IL3/H - Coutances Way

Object

Representation ID: 2148

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Elizabeth Marjoram

Loss of Green belt. Loss of habitat for breeding curlews and many other ground breeding birds.
Heightened Flood risk- this area is notorious for flooding.
More traffic joining A65 and Wheatley Lane- already very busy sections of roads. too far for secondary pupils to walk to school therefore more cars on the roads at peak times. • Any realistic prospect of fulfilling sustainable/carbon neutral principles will be forestalled – the secondary school will be too far to walk, the primary school similarly with young children, there is no realistic prospect of a cycle route.

Object

Representation ID: 2175

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Gregory Selman

It's green belt don't build here. The increase of traffic will be a nightmare the roads were not designed for the amount of cars there is at the moment let alone more. The grammar school can't expand any more on it's current site and there is nowhere to move it to so increasing the amount of children is not going to help. Building will have to go ahead but Ilkley might not be the best place there are plenty of better locations in the Bradford district

Object

Representation ID: 2203

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 close to this area which will be threatened if more development takes place.

Object

Representation ID: 2207

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.

Object

Representation ID: 2209

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Mr S Hall

This is a green belt site which needs to be protected for future generations.

Object

Representation ID: 2237

Received: 19/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Tony Bannon

This major development again on our precious Green Belt land does not take into account the lack of infrastructure in terms of sewage capability, schooling capacity and access /egress to the major road which is already extremely busy and often at a standstill.
If we continue with projects of this nature we will end up with Urban Sprawl, where the areas of Ilkley, Ben Rhyding and Burley in Wharfedale will morph into one and their individual identities will be lost.

Object

Representation ID: 2257

Received: 19/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Catherine Weir

This is an unsuitable site for development because it is green belt land and is on the edge of flood plain. Changing the site to a residential area would add stress to drainage, water courses and wildlife habitats. Access road would add significantly to congestion on Wheatley Lane.

Object

Representation ID: 2278

Received: 19/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Colin Williams

IL3/H - Coutances Way:

1. Over-development on greenbelt land – Building on this land changes the character of Ilkley, and should be rejected. While there are significant brown field sites available within Bradford District, building on green field sites should be a last option not a first.
2. Impact on Youth facilities – new houses will overlook the Scout and Guide property from two sides raising a safeguarding issue of people being able to see our children, including overnight camping, from private premises.
3. Increase in traffic – the proposed development will increase the vehicles on an already very busy and dangerous road..

I would further note that an increase in over 300 houses in Ilkley will have demands on local infrastructure that it can not support, it will significantly increase the number of children needing schooling in Ilkley, a demand that the local schools are not able to meet.

Object

Representation ID: 2281

Received: 19/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Paula Smith

School places - primary and secondary schools are already struggling to provide the space required to teach the local community. Rail service - is already inadequate. Traffic within the town, entering and exiting is already high with queues and delays at peak times and throughout the holiday season.

Object

Representation ID: 2321

Received: 19/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Veronica Driver

This area is entirely unsuitable for housing. The document here admits that it is flood zone 1, and that also parts reach into zones 2 and 3. The fields here are SO often under water, I cannot believe that any sensible council is considering this land for housebuilding. In addition, the A65 is a very busy road, particularly at rush hour and being single lanes cannot cope with additional traffic.
Where would the children from these houses go to school? Nurseries, primary schools and Ilkley Grammar are all full and oversubscribed. Along with the other developments along Wharfedale, where are the children supposed to go to school? This is madness beyond belief.

Object

Representation ID: 2339

Received: 19/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Sylvia Thomas

Objections:
1. The planned development is on land designated as green belt. The purpose of green belt is to prevent built areas sprawling. If we erode open areas bit by bit we damage the environment for both people and wildlife.
2. Wheatley Lane is already busy, and the emergence of many extra vehicles on to it, close to the junction with Valley Drive opposite, will cause more congestion and be a potential hazard.

Object

Representation ID: 2351

Received: 19/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Peter Thomas

Objection 1:
The planned development is on land designated as 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.
Objection 2:
The emergence of many extra vehicles on to Wheatley Lane, which is already busy, close to the junction of Valley Drive opposite, will cause more congestion and be a potential hazard.

Object

Representation ID: 2372

Received: 19/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Barbara Hartley

Coutances Way, Ben Rydding-155 Dwellings:
(Access) Valley Drive junction is dangerous 155 Dwellings will compound the situation towards the rail station, Ilkley. A65 carrying high volume traffic around the Denton Bridge.
(Flood plain) This area is essential green belt area to the environmental ecology, has listed farm buildings and on a flood-plain. Concreting will add to existing problems- the River Wharfe suffers with raw sewage and flooding will compound the situation. Along with Leeds City Council building plans across the river.
(Green Belt sustainability) Urban sprawl from proposed building in Sun Lane B’inW’dale will again and to the surface water with Climate change. The argument to maintain our green belt area is not considered here and the villages will emerge.
(Infrastructure) Ilkley Grammar Sch. will not accommodate additional needs of 500 Dwellings for Secondary education and is unable to extend to fulfil this need!

Object

Representation ID: 2382

Received: 19/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Liz Raven

This land has already had planning denied it does not have the roads to support it, Ilkley does not have the schools or other public amenities to support so many houses, it will affect flooding and is part of the green belt. It is also next to sewage work which will affect house prices. it will also destroy wild life in the area.

Object

Representation ID: 2426

Received: 20/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Malcolm Gardner

These proposals involve destroying precious Green Belt land. The houses will extend the residential area of Ilkley towards Burley-in-Wharfedale which itself is extending westward towards Ben Rhydding, potentially leading to the merging of the two towns.
There are likely to be about 200 more cars located on this site. Access to Wheatley Lane will create congestion on that road and at the railway bridge at Ben Rhydding. The number of journeys on the A65 in both directions and on Valley Drive and Bolling Road/Springs Lane towards Ilkley town centre will also create congestion on roads unsuited to any additional traffic.
There are more suitable brownfield sites within the Bradford district for the construction of new houses. This would avoid destruction of the Green Belt.

Object

Representation ID: 2434

Received: 20/03/2021

Respondent: Miss Daisy Prowse

In Ilkley there is more than a sufficient amount of residents already, and destroying this valuable piece of land would be completely unnecessary and inexcusable.

Object

Representation ID: 2435

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: 2454

Received: 20/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Michael Baldwin

On balance I object, I am still concerned about the traffic impact of a development on the edge of town, but its more acceptable for sustainable living/travel than the site IL1/H. The impact of site development could be mitigated by reducing its size and the number of planed homes. Visual impact should be addressed with careful design/tree planting. I note flood risk concerns have been addressed by reducing the area planned for development.

Object

Representation ID: 2456

Received: 20/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Catherine Davies

1. The proposed extra housing would cause serious traffic chaos on Wheatley Lane (B6382) and the surrounding narrow roads. The A65, whilst being an A road, is not wide and there are already considerable tailbacks at busy times. If the residents of the proposed new housing were to use Bolling Road to drive to Ilkley town centre, the additional traffic would cause long tailbacks queuing to use the narrow, single traffic railway bridge. Bolling Road which has a row of shops and a primary school would be unable to absorb the extra traffic causing traffic jams on Bolling Road and the neighbouring minor roads.

2. The Ilkley schools are already struggling and there is no capacity to cope with the increased demand that these dwellings would require.

3. The drains in the area are already overloaded. The Ilkley sewage system which is already inadequate would be overwhelmed.

Object

Representation ID: 2492

Received: 20/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Matthew Barker

Cumulative erosion of green belt when Burley development also considered
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.
I have noted flocks of Curlew using the fields near the Ben Rhydding Treatment Works during the autumn/winter months. Increased light and noise pollution may impact the curlew
Amenity impact on South Pennines SPA, as within 7km and likely to increase visitor numbers which will impact on SPA. Cumulative impact with HR/1.
Impact on schools - Do they have the capacity to copy with increased housing numbers
Increased surface water runoff - Impact on the River Wharfe and WFD status OR if feed in to sewers doe the system have the capacity to cope and will it lead to increased CSO discharges, which may affect Wharfe Bathing Water /WFD status?

Object

Representation ID: 2498

Received: 20/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Matthew Barker

Habitat connectively impacted through the removal of boundary features such as hedgerows.
Increased pressure on public services ie trains which pre-covid were usually full during commuter periods. Plus increased pressure on local parking around these facilities.
Potential for increase in car accidents as, if it is proposed to access out of the site opposite Valley Rd?, then there are poor sight lines. Traffic management to reduce this risk could lead to congestion as traffic lights now in place at the railway bridge.
Fields in this area subject to flooding. Flood risk likely to be increased through the increase in hardstanding.

Object

Representation ID: 2530

Received: 20/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Jim Matear

This is a major green area viewed as you approach Ilkley and contributing to it's character. This development would flout all the mooted Council strategic proposals such as biodiversity; impact of growth on climate change, air quality; retention of valuable habitats. Ilkley currently has major parking and traffic issues which this development can only increase and it's distance from the town centre will encourage car usage by residents. Given the average price of housing in Ilkley this will certainly not be affordable housing and certainly not for our younger folk. Additionally it does not contribute to enhancing employment in the District - another Council aim. Ilkley Grammar School is already overcrowded so where are any children of these households to be educated. If out of Ilkley then more transport and pollution. These points are in addition to the list of development considerations below which already say NO.

Object

Representation ID: 2552

Received: 20/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Victor Brown

Development of IL3/H will significantly disfigure the character of the Ben Rhydding area, putting extra strain on existing services. The proposed area is far enough away from the train station, schools and amenities to ensure that residents will rely on private vehicle use.

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: 2665

Received: 21/03/2021

Respondent: Neil Matthews

Scale of proposed development will damage the character of the town and its 'tourist draw'. Important in this is the increase in the physical size of the town, the impact on the surrounding (beautiful) landscape and access to this by those within the town, access both by walking and by sight
Permanently destroys green spaces with corresponding damage to the environment
If it is to be developed, this site should be reserved for a new school.

Object

Representation ID: 2680

Received: 21/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Susannah Lawless

I object to the proposed development at IL3/H Countances Way Green Belt Land, on the grounds of the negative impacts the development will have on - local biodiversity (with significant impacts of the South Pennine Moors SPA/SAC and North Pennine Moors SPA/SAC); climate change resilience (due to the site falling within active flood zones FZ2 and FZ3 and an area of high risk surface water flooding); the openness and character of the landscape (the location of the site at the entrance to the town will have a significant, unavoidable impact if developed); local infrastructure (the proposed development will further exacerbate the already overburdened road and school infrastructure, for example, the A65 is regularly grid locked already and queuing traffic regularly stretches from Ben Rhydding train station to the A65). Development of the Green Belt will degrade the biodiversity, infrastructure, climate resilience, openness and character of this much loved town.

Object

Representation ID: 2692

Received: 21/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Daphne Dixon

Green Belt and Pennine moorland landscapes. These areas are visited by many visitors and should building go ahead would deprive visitors to Ilkley of enjoying these areas of natural beauty. In addition there is the effect on the wildlife in the area for example deer, red kites, curlews skylarks, barn owls all of which can often be seen in these areas.

Object

Representation ID: 2707

Received: 21/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Tahira Ali

This town cannot support additional housing as does not have core infrastructure such as school, parking and main road being link road causing frequent traffic jam.
Also green belt site needs to be protected and should not be designated for the housing.

Object

Representation ID: 2843

Received: 21/03/2021

Respondent: Ms Kate Zezulka

I am writing to object to the proposed development of sites IL1/H, IL2/H, IL3/H and IL4/H as part of the Draft Bradford District Local Plan. Please see the objection entered above for full details.
These proposals are problematic for a number of reasons, including but not limited to:
- Green Belt land release
- Environment
- Flood risk
- Flora & Fauna
- Effect on the local character
- Effect on areas of historic significance
- Pressure on local infrastructure and amenities
- Road safety
- Parking
I would also note that a number of the assumptions & evaluations made in the document seem to underplay or disregard the concerns the document itself mentions. As the document is already aware of the huge potential pitfalls then, combined with strong resistance from the local area, I would urge BDC to reconsider these plans.
With thanks,

Ben Rhydding Resident

Object

Representation ID: 2851

Received: 21/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Jane Zezulka

I am writing to object to the proposed development of sites IL1/H, IL2/H, IL3/H and IL4/H as part of the Draft Bradford District Local Plan. Please see the objection entered above for full details.
These proposals are problematic for a number of reasons, including but not limited to:
- Green Belt land release
- Environment
- Flood risk
- Flora & Fauna
- Effect on the local character
- Effect on areas of historic significance
- Pressure on local infrastructure and amenities
- Road safety
- Parking
I would also note that a number of the assumptions & evaluations made in the document seem to underplay or disregard the concerns the document itself mentions. As the document is already aware of the huge potential pitfalls then, combined with strong resistance from the local area, I would urge BDC to reconsider these plans.
With thanks,

Ben Rhydding Resident

Object

Representation ID: 2861

Received: 21/03/2021

Respondent: Dr Alex Zezulka

I am writing to object to the proposed development of sites IL1/H, IL2/H, IL3/H and IL4/H as part of the Draft Bradford District Local Plan. Please see the objection entered above for full details.
These proposals are problematic for a number of reasons, including but not limited to:
- Green Belt land release
- Environment
- Flood risk
- Flora & Fauna
- Effect on the local character
- Effect on areas of historic significance
- Pressure on local infrastructure and amenities
- Road safety
- Parking
I would also note that a number of the assumptions & evaluations made in the document seem to underplay or disregard the concerns the document itself mentions. As the document is already aware of the huge potential pitfalls then, combined with strong resistance from the local area, I would urge BDC to reconsider these plans.
With thanks,

Ben Rhydding Resident