Increase of traffic and pollution and congestion on local roads
Impact on local wildlife - particularly curlews
Pressure on services- sewerage, schools
Access via narrow roads and single lane under railway bridge

Object

Representation ID: 1265

Received: 23/02/2021

Respondent: Mr Stephen Jordan

Sewerage storage tanks cannot cope and regularly are discharged into the river
More houses will exacerbate flooding
Loss of green belt
Empty properties and brownfield sites in Bradford
Pressure on schools, increase of cars
No need
Development will be unaffordable to first time buyers

Object

Representation ID: 1280

Received: 26/02/2021

Respondent: Katharine Graham

Green belt should not be built on- merging with Burley
Other brownfield sites available
Ilkley is a sensitive landscape
Climate emergency more flooding in the future
Proposal is incompatible with zero carbon future- more people will bring in more commuters
Development will overwhelm the roads. Access under railway line already since lane
Inadequate infrastructure- education, access, sewage systems and transport
Impact on countryside- Ilkley moor, wildlife, trees
Impact of infill development has not been counted

Object

Representation ID: 1289

Received: 27/02/2021

Respondent: Mrs Janine Bromley

Loss of green belt- provides natural area for wildlife
Flooding
Sewerage sites in Ilkley are not able to cope with demand
Traffic - pollution and congestion
Unused land in Bradford

Object

Representation ID: 1295

Received: 27/02/2021

Respondent: Mrs Kay Vann

Traffic - access under railway bridge is single lane, congestion
Sewerage - overloaded system as Water treatment works
Wildlife, loss of trees

Object

Representation ID: 1299

Received: 11/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Michael Rayner

This site is situated on a relatively steep hill side and is approximately a mile and a half from Ilkley Town Centre. It is surrounded by high quality individual houses. I therefore presume the development will be of a similar quality. i.e NO "affordable" homes. Due to the distance from town, the hill and the house type each will have an average of two cars which will be used to access facilities in the centre. Where will they park? Most will not work in the town. What provision for the commute to Leeds and Bradford for these extra cars is in the Local Plan?

Support

Representation ID: 1303

Received: 11/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Steve Amos

Given that housing is required, this area would not impinge on the approach to Ilkley and would not extend the boundary of housing already in place.

Object

Representation ID: 1388

Received: 13/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Geoff Davidson

Ben Rhydding Drive/Wheatley Grove Site IL1/H
This objection is based on:
• The unjustified and unwarranted loss of Green Belt which includes a high quality rural landscape providing useful green space for local residents and wildlife via public rights of way and informal access. This will remove the protection to the environment and locality that Green Belt status provides.
• Increased pressure on local roads, parking and pedestrian facilities. Specifically on existing constraints at the railway underbridge, Denton Road river bridge, and Wheatley Lane/Wheatley Grove junction
• Negative impact on sustainability policy based on increased local car ownership and usage
• Loss of wildlife habitat and heritage landscape
• Consequent impact on the adjacent Ben Rhydding Conservation Area
• Implementation of a much denser housing development which is inconsistent with the existing residential area
• Construction, usage and maintenance impact on Ben Rhydding Drive and its associated sensitive/vulnerable residents

Object

Representation ID: 1408

Received: 13/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Reg Haigh

TRAFFIC CONGESTION AND NO PLANS FOR EXTRA INFRASTRUCTURE IE SCHOOLS PARKING ETC

Object

Representation ID: 1410

Received: 13/03/2021

Respondent: Suzanne Holdsworth

Green belt area.
Significant negative impact on this greenbelt area, as shown by the assessment.

Object

Representation ID: 1430

Received: 13/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Robert Hartley

This area of countryside is currently used for grazing sheep (including some historic breeds) and has been used as pasture for as long as I can recall (40 or more years).
It is a predominantly sloping area with a very steep rise to the south which must make building houses and making access to them difficult. Additionally, if access to the whole site is to be made from Ben Rhydding Drive then I do not believe that road is sufficiently good to cope with the extra traffic. There are no pavements and the road is quite narrow.
Hundreds, if not thousands of people walk and cycle on this road on regular basis enjoying the lovely vista's. I believe it would be a mistake to destroy one of the few remaining green areas in Ilkley.
Attempting to pack 130 ugly modern dwellings into this lovely area is a grave error.

Comment

Representation ID: 1442

Received: 13/03/2021

Respondent: Dr Geoffrey Cloke

To create 300 extra houses in Ilkley, without improving local transport and local facilities is a mistake. Ilkley already has insufficient parking to support commuters and the roads through the town are already overcrowded. 300 extra houses will be 300 extra cars.

Object

Representation ID: 1474

Received: 13/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Jamie Swinstead

This proposal seeks to destroy green belt, place additional burden on already congested roads, place additional strain on already struggling school and medical services and will devalue the charm, beauty and history of what is one of the Dales most treasured sites.
You are killing our planet by eating into our greenbelt. You are eroding the charm of our town by taking away its natural, beautiful surrounds.
Our infrastructure is struggling. Growing the town with more houses for more people is not the answer.

Object

Representation ID: 1495

Received: 14/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Richard Pollard

I object to the proposal on site IL1/H. The development is on Green Belt land - itself objectionable: the many brownfield sites in Bradford are more appropriate for the population demographic; the density of housing would be an eyesore from many viewpoints, including Cow and Calf Rocks; the compensation for taking Green Belt land cannot be undertaken from the Ilkley area; the site is part of a conservation area. The number of cars will create further chaos owing to the site's restricted access and especially to Countances Way under the single railway bridge. There will be more pressure on school places and parking. The development will exacerbate serious local flooding issues. The Council acknowledges there are several notable reasons for not using the site but abvolves itself by noting them.

Object

Representation ID: 1507

Received: 14/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Sally Mason

Residents in the new development will be obliged to make multiple car journeys as service provision is limited locally. Traffic congestion and emission will increase. Personal experience of applying to our closest primary school and failing to get a place suggests that demand is already high, additional demand created by the proposed housing development is unsustainable.
Heavy on-site construction may undermine the health of the root system for trees with TPO’s. These trees should be seen as environmental assets supporting ecosystems and biodiversity.

3 Loss of amenity.
The area provides a green corridor between existing housing and gives us all a valuable, well used, leisure space. It is an asset for our mental and physical health. Whatever provision made by developers to replace this amenity will not improve on what is currently available.

Object

Representation ID: 1508

Received: 14/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Christina Craven

I have been a resident of Ben Rhydding for 21 years and I am concerned as to the impact of this site and the other Ben Rhydding site on what was a village on the edge of the larger Ilkley.
We moved to Ilkley with our children to take advantage of the green belt land and it’s fields. My children played on these fields year round and sledged there in the winter snow.
I wonder how you can justify using this land when you state that Ilkley is set within a scenic and sensitive natural landscape’. I’d like this landscape to still be there for my grand children.
130 houses here will significantly change the character of Ben Rhydding.
I thought the council were there to protect the local environment and not destroy it!
Wheatley Grove is only 350m from the moor. I understand that development should be avoided here.

Object

Representation ID: 1526

Received: 14/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Robert Bayton

Unnecessary green belt development - brownfield sites across Bradford must be considered first.
Surface water flooding - steep site once developed will direct surface water flows towards Ben Rhydding.
Limited facilities - no apparent plans to account for increased number of residents. Schools, doctors and pharmacies.

Object

Representation ID: 1530

Received: 14/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Mark Selby

Inappropriate site for these reasons:
1 Steeply sloping with many springs in wet periods leading to drainage problems
2 Highly visible from the north side of the valley
3 Current good wildlife value with feeding curlew, oystercactcher and woodcock
4 Close to Ilkley Moor
5 Poor access which would change the character or roads leading to the site

Object

Representation ID: 1536

Received: 14/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Joan Firth

Lack of adequate infrastructure- schools full, no car parking at or near railway station, few shops,poor local public transport, inadequate car parking at city centre (problem for those of limited mobility), roads inadequate for new volume of traffic

Object

Representation ID: 1556

Received: 14/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Paul Davies

Inadequate provision for access.
Green Belt and countryside considerations.
Impact on existing community infrastructure.

Some development could be tolerated but not to the extent proposed.

Object

Representation ID: 1570

Received: 14/03/2021

Respondent: Miss Liane Crampton

I am objecting to this as there is already far too much traffic in the area, i worry for the children playing outside, the environment as the land is green belt. Also people use valley drive and wheatley lane as a rat run to avoid the traffic on the A65. These homes are not going to be affordable and will inflate house prices even more in the area.