IL2/H - Skipton Road east

Object

Representation ID: 19622

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Lisa Hilderbrandt

Developing on this site (and also the Ilkley, Burley in Wharfedale and Addingham sites) will have a significant impact on the greenbelt land which is being continuously eroded by development.

It will also impact the biodiversity of the area.

There will be issues with access to the area, as there is only one minor road (Wheatley Grove) which already experiences congestion as a result of the one-way system imposed by the railway bridge as you enter Ben Rhydding.

The existing primary schools and secondary school are already oversubscribed. The nearest local amenities are in Ilkley, which would further increase the congestion in the centre of Ilkley unless yet more greenbelt land is taken up to build supermarkets and general recreation facilities (the current facilities mentioned in your plan are actually private facilities for which you have to pay subscription fees eg. the Ilkley tennis/squash club).

Object

Representation ID: 19626

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mr & Mrs D Earle

Number of people: 2

Proposed erection of 314 dwellings on land at See above.

I write in connection with the above planning application.

I have examined the plans and I know the sites well. I wish to object strongly to the development of these houses in these locations for the following reasons:

1. Highway safety - junctions nearby that are dangerous.
2. Traffic generation from the development itself
3. Loss of accessible informal green space and open land
4. Pressure on local schools
5. Health Centre
6. Drainage issues - Have you experienced drainage or flooding issues? Are you concerned that more houses may cause further issues?
7. Layout and density of buildings
8. Road access - concerns about access for emergency vehicles
9. Effect on and conservation area

Object

Representation ID: 19755

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Paul Blake

Most of the houses will be on green-belt land. Green-belt land, once built on, is gone forever. Future generations will not enjoy the limited amount of countryside land in the Bradford/West Yorkshire area. There are plenty of other brown-field sites in the Bradford area that should be built on first. There is a risk that the Wharfe valley will become one long ribbon development with negative impacts on the scenic nature of the area.

There is no capacity increase in local facilities e.g. schools, waste treatment and transport. E.g. IL3/H will result in enormous extra pressure on the one-way road underneath the Ben Rhydding rail bridge. Ilkley Grammar is at capacity and there are the well-publicised problems with Ilkley waste treatment plant.

The proposed sites are at significant risk of flooding. Building on these sites will also increase the risk of flooding at existing properties. The sites regularly get saturated with springs appearing during times of heavy rainfall.

Comment

Representation ID: 19886

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: 20025

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Andrew & Sue Lambert & Varley

Number of people: 2

IL2/H is a small area, exiting directly on the A65 and 20 homes is excessive, reduce this plan to 10 and this could more sense although residents will struggle to get out onto the A65 when it is commuting time.

Comment

Representation ID: 20059

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Felicity Tomblin

•Has access to the A65 from site IL2/H been considered. The A65 is a busy road with queueing already occurring when traffic levels are high up to and beyond the Hollin Hall House junction. What traffic calming will be put in place here?

Object

Representation ID: 20073

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Valerie Simpson

The basis of my objections are;

1. Building on Green Belt or non-Brown Belt land should not be allowed. This land should be kept undisturbed for ecological reasons.

2. The infrastructure of Ilkley cannot sustain such a large increase in dwellings.Services such as schools , transport in/out of the area particularly the road network, parking , GPs & other support services are already under pressure and could be strained to breaking point

3. Increase risk of flooding

Comment

Representation ID: 20082

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Paul Holmes

The site on Skipton Road East has main road access and good public transport links, and is ‘partially despoiled land’. The area has been something of an eyesore since the railway was dismantled and is in need of development or at least beautifying. It is a surprise to me that it is Greenbelt, given that the site contains the old railway siding. No objections.

Object

Representation ID: 20092

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Rachel Lawton

Dear sirs, please accept this as my complete opposition to all for proposed sites on Ben Rhydding Drive/Wheatley Grove, Skipton Road, Coutances Way and Stockeld Way.

Ilkley and the surrounding villages are in danger of being merged into one great big bank of housing. This will destroy all remaining green belt land and all habitats for every type of nature. No infrastructure - schools, transport, parking excetra has been considered and the reason that we choose to live in these beautiful places is because they are beautiful. Bradford Council has many other options to build affordable housing and they should look at those options before destroying green belt land and the villages and towns we are proud to call home. Enough building on green belt. It is time to look at truly affordable housing options.

Object

Representation ID: 20177

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Kathryn Leake

•The sites are on green belt land with no natural boundary to stop them expanding further in the future. This would put even more green belt land at risk. In view of the extremely damaging impact climate change is likely to have/already having on our environment, I would expect my council to be making every effort to protect green spaces, not build on them.
•Sites IL1/H and IL3/H would increase the already busy traffic on the local roads. Valley Drive and Bolling Road already have a high volume of traffic as they are used as cut-throughs to and from the town centre. The volume of traffic would increase exponentially if these new houses were built, making these residential roads even more unsafe for local residents/pedestrians/school children.
•The roads around Ben Rhydding are already constrained by the train line (e.g. the single lane under the train line on Wheatley Lane has a dangerously narrow pavement and cars racing to beat the new traffic lights), meaning an increase in traffic would be highly damaging, with no way of increasing road capacity.
•Brownfield sites should be considered ahead of removing green belt, and building on it would irreversibly damage scenic/natural landscape.

Object

Representation ID: 20334

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Rachel Whitham

1) Loss of green belt when there are so many brownfield sites in Bradford which have never been considered. Within the overall figure within Bradford this is only 20% which is a significant disproportionate difference compared to Ilkley. The ratings for these sites is moderate or major impact.

2) Impact on the historic character and landscape setting of the town.

3) Loss of green fields will increase flood risk;

4) Impact on Ilkley Moor SSSI

5) Impact on wildlife e.g. Curlews. These sites are important wildlife corridors.

6) Lack of capacity at Ilkley Grammar School;

7) All the sites will increase traffic within Ilkley - one area of direct concern is the Wheatley Road train bridge and the junction to Valley Drive.

Object

Representation ID: 20367

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: John Forster

The proposals would adversely affect the character of Ilkley and its attractiveness to residents.

The proposals are contrary to national policy on green belts and contrary to 'Gallagher Homes Limited v Solihull MBC (2014/2015)', "it is not arguable that the mere process of preparing a new local plan could itself be regarded as an exceptional circumstance justifying an alteration to a Green Belt boundary". There are plenty of viable sites within the wider Bradford area that are perfectly suitable to be developed but are not as desirable for developers because it will cost them more to ensure the site is free from any contamination.

If any houses are needed to be built, they should be limited in number and of exceptional design (not a Barat homes or Georgian recreation).

Local infrastructure - school places, parking, congested roads - are already issues which will be exacerbated.

Object

Representation ID: 20384

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Chris Brown

I would like to voice by objection against this proposal on the following grounds:

- 97% being built on Greenbelt land.
- flooding risk.
- schools are already at capacity.
- environment impact due to more people, more houses and more cars.
- road safety being compromised.
- quality of life for existing residents.

These dwellings should not go ahead as further building in Ilkley cannot be supported by the existing infrastructure.

Object

Representation ID: 20388

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Natalie Brown

I understand the need for more housing but these plans have many problems. The key one being the proposal for 97% of the current land being green belt. Building houses on this land would negatively impact on the local environment - namely flooding, car pollution and emmisions, habitat destruction and so on.

Additional to these concerns is the strong negative impact this would have on the local education provision. We have primary age children who will hopefully be attending Ilkley grammar school in the future.

Regarding cars in a small town, I believe there would be a disproportionate number of vehicles which would make it unsafe for a family town. The location of the two big applications would result in more cars driving to and from the centre of Ilkley.

From an educational, environmental and safety point of view, I strongly hope this is not approved.

Object

Representation ID: 20394

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs S Keenan

• Loss of habitat (grassland, meadows, hedgerows, trees and watercourses); loss of agricultural land, and natural views; loss of opportunities for schools / community engagement with countryside;
• Priority should be given to reusing brownfield land.
• Detrimental impact on residential amenity
• Lack of infrastructure – transport links, busy roads, schools, medical services, increased traffic congestion, increased drainage
• Ground stability, drainage and flood risk
• Increased air pollution and risk to highway safety for cyclists & pedestrians
• Impact on tourism;
• Presence of viable alternatives – such as brownfield sites or commercial premises see CPRE response to the consultations.
• Loss of open green space detrimental to resident’s mental health and well being
• Loss of a beautiful piece of Yorkshire countryside (Wheatley Grove development)
• The proposed development site off Wheatley Grove has a public footpath through the field.
• Proposals conflict a number of strategies - Safeguarding Our Soils / 25 Year Environment Plan / Biodiversity 2020 / Planning for the Future White paper

Object

Representation ID: 20767

Received: 11/03/2021

Respondent: Peter, Shelley & Catherine Lain

Number of people: 3

The majority of the houses are planned to be on green belt land, causing destruction of wildlife and green space in sensitive areas close to the moor and river.

Flood Risk – water management is already a challenge in Ilkley and Wharfedale, with vast accumulations of water associated with both the moor and River Wharfe already impacting the proposed locations, particularly IL1/H and IL3/H. New homes will be subject to this risk, with implications for neighbouring properties.

Increased demands on local infrastructure and amenities - demand for school places at IGS, and increased pressure on medical and dental facilities.

Transport and traffic implications – increasing population in locations outlying the town centre is highly likely to accelerate car use and movement, increasing pollution and danger.

Risk of creating a continuous urban sprawl along the Wharfe valley, undermining the very character and quality of life that inhabitants and visitors value most.

Object

Representation ID: 20999

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Jon Round

1. Green Belt. There are many brownfield sites in the Bradford area that would be better suited to new developments and less destructive of precious green belt. Together with the proposals in Addingham and Burley there would be serious erosion of the separation between the three towns.
2. There is significant flood risk and any development would increase run off and flood risk in surrounding areas, particularly Coutances Way.
3. Impact on the environment / trees / wildlife - Wheatley Grove falls within the buffer zone for the Ilkley Moor SSSI. Coutances Way is an important area for curlews. Both form part of a wildlife corridor.
4. Impact on s Sewage works capacity.
5. Ilkley Grammar School is already at full capacity and unable to expand. A bussing solution is not fair or viable in the long term.
6. Impact on road safety due to additional traffic on Wheatley Lane.

Support

Representation ID: 21011

Received: 17/03/2021

Respondent: Ms Janet Wilkinson

I am writing to give my views on the current proposals IL1/H, IL2/H, IL3/H & IL4/H before the close of the consultation tomorrow.

I do understand that Ilkley & Ben Rhydding need more homes for people and am broadly supportive of the proposed IL2/H and IL4/H.

Object

Representation ID: 21065

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Peter Ferguson

-Green Belt – no significant justification for use of green belt land, especially given the number of brownfield sites available in the Bradford district.
-97% of homes in green belt as opposed to 20% elsewhere - hugely disproportionate value against Ilkley.
-The three sites are rated as either having moderate or major impact on the green belt.
-These developments, plus those proposed in Addingham and Burley, would significantly reduce the separation between the towns.
-Impact on the character of the town and surrounds.
-Flooding – Three sites have significant existing flooding risks, and development of this land would further exacerbate issues on the surrounding areas.
-Impact on Environment – proposals go against the defined local plan to protect the local environment.
-Impact on SSSi
-Impact on Ben Rhydding and Ilkley sewage sites are already unable to deal with the capacity required, and regularly overflow their storm surge capacity.
-Secondary School at capacity. No additional secondary school capacity has been proposed for any local areas.
-Road Safety and increase in traffic.
-No traffic assessment has been carried out on these areas.

Comment

Representation ID: 21066

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Paul Heierman-Rix

- Has access arrangements been fully developed?
- Has a study been undertaken to quantify the impact on the A65 ?
- Has an environmental study been completed on the air pollution/noise when the A65 is congested in summer weekend afternoons?
- has a more comprehensive plan been considered regarding potential future development north of the A65?
- Has a study been completed regarding impact of traffic in and out of Ilkley West?
7. Will the new dwellings be eligible to apply for a commuter parking permit this should not be granted.

Object

Representation ID: 21097

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: 21101

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: 21284

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Linda Bradley

Ilkley Town Council have drawn my attention to this plan. Firstly as the press are reporting one million people have left the UK due to Covid and the excess deaths this year, wouldn’t it be better to await the results of the census before embarking on such huge schemes.

Turning to the sites proposed which are all using the green space around town:

Stockheld Road - this is a lovely location close to historic Ilkley Bridge and a density of 9 new dwellings seems excessive.

Skipton Road - this could improve the entrance to the town.

Coutances Way - should consideration be given to closeness to Ben Rhydding railway station and the need for more parking before building more houses in this location.

Generally the whole proposal will put extra traffic in the town and this is a serious issue already.

Object

Representation ID: 21370

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: 21381

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: 21404

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: 21408

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: 21421

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: 21481

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: 21487

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs C A Sunderland

IL2/H Proposed 20 dwellings
Too high density and traffic problems already high.