IL1/H - Ben Rhydding Drive, Wheatley Grove

Object

Representation ID: 21084

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Emma & Jonathan Booth

Number of people: 2

Extra houses in our vicinity will bring extra traffic. In normal times Ilkley becomes very congested along Leeds Road and Wheatley Lane.

I can’t drive over the single pass iron bridge at Leeds Road - it gets too congested. There have been several accidents around the railway bridge. Has a traffic safety report been undertaken?

The pressure additional children will put on local schools - if you are going to bus pupils to Keighley to get over that problem then why don’t you just build the houses there?

What is the justification for building on Green Belt land and for not using Brownfield sites in the Bradford district?

Have you taken into account the development that has happened and is planned to happen in Ilkley when coming up with this proposal?

The character of Ilkley and Ben Rhydding will be negatively impacted by extra pressure on an already overstretched infrastructure.

Object

Representation ID: 21096

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Naomi Curry

I am concerned by the environmental and social impact of developing on the green belt. The area is both characterful and home to varied wildlife. Also after the known impact of the pandemic on mental health it is recognised that green spaces are essential to well being.

Such developments on green belt areas further limit the availability of these areas to people within the community and further afield.

There is also already a significant pressure on both primary and secondary schools in the area and these developments would further impact negatively.

Increase in traffic on the surrounding roads I consider would also have a detrimental impact.

Within the Bradford district there are a number of brownfield sites that could be developed and a significant number of empty houses which could be improved providing more accommodation in the area without impacting on the green belt.

Object

Representation ID: 21100

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Henry Simpson

The basis of my objections are:

1. Building on Green Belt or non-Brown Belt land. This land should be kept undisturbed for ecological reasons.

2. The infrastructure of Ilkley cannot sustain such an increase. Infrastructure meaning services like schooling, transport in/out of the area particularly the road network, GP’s & other support services.

3. The absolute size of the application in terms of dwelling numbers exacerbates the problems discussed at points 1 and 2.

Object

Representation ID: 21116

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Hilary Boon

I am concerned about my safety and the safety of my family, should the development go ahead.

I am registered blind as are two other members of my family and therefore have to access my home via Ben Rhydding Drive. Being blind, I have to always walk to my home, along Ben Rhydding Drive, which is narrow and virtually all without a footpath (a small section near the bottom has footpaths). Even with the current traffic along this road, there are risks.

There would be a huge increase in the number of vehicles and just the construction phase would cause dangerous conditions on the road for the pedestrians.

Already the speed limit is ignored by some road users.

The local infrastructure e.g. schools is not sufficient to accommodate so many new properties.

Why are these green belt sites being developed when were are plenty of brown fill sites and derelict buildings in the Bradford area?

Object

Representation ID: 21254

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Emma Dowson

- The combined proposals with IL/3H is is not at all in keeping with the area
- impact on local highways and infrastructure
- Flooding surface water run off from these sites and the River Wharf on regularly floods in this location.
- Traffic congestion, impact local road network, highway/pedestrian safety and pollution - Leeds Road is already extremely busy. Traffic survey in non COVID times required.
- Local Character- impact on Ben Rhydding & conversation area
- brown field sites should be considered before Green Belt
-Local infrastructure cannot support these developments.

Object

Representation ID: 21369

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Jeff Gardner

Objections are as follows:
1) Use of Green belt land
2) Character
3) Flooding
4) Environment
5) School capacity
6) Road safety and congestion
7) Additional building
8) Train / road capacity to Leeds and beyond

More details on each issue are provided in the submission.

Object

Representation ID: 21380

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Brian Cousins

With regard to your above planning proposals, I feel that so many new properties would have a really detrimental effect on Ilkley. The schools, already full, couldn't cope with the additional numbers. I also think that destroying the precious green belt is totally un accessible.

Please think again !

Object

Representation ID: 21393

Received: 21/03/2021

Respondent: Stephen Mann

1. Environmental Issues: The primary concern here is the apparent disregard for the green belt concept - the removal of natural views and living space for wildlife. Loss of a resource for the young. The proposal is contrary to the alleged Bradford council commitment to a zero carbon future.

2. Infrastructure: Transport links are already at capacity, as are schools and medical services. The spread of car parking for and by train users into side roads/streets has been a major local issues for several years, additional housing will only serve to exacerbate this problem;

3. Traffic Management: we can expect in the region of 2000 extra car journeys per day on already congested roads and parking spaces;

4. Land Quality: the land in question is already much affected by poor drainage and is subject to flooding

Object

Representation ID: 21395

Received: 21/03/2021

Respondent: Carole Dawson

There have been major increases in the population of Ilkley with the high density housing in Railway Rd which has put increasing pressure on the local infrastructure and services.

The proposed developments will substantially increase local traffic , require additional primary and secondary school places and further healthcare facilities as well as increased volume on the already overcrowded train services to Leeds.

Object

Representation ID: 21397

Received: 21/03/2021

Respondent: Juhi Bains

I object to the above proposed dwellings because of the sheer number of them, in a small, currently green space.
There simply isn’t enough infrastructure to cope with the extra numbers of people. There will be an increase in traffic in an already congested area and consequently more air pollution.

It appears that the houses will be shoe horned in to a small space with a subsequent drain to the local amenities.

Object

Representation ID: 21399

Received: 21/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Sally Varley

My objection to the proposed building of 130 houses on Wheatley Grove (IL1/H) is also one of safety as there would be far more cars joining Wheatley Lane from Wheatley Grove at a point where it is difficult to see cars coming down the hill from the left as well as more cars using an already dangerous junction as they feed into Bolling Road from Wheatley Lane. Any cars joining Ben Rhydding Drive would be an added hazard to people walking up and down as there are only a few places where there is a pavement.

Unlike villages West and East of Ilkley, there is no by-pass so all traffic heading in either direction driving through Ilkley have no alternative but to go through the centre of the town which is already very busy.

Object

Representation ID: 21403

Received: 21/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Fay Gray

I am emailing to register my concerns regarding the proposed building plan for Ilkley.

This is based upon a number of factors. The large scale projects proposed for IL1/H and IL3/H are on green belt land and will significantly impact the character of the area and approach to the Yorkshire dales. I cannot see why green belt is being put forward this way, given there is undeveloped brown belt in the district. The creation of housing here is a precedent and using green belt to ‘fill in ‘ between the villages completely changes their nature.

The proposed plan will allow many more people to live locally and rely on local resources. Traffic on the roads is already high. The local schools are oversubscribed, in particular our only senior school Ilkley Grammar school.
Similarly the area is popular for commuters. Creating even more demand on packed trains or on busy roads

Object

Representation ID: 21407

Received: 21/03/2021

Respondent: Madeleine & Peter Birkinhead

Number of people: 2

As a local resident I would like to register my objection to the proposed building on four sites in the Ilkley area.

This would take precious green belt which is home to various birds and wild life added to which the local infrastructure, schools, doctors, roads etc cannot cope with what would be large increase in the population.

Could we request that you reconsider this option and think of the many brownfield sites which would be nearer the city centre and much more convenient for residents to travel to work, school etc.

Object

Representation ID: 21417

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Jane Tindall

Whilst understanding the need for housing, I object to both these developments on the following basis:

• Both in Green Belt - Bradford should develop its brownfield sites and redevelop 4,000 empty properties first.

• Sites subject to serious flood risk - river regularly overtops its banks and field drains water from Ilkley Moor.

• Loss of land for amenity value – existing footpaths/walks, loss of woodland;

• Hopeless access into the road system leading to congestion;

• Dangerous access into the road system and creation of traffic jams down Wheatley Lane towards traffic lights at junction with A65;

• Extension of Ilkley boundary towards Burley in Wharfedale

• Completely out of character - visual appearance of two large modern estates out of keeping with Ilkley’s architecture;

• What happened to the proposal to build a car park for Ben Rhydding Station – to get parking off the local streets?

• Pressure on schools/shops/medical facilities etc. to service the new communities - will be made even worse if North Yorkshire go ahead with housing proposal north of the river.

Object

Representation ID: 21420

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs E J Winterburn

The areas you are proposing are on a significant FLOOD plain, the town is often cut off Burley and Addingham during winter months - these proposals will only increase the problem.

Why build on green belt when the Bradford area has so many brownfield areas better suited to this sort of development?

The route into Ilkley is one of natural moorland and along this is a WILDLIFE corridor and of scientific importance attracting curlews and other birds and mammals which will be directly affected.

There INFASTUCTURE is not able to cope with anymore traffic on the A65. There’s only one fire station manned by volunteers, one secondary school that is already over subscribed, one surgery and parking is already a big issue in Ilkley.

The separation between Burley-in-Wharfedale and Addingham will be reduced and Ilkley's character and uniqueness harmed.

Object

Representation ID: 21480

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Mark Hinchcliffe

Number of people: 2

We would like to formally object to the proposals to encourage or permit house building on green belt land in Ilkley.

We do not consider that it is consistent with green belt policy, or necessary, to permit such a desecration of our limited green open spaces.

There are alternative sites in the Bradford Council area that are not green belt.

Object

Representation ID: 21486

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs C A Sunderland

IL1/H Proposed 130 dwellings
Too high density and traffic problems already high.

Object

Representation ID: 21493

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Julie Irwin

Its inappropriate to build on the green belt - it protects the gateway to Ilkley and prevents urban sprawl. Ilkley and Burley will join together. There are brownfield sites to use in Bradford instead.

Ilkley is a tourist town.

A better idea would be a nature reserve.

The area floods regularly - utilities are strained, sewers overflow causing the river to become contaminated.

Ilkley does not have the infrastructure to cope with the proposed development - doctors, dentists, schools and parking facilities are already stretched.

Extra people living in and around Ilkley would not be able to use the train for commuting as the car parks at both Ilkley and Ben Rhydding stations are tiny. Traffic - A65 long tailbacks are common.

The government has issued unrealistic figure of extra houses - no proof that there is a further housing need in Ilkley, most young people who want to live here can’t afford to as house prices are so high.

Object

Representation ID: 21583

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Rachel Doherty

These are beautiful green belt sites that characterise Ilkley/BenRhydding.

The land sustains much natural flaura and fauna.
There are plenty of brown field sites in Bradford district that can take more housing.

There is the old hospital site the other side of the river - because it lies in Harrogate District seems to be ignored as a development opportunity.

Very high risk of flooding to surrounding areas if this density of housing is put on to these sites.

Ben Rhydding sports clubs which take the run off from these sites has already flooded a number of times - this risk would inevitably worsen with the associated development putting the existence of this club under threat.

It would just be a question of when it floods again - the club would potentially have to close taking with it an area for sport used by so much of the Ilkley/Ben Rhydding community.

Object

Representation ID: 21587

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Neil Harris

- Impact on PROWs and links to wider local network and benefits of fresh air, peace, green space
- Driving short distances to crowded local areas (Ilkley Moor) will increase if this field is taken away.
- Access- increased traffic on small local roads and highway safety of local junctions
- increase in noise pollution

Object

Representation ID: 21591

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Gareth Heaton

the infrastructure of Ilkley is Ill equipped to deal with these extra homes- schools, parking, through traffic

Object

Representation ID: 21608

Received: 19/03/2021

Respondent: Sue Towler

1. Impact on local highway network- A65 is heavily congested . Wheatley LANE is a B road and unable to accommodate such an increase in traffic flow. Ben Rhydding Drive/Wheatley Grove are minor roads and will be unable to cope with further traffic.
2. The schools are full to capacity. The grammar school has no further ground space on which to expand
3. Ilkley facilities will be unable to cope
4. Ilkley and the river already has a major issue with sewage due to the old sewage systems. The addition of 285 dwellings will only exacerbate with major problems at the Ben Rhydding plant.

Object

Representation ID: 21638

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Pamela Pearce

1) Bradford has recognised the climate emergency, and this would worsen the situation;

2) Biodiversity would be adversely affected.

3) Both sites are prone to flooding and this would be aggravated by the loss of permeable surfaces.

4) Highways access and safety issues - the traffic on Wheatley Lane is often at standstill because it is so congested. Wheatley Lane / railway bridge has been improved lately by the traffic lights, nevertheless the space available for pedestrians is limited, it is very difficult to walk safely under the bridge. Turning right out of Valley Drive is always difficult because of obstructed sight lines.

5) School places are limited. Ilkley Grammar School is overcrowded and constrained;

6) the outdated sewerage system

7) The green belt land was established as an amenity for all;

8) Ben Rhydding has a discrete identity which will be overwhelmed by the proposed size of expansion;

Object

Representation ID: 21640

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: G Harrison

The amount of jobs in Ilkley is minimal indeed the whole of the Wharfe Valley - town centre losses etc Why build here in Ilkley forcing nearly all new residents use public transport or private transport to travel to other areas Eg. Bradford, Leeds or Keighley to find work.

The infrastructure is already maxed out here, peak capacity public transport, schools, hospitals and road bottlenecks.

Ilkley attracts many visitors but they are certainly not visiting here to see high density housing. Ilkley’s open spaces are to be preserved in order to maintain our annual visitor revenue.

There are plenty of contractors who would be delighted to build on brown sites of which there are many in and around the Bradford area, which would far better to serve the use of starter/affordable housing.

Object

Representation ID: 21763

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Susan Boerrigter

Object on the grounds of:

1. Congestion – area already congested. 130 new homes mean up to 260 extra cars. Local roads are not suitable. More commuting to work by car would cause extra congestion. Peak times would see longer queues and stationary traffic. Queues already form at Ben Rhydding railway bridge.

2. Infrastructure – where will children go to school. Ben Rhydding primary is full and suffers traffic congestion. Also insufficient transport, flood risk, sewage and limited health care facilities.

3. Environment – little practical thought given to open spaces, clean air and Green Belt, and environmental impacts – effects on wildlife and loss of recreational amenity. Green Belt should only be developed in very special circumstances.

Building on brownfield sites would be more environmentally friendly and support regeneration. Encroaching on Green Belt/greenfield sites encourages urban sprawl.

New homes are needed, although they should be more affordable ones, and the facilities to go with them.

Object

Representation ID: 21783

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Catherine Crannigan

As a resident in Ben Rhydding and also someone who works in the area, my main issue with the proposed plans is the amount of traffic 300 more houses would bring to the area. Cars travel up Wheatley Lane very fast and often race to get through the traffic lights under the bridge. I dread to think how much traffic these houses would bring, all battling to get to work in rush hour.

We recently requested planning permission to alter the entrance from our property. This was refused due to the potential of it increasing traffic coming out onto Wheatley Lane near to the bridge. We have 1 car, I fail to see how 150 houses , bringing at least 1 car each could not do significantly more damage and therefore how this is even suggestible.

Object

Representation ID: 21851

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Toni Minou

- This development will destroy a green field/wooded site and further erode the boundary of the Ben Rhydding settlement.
- It is unlikely to provide improved cycle/pedestrian links, being situated up a steep hill.
- It will probably attracted further motorised traffic and will appeal to car-dependent families, there being very little in the way of community facilities within walking distance.

Object

Representation ID: 22051

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Kristy Walton

-Objection to Green belt sites - no justification. Ref NPPF s.133.
-Existing boundary of Ben Rhydding/Ilkley – the row of Victorian terraces on the A65 – remains the border and that urban sprawl is not promoted.
-Retain individual settings of settlements.
-Historic areas must be preserved.
-Openness and permanence must be protected not eroded!
-Disproportionate proposals on GB land (97% Ilkley/Ben Rhydding compared with 20% in LP)
-Sensitive areas landscape, SSSIs, SAC, SPA and buffer zone, nature reserve
-TPOs.
-Use of site by people for exercise, valuable for mental health.
-Scale and appropriateness deemed excessive
-Estimated 30 houses built per/yr. If these are included then the area has also already provided many additional houses.
-Flood risk levels of 2 and 3 leading to significant risk of flooding.
-Both sites act as water reservoirs in times of flooding. The number of flooding occurrences is increasing in regularity even with these areas of land holding water.
-secondary school provision limited / IGS oversubscribed. No significant increase in capacity at the school has been proposed.
-Drainage / sewerage system is already struggling and has water breaking through the pavements and road surfaces,
-Ben Rhydding is not of adequate size to cope with the additional number of car journeys that will be generated.
-Wheatley Grove junction is dangerous with poor visibility.
-Wheatley Lane and Valley Drive junction has poor visibility.
-Concern about safety
-No cycling provision

Object

Representation ID: 22384

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Michael Piercy

Have read the various documents setting out the proposals for a substantial number of houses to be built in Ben Rhydding/Ilkley.

Two sites (IL1/H & IL3/H) indicate a large number of properties to be built on greenfield sites. The size of each would have a significant negative impact on the village. Already problems associated with traffic and parking at peak times with access from the A65 via Wheatley Lane negotiating a single track section under the railway bridge.

Access to IL1/H would leave to increase in traffic volumes passing under the railway bridge and along Wheatley Lane.

Access to IL3/H could be more easily managed as it is north of the railway; it would still cause considerable added congested on Wheatley Lane.

No reference to added strain that large increase in dwellings would have on traffic flow nor on the provision of school places and medical facilities.

Object

Representation ID: 22461

Received: 09/03/2021

Respondent: Diane Hopton

Government policy is that building on green belt should only be carried out in exceptional circumstances - which is not the case in this situation and also goes against the governments aims and objectives on green belt to prevent urban sprawl.

The entrance to Ilkley will be ruined which is a huge tourist boost to the area seeing the site of the moor and cow and calf rocks.

Infrastructure will not be able to cope. Peak time traffic is already a problem. Extra traffic, particularly around Ben Rhydding station.

Dentists and all schools in Ilkley are over subscribed the schools have no room for expansion.