IL1/H - Ben Rhydding Drive, Wheatley Grove

Object

Representation ID: 1999

Received: 17/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Sarah Haines

I strongly object to the development of IL1/H, SHLAAA Ref IL/009, Ben Rhydding Drive Ilkley for buildings. This is a parcel of green belt land and should be retained as such. It is very important to hold on to green space for the positive contribution it makes to our health, the health of the planet, and the quality of Ilkley generally.
Once you build on green space it has gone.

Object

Representation ID: 2006

Received: 17/03/2021

Respondent: Professor Alistair Black

Along with many others, I don't understand how an area designated as 'green belt' can be developed. There is lots of data considered by citizens before they make a decision about moving to an area, from travel connections and quality of schooling, to amenities, health facilities and, indeed, the presence of green-belt land which, I repeat, most people would reasonably understand to be protected. By building on the green belt, the Council is effectively breaking a much cherished (by citizens) social contract. More specifically, both Wheatley Grove and Wheatley Lane are very narrow thoroughfares. The latter gets particularly congested at certain times. Finally, I fear the very narrow and sylvan Ben Rhydding Drive, a private road, may be dragged into the plan to provide vehicular access. This would be an appalling escalation of the de-flowering of the green belt represented by the IL1/H proposal.

Object

Representation ID: 2014

Received: 17/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Michael Craven

I have just been for my local evening walk and on walking down Ben Rhydding Drive was struck by what an environmental disaster this development will be for the area. In the field were some horses and some children playing, which was such a nice scene. Looking further up the hillside there were spectacular views of the moors around the Cow and Calf rocks area. I saw a barn owl and many curlews. I am conscious that I would have held a similar view before the developments which have previously taken place but this build quite simply feels too big and intrusive into a lovely area.
This development together with the other one further down Ben Rhydding will add significantly to the pressures on roads, particularly the railway bridge, the train station parking and utilities. In addition the demands on schools will over time increase dramatically.

Object

Representation ID: 2063

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Mr David Ward

the river wharfe at Ilkley and Ben Rhydding are subject to regular flooding, several streams from the moors and fields feed into the river here, building on this land will add to the risks of flooding during storms, the area covered by roofs, roads and driveways will run straight into the sewage system and river rather than being taken up by the earth. Extra traffic filtering into Bolling Road and Wheatley road will add to the already congested area where they meet due to the railway bridge. The area is Green Belt and should be left that way. It was created for very good reasons and is being slowly chipped away by housing developments.

Support

Representation ID: 2070

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Suzie Bullock

While I weakly support the plan and site, it would be good to see improved infrastructure and services, including increased provision for school places, doctor's surgeries, parking, drainage, sewage etc. It would also be good to see imagination and nuanced planning. For example, could the site be designed to avoid mass identikit houses? Could plots be available to self-builders? Could plots be sold with a range of designs so people could choose a plot and have their house custom built? Could a survey be carried out to see what sort of housing people want, rather than squashing houses onto a site? Usually, due to space constraints, new builds are townhouses, which are bedroom heavy and sparse on reception rooms. This doesn't suit everybody. Similarly older people might like bungalows; flats could be designed with balconies/terraces so owners still have residential outside space. Will green, leafy space be protected?

Object

Representation ID: 2094

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Peter Barron

Significant traffic can be expected from 130 new homes with a large proportion requiring access to the A65 via the single lane railway underpass in Ben Rhydding. This will cause unacceptable congestion unless the road is widened. In addition this traffic when combined with that from the 155 new houses on IL3/H will cause congestion and delays at the junction with the A65.
The schools in the area already crowded and some with waiting lists could not cope with the demand from these new homes.

Object

Representation ID: 2096

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Gareth SAmuel

Green belt land very near the moor. Unacceptable to build additional properties here

Object

Representation ID: 2111

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Ms Gwyneth Moss

Ilkley is an affluent town, developers will want to build 4/5 bed detached houses with a high price tag. People who live in these houses will not walk into town or get the bus or train. They will have 2 or 3 cars per house and they will drive. The three roads from Ben Rydding into Ilkley town centre are not wide enough to take the volume of traffic. Parking along these roads is necessary because people live on these roads. Significant increase in the volume of traffic is dangerous and will lead to accidents. There is also not sufficient parking in the town centre.

Object

Representation ID: 2147

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Elizabeth Marjoram

This is an important greenfield site. The ecology of the site will be affected.
Flood risk from water running off the moor.
Infrastructure of Ben Rhydding Drive cannot support more vehicles, No footpath for most of the length of the road therefore dangerous for young children and wheelchair users. Too far for grammar school students to walk to school therefore more vehicles on the road which will not fulfil sustainable/carbon neutral principles.

Object

Representation ID: 2172

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Gregory Selman

It's a greenbelt site so you should target other sites for development. It's easily water logged so a poor choose of site for building on. It's quite close to the sewerage works and on a bad day residence will not like the smell which will reduce house prices

Object

Representation ID: 2202

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Alison Bennett

This is an area of greenbelt in Ben Rhydding. There is not the local infrastructure to support the number of dwellings proposed. Schools, Surgeries are already severely compromised and cannot accommodate a growth in population which would result from this proposal. I am concerned about access and the increased level of traffic in this residential area. Pollution levels and environmental issues are a concern. There is a population of Barn Owls in this area which will be threatened if more development takes place.

Object

Representation ID: 2204

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Alison Bennett

This is an area of green belt which should be protected. The number of houses is excessive. The access is not safe nor suitable and the increased traffic will have an impact on pollution and safety in the area. There is not the infrastructure in schools to expand their classes and other service are overstretched. The town has become very congested with traffic and visitors and this needs to be reduced, not increased.

Object

Representation ID: 2206

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Mr S Hall

This is an area of greenbelt in Ben Rhydding. There is not the local infrastructure to support an increase in properties. Schools, Surgeries and other necessary facilities are already stretched and cannot accommodate a growth in population which would result from this proposal. I am concerned about access and the increased level of traffic and noise in this residential area. Pollution levels and environmental issues are a concern. There are Barn Owls have begun to reside in this area recently, which will be threatened if more development takes place. Ilkley has become very crowded with visitors and a further increase in population will put huge demand on necessary services.

Object

Representation ID: 2222

Received: 19/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Richard Marshall

Village destruction of Ben Rhydding, start of plan to join Burley and Ilkley, a proposal has been made to build houses off the A65 near the Kashmiri restaurant alongside the river where it regularly floods.
285 houses inBen Rhydding with 4 people per house and usually 2 cars will mean a requirement for additional Doctors surgeries, infant and junior schools and a doubling of the size of Ilkley grammar school, plus pupils already bused in. Additional sewage requirements, a doubling of parking at the railway station and improved number of trains at certain times. The traffic volumes at Wheatley Lane/A65 lights will be ridiculous and therefore current rat runs over the moors will increase causing a potential for more accidents.
I object about the 2 Ben Rhydding proposals as destruction of a village, can’t we move Into North Yorkshire and leave Bradford metro.

Object

Representation ID: 2226

Received: 19/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Tony Bannon

There is no infrastructure to support a development of this magnitude.
Our schools would be unable to support further housing unless major investment in them was to be forthcoming.
In addition our sewage system is already at breaking point and currently not fit for purpose, additional pressure on the system would be irresponsible.
Eating into our Green Belt land is shameful , when there is so much Brown Field space available in Bradford MDC area

Object

Representation ID: 2263

Received: 19/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Catherine Weir

This is unsuitable as it is greenfield and green belt land. The impact on drainage and wildlife habitats on the site and adjoining it would be significant. Development would be utterly inappropriate and would destroy the beauty of this large field and the wider area.

Object

Representation ID: 2317

Received: 19/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Veronica Driver

This beautiful area is entirely unsuitable for housebuilding. The land is steeply sloping and there is likely to be a problem with flooding when water runs off the moor. Most of the area would be a considerable distance from the station, and is not served by buses. Residents would need their own cars, and Ilkley cannot cope with more traffic. The woodland in this area is stunningly beautiful and many of the trees have TPOs. What is the point of a TPO if the council are going to chop down trees at will?
That particular area would also be undesirable to live in anyway, backing onto the moor so it would see very little sunlight. Transport links are not good, residents would need to be in the car frequently and the area may flood.

Object

Representation ID: 2338

Received: 19/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Sylvia Thomas

Objections:
1. The planned development is on land designated green belt. The purpose of green belt is to prevent built areas sprawling. If we erode open areas we damage the environment for both people and wildlife.
2. Increased numbers of vehicles which will be funneled on to Wheatley Lane will cause extra traffic on what is already a congested road. In addition, the junctions which are likely to be used are both potential hazards: from Wheatley Grove the angle is awkward for good visibility, and from High Wheatley the junction is on a right-angled bend.

Object

Representation ID: 2350

Received: 19/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Peter Thomas

Objection 1:
The planned development is on land designated as green belt. The purpose of such designation is to prevent built areas sprawling. If we erode open areas we damage the environment for both people and wildlife.
Objection 2:
The development will result in increased numbers of vehicles emerging on to Wheatley Lane, which is already a congested road. In addition, the two junctions which are likely to be used are both potential hazards. From Wheatley Grove the angle is very awkward, with poor visibility, and from High Wheatley the junction is on a 90 degree bend.

Object

Representation ID: 2380

Received: 19/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Liz Raven

Ilkey does not have the roads, parking, schools or other amenities to support so many new houses . Plus this invades the green belt and this will also affect fllooding in the area

Object

Representation ID: 2381

Received: 19/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Barbara Hartley

(Access) Wheatley Grove/Ben Rydding Drive is a built up area. Access is narrow/limited and dangerous from Wheatley Grove - on to Wheatley Lane. Traffic calming and highway alteration will not reduce the danger. Ben Rydding Drive has no footpath and, is too narrow for plant access and equipment, with no safety for pedestrians.
(Flooding/Surface Water) underground streams in the area cannot be accommodated by risk assessment - my garden has worsened over the past 7 years by surface water despite drainage.
(Green belt sustainability) within a built up area heavily used by residents and walkers for recreation - this field with ‘public footpath’ access serves the local community and is of historical importance to the area.
(Flood Risk) will be added to the area around the River Wharfe.
(Infrastructure) Ilkley Grammar Sch. cannot provide for Seconaty Education needs of 300 Dwellings and cannot be extended!

Object

Representation ID: 2432

Received: 20/03/2021

Respondent: Miss Daisy Prowse

Wheatley Grove is an essential piece of Nature in Ilkley and if it were to be diminished, not only would the local residents be effected but the local habitats too.

Object

Representation ID: 2436

Received: 20/03/2021

Respondent: Ms Lottie Curry

As a young adult growing up in this town, I would hate to see my surrounding environments and habats deminished for commercial use. The Yorkshire dales supply’s thousands of people with a tranquil location that is sacred and untouched. Therefore if we start to chip away at this land we will loose the something that makes us special.

Object

Representation ID: 2441

Received: 20/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Catherine Davies

1. The roads in this part of Ben Rhydding are narrow and there would be traffic chaos at busy times. Ben Rhydding Drive and Wheatley Grove are both narrow roads with low capacity and no scope to be widened.
2. The narrow, single traffic, railway bridge would not be able to cope with the increased traffic creating long tailbacks at peak times.
3. The Ilkley schools are already struggling and there is no capacity to cope with the increased demand that these dwellings would require.
4. The drains in the area are already overloaded. The Victorian sewage system which is already inadequate would be overwhelmed.

Object

Representation ID: 2450

Received: 20/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Michael Baldwin

I am opposed to this site most of all. The site is hard to get to by walking/cycling (on a hill and up to 2 km travel to amenities) and so would create additional traffic congestion and high car dependency. Also potential ecological impacts considering proximity to moors.

Object

Representation ID: 2488

Received: 20/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Matthew Barker

Policy SP11 - Site within Zone B of the South Pennines SPA. Further ecological assessment required for impact on ground nesting birds important to designation eg lapwing, curlew, etc.
Amenity impact on South Pennines SPA, as within 7km and likely to increase visitor numbers which will impact on SPA.
Mature trees towards the bottom of the plot.
Impact on habitat connectivity
Impact on schools - Do they have the capacity to copy with increased housing numbers
Increased surface water runoff - Impact on the River Wharfe WFD status OR if feed in to sewers does Ilkley STW have the capacity to cope and will it lead to increased CSO discharges, which may affect Wharfe Bathing Water /WFD status?
Light pollution from increased housing and street lighting - impact amenity, wildlife.
Will the houses be truly affordable housing for young people in this area when house prices are generally high?

Object

Representation ID: 2489

Received: 20/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Matthew Barker

Will transport be able to cope with increase in commuters? - Pressure on parking around Ben Rhydding Station

Object

Representation ID: 2522

Received: 20/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Jim Matear

Firstly this is a greenfield site. There is no apparent justification apart from growth to choose this site as it fails against the mooted strategic proposals on every count e.g maintain biodiversity; retaining valuable habitats; climate impacts etc. Additionally there is no reason to believe this will increase employment in the area and given the house prices in Ilkley will certainly not be affordable housing in the range of the younger people in the district. Specifically in Ilkley car parking and traffic are major issues which this development will significantly exacerbate. There are no details of how these developments will be 'green' and sustainable. The 'concreting over' of this site, the largest green area in its vicinity, is adverse for the climate. Distance from the town centre means more car usage. Green housing normally requires major investment during build so again unlikely to make houses in this area affordable.

Object

Representation ID: 2550

Received: 20/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Victor Brown

Development of IL1/H will more than double the number of houses in the sector between Wheatley Lane and Ben Rhydding Drive, significantly disfiguring the character of the area, putting extra strain on existing services. With all access being off Wheatley Grove, there will be significant increases in local traffic. Given that both ends of Wheatley Grove end in dangerous junctions, such development should be rejected on the basis of the increased risk to road users an pedestrians in the area. The proposed area is far enough away from the train station and bus stops to discourage residents from using them and so greater private vehicle use will occur.

This development is in direct contravention of the National Planning Policy Framework Green Belt policy “To assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment" and should not progress any further than this consultation.

Object

Representation ID: 2581

Received: 20/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Jenny Firth

There are a number of factors that make this site unsuitable for development. These include unsuitable local infrastructure, impact on schools, the impact on the local area and its residents, safety issues, destruction of wildlife and natural habitat. Of particular concern is the impact on local houses if the significant drainage issues in the area are exacerbated, evidenced by the flooding of my own home 18 months ago. All of these are points are expanded in my full response above.