IL1/H - Ben Rhydding Drive, Wheatley Grove

Object

Representation ID: 3265

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Ewan Farrow

The development of this green belt site for 130 houses raises significant concerns, particularly regarding drainage and transport infrastructure.

Drains on Ben Rhydding Drive are already frequently overwhelmed during heavy or prolonged rainfall, resulting in flooding of the road surface and personal property. Development of the site for housing will significantly increase water runoff that the current drainage infrastructure cannot accommodate.

The local transport infrastructure cannot safely support so much new housing development proposed in local area. For example, the Bolling Road / Wheatley Lane junction is already hazardous during peak traffic periods. The proposed highway access arrangement is not suitable for the Wheatley Lane / Wheatley Grove junction. The location of this site is also not sustainable, lacking accessibility for pedestrians to local amenities.

Finally, local schools are already at capacity, meaning that they could not support this additional housing development.

Object

Representation ID: 3292

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Priscilla Wood

My main reasons for objecting are: the loss of open green space and a picturesque piece of land, increased traffic and the detrimental impact on surrounding residences.

Object

Representation ID: 3366

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Malcolm Gardner

These proposals involve destroying precious Green Belt land.
Access to this area is on existing residential roads. The additional traffic on Wheatley Grove and the surrounding streets will destroy a quiet neighbourhood. These roads are unsuitable for more cars. As there are no nearby schools or shopping facilities the majority of journeys are likely to be by car. The roads from this area towards Ilkley town centre are also unsuited to the creation of more traffic – these are largely residential areas.
The area includes a public footpath through Green Belt land. Building on this will destroy views across the Wharfe Valley.

Object

Representation ID: 3398

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Ms P Lennon

I am writing to object strongly to the proposed development of the greenfield site identified as IL1/H.

My objection is based on the following key areas:
1. Protection of Green Belt
2. Flora and Fauna - Protecting the South Pennine Moor SPA/SAC and their Zone of Influence
3. Traffic, Accessibility, Safety and Moving to a Low Carbon Future
4. Cultural Heritage
5. Flooding
6. Harmonising with the surrounding area
7. The Council’s own Sustainability Appraisal/Strategic Environmental Assessment for the proposed development of IL1/H - the greenfield site at Ben Rhydding Drive/Wheatley Grove - acknowledges NO ‘major positive’ for this site and more negatives than positives, including two ‘major negatives’.

Object

Representation ID: 3425

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Mary Girling

Ben Rhydding Drive is a private road how can access be made for this site? Are you buying it from residents?

Object

Representation ID: 3431

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Rachel Barker

Grounds for objection:-
Road access via Wheatley Grove is narrow and dangerous at the junction with Wheatley Lane and the distance from facilities and the hill access mean cars will be used rather than walking or cycling increasing pollution and non compliant with net zero carbon policy
Loss of greenfield site close to moor and countryside, threatening public access from footpath through field and detrimental to Ben Rhydding residents’ mental health and well being. This field is a well loved and well used open space for locals

Object

Representation ID: 3459

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Ivan Horoshenkov

1. Proposed access road is not suitable with no realistic alternatives

2. The site is a valuable green space, home to a variety of wildlife and enjoyed recreationally by local residents

3. The expected run-off will exacerbate the subsidence risk to local properties and increase the load on the sewage treatment plant which is already at capacity

Object

Representation ID: 3468

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Deborah Nicholson

1) Land provides a corridor for wildlife up through the golf course to the moor. With the development along Ben Rhydding Drive up to the Clevedon, there is limited access without this until the other side of clevedon
2) I regularly use the public footpath with my family for walks in nature
3) Limited access to transport at the location (lack of bus routes, longer distance to train station, limitation on school places and the steep terrain) is likely to result in significant extra traffic through the railway bridge which is single lane.
4) Limited local school places unlikely to support both this option and the Countances way option (IL3/H). Better to select one out of the two options to manage traffic, access to services, etc.

Object

Representation ID: 3523

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Neil Mason

Objections on reduced highway safety and detrimental impact on the character of the neighbourhood and the wellbeing of residents.
Junction Wheatley Lane and Wheatley Grove is narrow with bad turning.
Blind spot on Wheatley Lane for vehicles turning right into High Wheatley.
Loss of much used footpath and green space leisure amenity which is also habitat for wildlife
Significant increase in noise and reduction in pedestrian safety.
Insufficient infrastructure - Schools oversubscribed, insufficient local doctors/dentists. Nearby roads are already extremely busy but will see increased car traffic – commuting, school run and shopping, especially Ilkley where parking is already insufficient.
Negative impact on CO2 with loss of green field and increase in concrete and cars goes against Council policy.
Local residents are regularly denied permission to manage tree canopy but this development would destroy several trees.
The land also assists drainage and run-off between the moor and lower lying properties.

Object

Representation ID: 3527

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Mr James Williamson

This is green belt and as such should only be developed when all other options especially brown field sites are developed.
There are lots of brown field sites in the Bradford area that could and should be developed before encroaching on Green belt.
With the other site off Wheatley Lane there would be an extra 300 hundred houses. There is only one, one form entry primary school in Ben Rhydding and this would not be sufficient to accommodate the extra school age children.
Ilkley Grammar School is not large enough to accommodate the extra children from these houses.
The small sewage treatment works at Ben Rhydding is unlikely to be able to cope with the extra loading that these two sites in Ben Rhydding would create.
Loss of agricultural land.

Support

Representation ID: 3596

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Janet Leach

Qualified support.
This is a huge area, unknown to most people who live in Ilkley.
130 houses sounds a very large number - maybe too large. I would expect a significant proportion to be affordable housing. I would also expect the development to be attractive, with varied houses, plenty of space in between, and natural features to be maintained.
There would be a beneficial effect on the nearest primary school (for which numbers are comparatively low), though the long term effect on Ilkley Grammar School numbers may not be.
Overall, though, this is probably the best site for a significant number of new homes.

Object

Representation ID: 3637

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Kathryn Allen

I strongly object to the proposal to build 130 dwellings on this site. In my view this would be gross over-development of this small area and totally out of context with the surrounding residential properties.

This is greenbelt land, designated as such to prevent excessive development and allow for recreational and natural areas within developed ares. Nature and wildlife must have space for the mutual benefit of both wildlife and ourselves. I appeal to the council to continue to protect this small oasis of unspoilt land.

Object

Representation ID: 3647

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Alison Weston

The site is greenfield and Green Belt - currently a beautiful sloping field with a public footpath giving access to the moor and used by lots of Ben Rhydding residents. It is open and green with protected mature trees, horses and sheep grazing, quiet and peaceful. There is a wide range of natural habitat including deer, birds of prey and owls. Adjoining the golf course the whole landscape is a feature of Ilkley and Ben Rhydding. Building will adversely affect the natural habitat and landscape of the area and also of surrounding areas of the South Pennine Moors.

It is a poor area to build on due to distance from Ilkley amenities - resulting in increased traffic and congestion to access schools, services and amenities.

Very poor road access to the intended site and dangerous junction where Wheatley Grove joins Wheatley Lane.


There will be risk of surface water flooding.

Object

Representation ID: 3753

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Cecilia Cleland

I fully endorse the submission made by Ben Rhydding Drive Association. My most particular concerns relate to flooding risk and loss of wildlife habitat. The amount of water which courses down into the current field from the Moor and Golf Course onto Ben Rhydding Drive when it rains is barely containable by the soft earth. If that is built upon, there is simply no drainage system which will be able to deal with it, as the volume which runs down very quickly is overwhelming. The water freezes in the winter and creates a significant hazard for pedestrians and cars on the road.
The infrastructure of the area is at breaking point already and the proposed number of dwellings is too high. Traffic is high in the narrow streets and there is always a bottle neck on Coutances Way. The proposals will exacerbate these problems significantly.

Object

Representation ID: 3764

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Andrew Lund

This site is in the Green Belt and makes a major contribution to three of its five purposes as prescribed by NPPF - to check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas; to assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment; to assist in urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land. The Council acknowledge that (b) represents a major contribution but judge the others as moderate. This judgement is flawed
The Council's sustainability and environmental assessments are also flawed The headline conclusion is “A major adverse effect is predicted on the land and buildings SA Objective due to the loss of greenfield land.” Surely, on this criterion alone, the site must be deemed unsustainable. A second major adverse effect is acknowledged on biodiversity and geodiversity and no major positive effects whatsoever are noted. Even though the majority of the resources listed (eg shops, pubs, healthcare) are beyond walking distance from the site, and cycling is effectively ruled out by the local topography, all are deemed by the Council to have “minor positive” influence on sustainability. Schools are acknowledged as “minor negative”, presumably because of distance, yet apart from employment, schools generate more journeys than all other venues. I contest these judgements and submit that an objective assessment must conclude that this site cannot be developed sustainably.
The whole site lies within 2.5km of the SPA boundary, and a significant part of it is within the 400m zone. The whole site is an important foraging and nesting area for protected species., none of which have any appreciation of the invisible 400m boundary.
The site is a valued green space extensively used for recreation by the public and as animal grazing. It is a major part of Ben Rhydding’s only green corridor between Ilkley Moor and the River Wharfe.
Road access to the site is possible only via Wheatley Grove, a steep residential street. The addition of traffic from the proposed 130 housing units would overload the local road network and result in a damaging loss of amenity for existing residents.
Contrary to the Council’s statement, no part of the site is within 800m walking distance of Ben Rhydding rail station unless pedestrian access is allowed via Ben Rhydding Drive. This is a private road with no footway, minimal lighting and such access is unlikely to be allowed.
Ilkley presently has a strongly defensible green belt boundary, for the most part incorporating the built settlement edge. Development of this site would considerably weaken the eastern boundary and increase the likelihood of sprawl

Object

Representation ID: 3787

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: James Ford

Building on greenbelt land should not be undertaken lightly, requiring us to remember why greenbelts were created : to prevent uncontrolled sprawl, protect the unique features of our landscape, maintain farmland, and ensure access to green space. These are all the more important today, with greenbelt land essential for flood control and with climate change. The size of the building plots planned is not compatible with these goals, especially in the context of 500+ homes planned for Burley and Otley. Furthermore, there are enough plots of land in Ilkley to accommodate 300 homes without building on greenbelt: there are at least 10 plots where >20 houses could be built, and lots of locations where 5-10 homes could be built. Building in greater density in the current footprint of the town would spread out the pressure of more people and houses, maintain the feel of the town, and encounter less opposition.

Object

Representation ID: 3810

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Albert King

This is a disgraceful proposal to develop GREEN BELT land in Ilkley.

Vast quantities of 'Brown' land are available elsewhere in Bradord MDC for housing needs, with lower infrastructure impacts and costs , more affordable homes delivered more quickly, new homes closer to where the jobs are, reduced travel times to workplace and thus reduced costs, reduced carbon emissions, regenerated city centres and old industrial sites, retained leisure and tourism amenities, and the £value placed on green belt that has thus been “saved".

This development would further and unacceptably overload community and council services, schools, roads and traffic, drains/flooding issues.
Vehicular access to Ben Rhydding Drive will not be permitted as it is a private road, and should not be permitted as it is steep and is used significantly by pedestrians without any sidewalk paving.

This development would have a severely detrimental effect on flaura & fauna.

Object

Representation ID: 3819

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Tom Holmes

Green belt land should be cherished, particularly at this, of all times. More than ever, over the last twelve months, we have taken real comfort in the availability of green spaces on our doorstep. This has regularly involved walking from our house, (as we have been required to do), along public footpaths, taking in fresh air, wildlife and calm.

Local infrastructure is already at breaking point. IGS is hugely oversubscribed and resources significantly underfunded. Our children are unable to learn to swim together at Ilkley Swimming Baths, having been on a waiting list for over 18 months, instead learning to swim in Skipton.

Given the availability of more appropriate derelict / non-green belt land in the Bradford catchment area, and the reasons listed above, I can only conclude that Bradford Council are putting financial reward ahead of quality of life, mental and physical wellbeing of residents. Shame on you.

Object

Representation ID: 3821

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Rachel Rawnsley

I object to the proposed developments IL1/H and IL3/H in the Bradford District Local Plan consultation.

I object to them on the following grounds:

1. Loss of green space amenity – as the pandemic has shown, green spaces are very important and these plans in particular involve building on space which adds to the local district, preventing the village of Ben Rhydding feeling built up and hemmed in. Building on these spaces will spoil the character of the village for good.

2. Too much strain on local services. The number of proposed dwellings will put unbearable strain on local services, including primary and secondary schools, and local healthcare services.

3. They will create too much traffic. The addition of 285 houses, with 2 cars each (minimum) will add a further 5-600 cars on the roads around Ben Rhydding, adding hugely to the congestion and pollution of the areas.

Object

Representation ID: 3846

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Richard and Jennifer Rundle

• IL1/H - 130 dwellings, too much traffic for Wheatley Grove, Wheatley Lane and Ben Rhydding generally. Mature trees on site (inc TPO's?). Impact on openness of the area.

Object

Representation ID: 3889

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Mary Fowler

Will desecrate beautiful countryside and alter the character and entry to the town. Huge amount of extra traffic and pressure on schools and services

Object

Representation ID: 3917

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Michael Noble

This would be a significant development, on green belt land and would reduce the enjoyment of walks in this part of/edge of the town. It would cut off part of a footpath route onto the moor. Vehicular access via Wheatley Grove on to Wheatley Lane is poor already and the extra volume will be a significant increase on what is an already dangerous corner. The junction at High Wheatley is not much better. The same would apply to the foot of Ben Rhydding Drive even if permission for access were obtained from the frontagers. With this number of houses, and likely to attract families, there will be significant pressure on local services in Ben Rhydding and Ilkley, especially when taken with IL3/H, perhaps most particularly on schools. Both sites would increase traffic through the Ben Rhydding railway bridge, and lead to increased tailbacks from the traffic lights.

Object

Representation ID: 3918

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Ms Carol Martin

This site would significantly change the nature of the town. Visually, it would reduce the attractiveness of the town. It extends the boundary of the town and once this area is breached, it might be harder to ague for limits to further building. 130 houses will require further infrastructure for education and health, which seems not to be mentioned or factored in. The temptation will be to build detached and semi-detached housing, taking up more ground.

Object

Representation ID: 3919

Received: 19/02/2021

Respondent: Mr Richard Fox

Greenbelt is needed to prevent urban sprawl, protect the landscape, our environment, and supports wellbeing. Fields capture carbon and support natural flood management, while agricultural supports food production. We must avoid unnecessarily losing our countryside.
IL1/H is accessed off Ben Rhydding drive which has no pavements.

Object

Representation ID: 3926

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Amanda Hindmarsh

This is green belt land would completely change the character of this beautiful area of Ben Rhydding, which is also of significant importance for wildlife in this area just below Ilkley Moor.
Building such a large number of houses on this land would also increase the risk of flooding to housing in the surrounding area as this land is known to be a significant sink for rainwater.
Ilkley Grammar School is already at capacity and has no further land available to expand further to cope with the increase in demand for places. No consideration seems to have been given to where the children living in this new development would be offered places?
The increase in traffic from this housing development is a significant area of concern particularly access to and from the site onto Wheatley Grove which is already a difficult & narrow junction to navigate.

Object

Representation ID: 3968

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Dr Rachel Trowbridge

This development will lead to an increase in vehicle traffic on to a minor residential road, Wheatley Grove, and consequently on the roads leading into Ben Rhydding & Ilkley. This will have further impact on the access along Bolling Road, especially from the corner with Wheatley Lane, which is currently restricted by narrowness of the road due to parking. Lack of availability of public transport to the town centre will increase the number of cars on the road to access amenities and hence lead to the requirement for additional parking facilities. Loss of another green belt area poses the question, have all available brown belt sites in the Ilkley Ward been explored for housing development?

Object

Representation ID: 3987

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Polly Hosking

This is a field whose footpath is used by walkers of all ages. It is used for sledging by local children . In your plan outline you state that Ilkley needed more open space for recreation to the East of the town. This is one such space, providing space and access to the open country. The copse and field are an important habitat for local and migratory birds. If you need to have some sort of development why not badly needed allotments. The access and infrastructure would not be able to support the increased traffic from a housing development and Wheatley Lane is already very congested with backing up at the various pinch points.

Object

Representation ID: 4006

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Ilkley Clean River Group

Ilkley Clean River Group (ICRG) object to this plan because of the adverse impact the new houses and supporting infrastructure will have on river water quality.
The combined sewage and drainage system is already overwhelmed and these new buildings will directly lead to a degradation in water quality through more unauthorised sewage discharges directly into the river.
SuDS mitigation plans for run-off water in Ilkley have been shown to be inadequate as there is currently a challenge on the adequacy of these plans at the new Moss & Moor Garden Centre.
Note: the Ilkley sewage system also serves Addingham so we also object to the plans for Addingham and any increase in sewage and run-off will directly lead to more sewage discharges in Ilkley.

Object

Representation ID: 4046

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Gillian Wilson

There seems to be a good mix of types of housing already in Ilkley, affordable housing is a relative term, and may assume that young people want to stay in Ilkley, when in fact most young people want to expand their horizons and move out of the small town they were born in, this is backed up by the exam results at IGS which mean large numbers go to university and do not return.
The school will struggle to accommodate the children from new homes particularly when combined with the Burley development
Traffic and parking requirements will increase and cause even more congestion/ pollution. Residents from this proposed site would be more likely to use their cars than walk into town.
The more land built upon, the more flooding will occur.

Object

Representation ID: 4072

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Ian McHardy

The development will have a significant impact on traffic which is already extremely busy on Wheatley Lane. It will also significantly increase the traffic on the upper section of Wheatley Lane.
Significant increase in foul drainage to a sewerage system that is already stretched including the treatment plant. This will result in greater direct pollution of the River Wharfe during storm surge. The River Wharfe is already polluted.
The increase in hard landscape involved in the site will increase rain water run off increasing flooding risks for the Wharfe Valley downstream.
The school placements are already over subscribed by the existing established catchment areas so this site will mean others could miss out.
The site is designated green belt. It is skirted to the south by public footpaths. The visual amenity of the area and the outlook from Wheatley Grove will be permanently spoiled by the development.