IL3/H - Coutances Way

Object

Representation ID: 2883

Received: 21/03/2021

Respondent: Richard Duff

There will be a major loss of visual amenity on a major gateway approach to the town, with visitors losing existing views of Ilkley moor and the Cow and Calf. Green belt land should only be used in 'exceptional circumstances' but this proposal is located in the worst possible position and most definitely does not qualify as exceptional.

Significant additional traffic and congestion (plus an increase from 133 houses in the nearby IL1/H proposal) on a narrow and dangerous section of Wheatley Lane under the railway bridge, and that is before taking into account extra traffic from the planned park and ride scheme.

Impact on local infrastructure...IGS and other schools are already full and the water treatment works are operating above capacity with frequent sewage discharges into the River Wharfe.

Object

Representation ID: 2893

Received: 21/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Peter Settle

Far too large a development which will again cause stress to the local infrastructure-traffic,schools and health care.This site was earmarked as the preferred site for a new building for Ilkley Grammar School.Has this been thought through

Object

Representation ID: 2911

Received: 21/03/2021

Respondent: Ms Jo 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 local character
- Effect on areas of historic significance
- Pressure on local infrastructure/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.
Sincerely,

Ben Rhydding Resident & Stockeld Road Business Owner

Object

Representation ID: 2935

Received: 21/03/2021

Respondent: Pippa Davies

1. Environmental, character and aesthetic-it will encroach on and spoil the character of Ilkley and of Ben Rhydding. It is greenbelt-far better to build on brownfield sites.
2. The combined number of houses planned will have a disproportionate impact on Ben Rhydding in terms of the pressure on roads and local schools. It will increase congestion in an already congested area, and will necessitate yet more green space to be built on in order to accommodate expanded schools (if indeed this is possible and affordable-as building schools is expensive)
3. Flooding-it will exacerbate what is already a huge problem in this valley.
4. There has already been a huge amount of building in the Wharfe Valley which has impacted on road congestion, green belt, noise pollution and flooding.

Object

Representation ID: 2940

Received: 21/03/2021

Respondent: Ms Agnieszka Stachura

The main objection to the proposed build of 155 dwellings on the Green belt is that it requires a destruction of the open pasture fields, especially valuable because of its wooded areas and hedgerows.
The area also contains listed farm buildings: Wheatley Grange Farm Grade II Listed farmhouse; the project is going to have a major impact on the heritage character. The proposal will disturb the ecological balance of the Green Belt and drastically change the biodiversity and value of the landscape.
More valuable to this part of Ilkley is designing a woodland adventure playground adjacent to Ben Rhydding Scouts Hut, complementing the educational character of existing development and giving the public an opportunity to benefit from green spaces and making it more accessible. Another solution would be investing in conservation, development of public footpaths and reintroduction and support for rare species of fauna and flora to support Green Infrastructure.

Object

Representation ID: 2961

Received: 21/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Andrew Cunliffe

Development proposed on this important Green Belt site will have an incredibly serious, irreversible, detrimental, immediate and long term effect on the environment. It will remove an important part of the natural rural environment, part of which is already at significant risk of flooding. The increased inhabitation will place an enormous burden on Ilkley's infrastruture, which is already stretched beyond any designed capacity, especially in terms of primary & secondary school places and health care provision. Ilkley Grammar School, which already caters for pupils outside Ilkley, in neighbouring areas, is bursting at the seams; further additions to its cramped site in the last twenty years have severely limited the outdoor space for pupils. Any building on this site will severely adversely affect the visual appearance on this important gateway approach to the historic town; it will come close to merging with Burley-in-Wharfedale, losing its identity as an independent town.

Object

Representation ID: 2995

Received: 21/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Elizabeth Williams

This area represents habitat for owls, curlews, wading birds, to name a few. These areas are vital in the global response to climate and biodiversity crisis. The entryway to Ilkley would be utterly compromised in terms of character. Traffic congestion would be extremely severe, during construction and once built. Noise, air and light pollution would further degrade the area. Run off would threaten water quality in the River Wharfe, which already struggles with regular release of effluent as Yorkshire Water battle to keep up - worsened yet further by the proposed housing. Local amenities for children and young people are not in place, particularly schools. This proposal degrades life for those already living here and promises no quality of life for those it would house.

Object

Representation ID: 3012

Received: 21/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Fiona Pitt

This is green belt land - release of green belt can only happen in exceptional circumstances and given there is a 5 year housing land supply elsewhere in the Bradford metropolitan district there is no exceptional justification for releasing green belt.
Also infrastructure cannot cope - roads, schools, policing, drainage etc .
In addition to this the scouts need safeguarding. This land overlooks the scout hut where camps are frequently conducted. Child protection is a huge concern.

Object

Representation ID: 3022

Received: 21/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Oliver Anderson

The development of Greenbelt is unacceptable for basic housing site IL3/H relates especially. There is also inadequate secondary school facilities in the town for ANY additional family housing with TESCO acting as a place kids HAVE to go to. The only plan that would have merit for Ilkley and this site is to put a new school at IL3/H with enhanced pupil capacity and then back fill the existing school site with housing. Previous much better plan to do this relates and should be revisited - if expansion of Ilkley is mandated. Really it should be left alone other than brown field in fill.

Object

Representation ID: 3043

Received: 21/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Elisabeth Hamilton

This is too close to the sssi site and will impact wildlife

Object

Representation ID: 3099

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Miss Catherine Morgans

The proposed plans 97% of which are on green belt will destroy land which is critical to wildlife and one of the key factors that makes the ilkley area attractive to residents and visitors. I do not understand why a number of available brownfield sites are not being utilised instead as these would have significantly less environmental impact. The significant increase in dwellings and therefore people and cars will place considerable pressure on the existing infrastructure including roads and schools which are already full. There is also increased flood risk in the area and removing the natural environment will further erode the flood defences it provides and be likely to exasperate the issues.

Support

Representation ID: 3108

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Williarm Marwick

An excellent location for new houses. I live nearby and I really enjoy living here. Why should I deprive others of the pleasure of living here?

Object

Representation ID: 3111

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Nigel Robinson

The development is a significant development containing 155 houses. Firstly, the development, I feel is on highly valuable green belt land, which will be missed, when options to develop on 'brown field' sites within the district of Bradford, must represent better alternatives for the environment, wildlife and precious green belt! Secondly, the impact assessment doesn't factor in the increased traffic impacts on the roads into Ilkley - e.g. Springs Lane/Bolling Road, Valley Drive & A65 which are already very busy roads. The issue of parking within Ilkley still remains an area under continued consultation/development by the BMDC, I cannot fail to see how an extra 155 households, cannot fail but make the parking situation more problematic in the town and around schools & railway stations. The 155 house development will also present an extra burden on the local schools, including Ilkley Grammar School which I understand is already over subscribed.

Object

Representation ID: 3117

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Laura Phillips

I’m concerned about the impact on the greenbelt, the habitats, trees and openness that will be restricted by this plan. Not to mention the pressure this will put on the local schools and medical facilities.

Object

Representation ID: 3213

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Simon Battersby

Apparently building on green fields, destroys character of the end of town. This, combined with IL1/H currently plans 285 dwellings at the Ben Rhydding end of Ilkley, with concurrent increase in traffic along narrow roads into Ilkley centre, plus no doubt increased on road parking.

Object

Representation ID: 3428

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Mary Girling

I don't want an urban sprawl, I want to keep the green spaces. Schooling: What are you planning about I G S which is full now and has no room for expansion, Also. it is on a flood plain. Also. access to the site, traffic and congestion concerns me, And imagine the queues outside Bettys,

Object

Representation ID: 3434

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Rachel Barker

Objections as follows;-
Huge increase in traffic on roads already very busy. The combination of traffic lights at bridge and junction of Wheatley Lane and A65 will cause long tailbacks.
Pressure on infrastructure , especially schools and medical facilities which are already overstretched
Loss of green belt and damaging to the very character of Ilkley. This will be a raw blot on the landscape damaging the views of Cow and Calf and the conservation area of Ben Rhydding.

Support

Representation ID: 3467

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Deborah Nicholson

I support this option as an alternative to IL1/H (Wheatley Grove option), but do not support it in addition to IL1/H as both options will be too much strain on local transport and resources.

Object

Representation ID: 3484

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Martin Nash

In appropriate housing density, however, the ownership of the site, combined with the proximity to public transport and favourable location for active travel make this (in my opinion) the best of the larger sites to develop at this time.

Object

Representation ID: 3520

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Mr James Williamson

Plenty of Brown field sites in the Bradford area that could be used for housing before the Green belt is encroached on.
Insufficient school places both primary and secondary.
Overloading of the local sewage works.
Spoils the view of the approach to the village.
Loss of agricultural land.
Causes urban sprawl.

Object

Representation ID: 3609

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Janet Leach

This site should be retained as the only possible site for the building of a new Ilkley Grammar School - as proposed a few years ago.
All the problems (drainage, access, etc|) could have been addressed given enough time and commitment, but the money ("Building Schools for the Future") was no longer available.
The current Ilkley Grammar School buildings are inadequate and unsuitable and far away from the school's playing fields.
Provision of a new site for IGS is the only acceptable reason for building on this Green Belt area.

Object

Representation ID: 3638

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Kathryn Allen

This is a large area of green belt land at the very edge of Ilkley.. To build 155 homes on this site would I feel have a very negative impact lon the town's visual amenity. Why was greenbelt land designated as such in the first place? 155 houses would put a significant increase on the local medical and educational facilities.

This area should not become a housing estate.

Object

Representation ID: 3646

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Alison Weston

Building on this land will not “improve existing green spaces” or “enhance and improve existing green belt”.
It would have a landscape impact causing major urban sprawl almost joining Ben Rhydding to Burley with no definite start to Ben Rhydding as there is now.

The area is close to the River Wharfe, designated as a site of wildlife importance and part of the local habitat network, and close to a site of ecological significance - Ben Rhydding Gravel Pits (Local Nature Reserve) where very varied wildlife can be seen including otters. Building on this area would increase traffic, noise and footfall, potentially disturbing this rich and varied wildlife and biodiversity.
It would also significantly reduce green fields, open space, trees and shrubs.

Developing will cause traffic generation, road safety issues, and parking problems at Ben Rhydding station. Increase demand on schools and doctors. No room for IGS to expand.

Object

Representation ID: 3749

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: 1st Ben Rhydding Scout Group

Objection to the proposed planning IL3/H - Coutances Way:
1. Over-development on greenbelt land – Building on this greenbelt land changes the character of Ilkley and Ben Rhydding. There are significant brown field sites available within Bradford District, so 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 Young People, including overnight camping, from private premises.
If Planning is granted then the Developer must be required to plant tall evergreen screening along the boundary fences before building work commences and the perimeter houses must be limited to two storey with no overlook
3. Increase in traffic – the proposed development will increase the vehicles on Wheatley Lane, already a very busy and dangerous road..

Object

Representation ID: 3757

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Andrew Lund

1. The Council acknowledge that the site makes a major contribution to GB purposes. Accordingly, for this reason, if for no other, it must not be developed.
2. The approach to Ilkley by road and by rail would be seriously compromised by development of 155 dwellings here. The present aspect of Ilkley Moor would be lost.
3. Ilkley presently has a strongly defensible green belt boundary, for the most part incorporating the built settlement edge. The northern and eastern boundaries of this site would not be defensible and future sprawl in those directions would be very likely to occur as demonstrated in the following point 4.
4. The site is a part of a much larger area previously designated IL/014. The east boundary of the proposed development site is weak - an insubstantial hedge line. Further easterly sprawl is, therefore, a danger and is clearly in contemplation by the Council whose Strategic Land Assessment (January 2021) indicates a total of 673 units for IL/014
5. The Council make no recognition of the fact that a 500 unit development at the west of Burley in Wharfedale will, coupled with the Ilkley development, significantly close the gap between settlements.
I submit that no part of IL/014 , either IL3/H or the remainder, should be developed, and must remain in the GB as a major contributor to its purposes.

Object

Representation ID: 3817

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Tom Holmes

Loss of green belt space, which should be cherished now more than ever.

Creaking infrastructure in Ilkely as it is, specifically for places and resource in Ilkley Grammar School, and now places available for children to learn to swim locally.

One of the proposed sites is regularly flooded - Why is this even being considered?

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: 3849

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Richard and Jennifer Rundle

• IL3/H - 150 dwellings, impact of 200 to 300 cars onto and from Wheatley Lane, potential flooding risk at northern edge of site (proximity of River Wharfe) and within site due to drainage channels already on site, impact on openness of the area.

Object

Representation ID: 3923

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Ms Carol Martin

This, alongside the other nearby site, make for a total of 285 houses at the eastern boundary of the town, making a large estate. This would have a significant impact on the infrastructure of the town and potentially affect other towns and villages, especially those along the A65, through extra commuting.

Object

Representation ID: 3933

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Michael Noble

This would be a significant development, on green belt land and would significantly impact the amenity value of the approach to the town from the East. It would be very visible from across the river and thus detrimental to the setting of the town when viewed from the slopes to the North. Vehicular access onto Wheatley Lane would be at a point where access/visibility is poor at this junction already and the extra volume will be a significant increase on what is an already dangerous corner. This would increase if also used as car parking for the station. 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 IL1/H, perhaps most particularly on schools. Both sites would increase traffic through the Ben Rhydding railway bridge, leading to increased tailbacks from the traffic lights.

Object

Representation ID: 3934

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Amanda Hindmarsh

This development would significantly reduce the separation between Burley and Ben Rhydding and completely change the character of the area.
Building such a large number of houses on this land would also increase the risk of flooding particularly as the proposed site is frequently under water after rainfall and would inevitably lead to Coutances Way flooding on a more regular basis.
The Ilkley sewage sites are already unable to deal with current capacity.
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 as the area around Ben Rhydding train station and Valley Drive is already frequently congested.