Consultation Question 120

Object

Representation ID: 4352

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Mr steve lowis

Built on Green Belt - plenty of brown belt sites available
Access - not suitable - too many cars on a narrow road
Water run off - flooding bad currently - this will make it worse
Traffic congestion especially around Ben Rhydding railway bridge
Lack of infrastructure - schools , doctors, dentists etc
Public transport - commuter trains full
Traffic congestion in Ilkely
Natural habitat - plenty of wilflife
Views from Ilkley Moor
Tree preservation
Loss of well used open space for recreation
Do we really want to merge all towns between Ilkley and Leeds?

Object

Representation ID: 4533

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Ms Vivia Tizard

Support for parking for visitors to the town. Not at a cost to them as they will invariably spend money in the town centre.
Support for a decent play area for children of varying ages and a good skate and cycke area for children. Skipton has an excellent area near the swimming pool.
The town functions well,increased housing means more traffic, A65 is heaving with delays during bad and good weather which commuters and passing traffic find infuriating.
The supermarkets are adequate and there are sufficient shops and food outlets for day visitors. NOT for more residents.
There continues to be house renovations on existing sites which increase stock.
This is a town of historic value,in a valley, separate from Leeds and Bradford.

30 houses were built over the last few months and I see today that what was a 3 bed house will now be 10 flats .

Object

Representation ID: 4689

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Miss Lydia Jackson

The planning should not be taking place on green field land.
This is an area which already floods and will worsen with additional housing.
The road network will not be able to cope with the additional traffic. It will increase traffic in an area next to recreational area where children and families play.

Object

Representation ID: 4803

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Richard Shelton

Green space can never be returned once destroyed. The pandemic has highlighted the essential role for open space for exercise and mental health issues. The proposals put increasing and unbearable strain on the current infrastructure, especially the secondary school and medical facilities, both of which have intense barriers for expansion.

Object

Representation ID: 4853

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Jane Paul

No planning permission should be given to any new housing developments in Ilkley before the correct infrastructure is in place. Ilkley Grammar School is already overscubscribed with no room to grow on its current site and serving a population that is already forecast to grow without any further housing developments. The Primary Schools are also full. Bradford Council supported the proposal for relocating Ilkley Grammar School to the Coutances Way site and so I am exasperated that this is now being considered for housing instead. Also, Greenbelts and Conservation areas are there for a reason to protect sensitive natural landscapes and wildlife that Ilkley is renowned for. Flooding, overburdened drainage systems are also a concern. It would make more sense to move the Grammar School to Coutances Way and redevelop the old school site for housing.

Object

Representation ID: 5037

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: IB PLANNING LIMITED

IT IS CONSIDERED THAT THE DEVELOPMENT LIMIT BOUNDARY FOR ILKLEY SHOULD BE REVISED TO INCLUDE THE AREA OF EXISTING BUILT FORM AS SHOWN ON THE SUPPORTING PLAN SUBMITTED.

Object

Representation ID: 5086

Received: 02/03/2021

Respondent: Janine Holmes

Loss of Green belt
Traffic on Wheatley Lane

Object

Representation ID: 5606

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Ms Heather Jones

I object to the strategy since it involves the taking of green belt.

It also does not provide adequate consideration to infrastructure improvement and expansion to cope with more population.

Object

Representation ID: 5631

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Stuart Roe

During busy times the A65 has already reached saturation, with traffic trying to enter Ilkley from Addingham or Burley-in-Wharfedale queuing to Addingham/Burley-in-Wharfedale by-passes. This will be further impacted by the additional homes Burley-in-Wharfedale. There are regular traffic queues exiting B6382. Traffic will use local roads to by-pass the busy A65, which is an inappropriate use of these routes. Any addition bus service would add to the existing traffic problems. The train line is also saturated, with trains are at the maximum length for the stations and at peak times there are no more available slots because of Springs Tunnel. There are already problems with becoming registered with local dentists and doctors.

Object

Representation ID: 5642

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Richard Powne

No reason to build on precious Green Belt land when so many Brownfield sites are available across Bradford District. 97% of proposed Ilkley houses on Green Belt compared to 20% across Bradford District is severely disproportionate

Adverse impact on special character of Ilkley “set within a scenic and sensitive natural landscape”

Ribbon development / urban sprawl along the A65 - loss of demarcation between Ilkley and Burley-in-Wharfedale, especially given the proposed developments in Burley and Addingham. Could lead to creation of a “Wharfedale corridor”

Already overburdened infrastructure in Ilkley (shops, medical, schools) - doubtful it will be able to cope

Secondary schooling in Ilkley is already at capacity - there is no provision for any more

Adverse environmental impacts on habitat of local wildlife

Sewage sites already unable to cope with demand and regularly overflow

Object

Representation ID: 5656

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Ewan McLachlan

The plans involve building on green belt land which will destroy the rural nature of the valley and destroy wildlife habitat. The influx of so many new residents will place a substantial strain on, and adversely impact upon, local schools, services and amenities.

Object

Representation ID: 5663

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Andrea Pickersgill

I strongly object to this proposal which is situated in the "greenbelt" and will destroy much wildlife habitats as well as birdlife. This will impact massively on local services and amenities including schools. Ilkley Grammar School is already oversubscribed. It will destroy the rural nature of the valley which is what attracts so many visitors to the town.

Object

Representation ID: 5695

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Ewan McLachlan

The plans involve building on green belt land which will destroy the rural nature of the valley and destroy wildlife habitat. The influx of so many new residents will place a substantial strain on, and adversely impact upon local schools, services and amenities.

There are numerous brown field sites in Bradford which could be developed without destroying our precious countryside.

Object

Representation ID: 5699

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Dr Eric Monteiro

Ilkley has facilities covering primary care/GP practices, supermarkets and associated supermarkets and their parking facilities, road infrastructure, schooling, recreation (swimming) which is only just sufficient for its current population. These will need considerable expansion prior to any new development. In addition, for substantial parts of the year there is an influx of a large number of tourists. The addition of 314 additional dwellings in the area will throw great strain on existing facilities. Loss of substantial areas of Green belt will lead to loss of wild life habitat, recreational land for locals and will be a detriment to the character of the area. In the unfortunate situation that the developments are given the go ahead then alternative brownfield sites should be explored.

Object

Representation ID: 5773

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Philip Chappell

The 2 proposed development sites in Ben Rhydding (IL1/H and IL3/H), comprising 285 new homes would put additional pressure on the local schools which are already oversubscribed. The location of these 2 development sites at the extreme east end of Ben Rhydding, makes it less likely that children will walk to school and parents will inevitably drive them to school causing further conjestion and hazards on the roads and for pedestrians, as well as the negative impact on local air quality and the environment around the schools.

Object

Representation ID: 5801

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Ian Nunns

The areas of proposed planning do not support local resource for access, schooling or hospitals. The Areas proposed are Green Belt Lands that should not be built on.
The proposed dwellings would be out of character to the areas and would cause ribon development between the nearby settlements

Object

Representation ID: 5813

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Miss Carol Lidstone

There is insufficient infrastructure in Ilkley to support 300 new homes. All primary schools are full, the secondary school is full and on a site with no room for expansion. Additionally there are to be 300 new houses on the outskirts of Burley generating even more school pupils in the area.

Whilst there are train stations, there are barely any bus services providing transport for commuters to and from the station, so they will drive - where are they to park? There are already parking issues in town and around the stations. The buses providing services around town are very limited.

There should be no building on green belt land, it's important that buildings don't spill over into the countryside.
Any new builds should be a maximum of 2 bed so that our young people have somewhere to live; no more 4 & 5 bed houses are needed.

Object

Representation ID: 5830

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Christina Powne

The Green belt has been designated as such to preserve our countryside for current and future generations to enjoy. Once built upon, it is irreversibly damaged. It must be retained at all costs and alternative sites for housing found. We owe this to all who come after us.
Ilkley is a separate town with it's own identity. If we allow ribbon development along the A65 corridor, we will end up with loss of this identity amid the urban sprawl as you drive out of Leeds and Bradford.
Extra housing on the scale proposed will put immense, unacceptable pressure on the already overburdened and under funded infrastructure eg schools, public transport, medical facilities, sewage etc
As we come out of the pandemic, we see how important open spaces and green areas are to public health and well being.

Object

Representation ID: 5839

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Vicki Nunns

- Lack of infrastructure to support this number of houses. The quantity of houses being developed across the whole of the Ilkley district will put pressure on already oversubscribed schools and many children will lose out of school places and therefore have to travel further.
- Building on greenbelt land when there are other development opportunities within the district risks losing the natural look and feel of the town and taking away precious greenland for recreation and nature.
- Implication of target emissions from such large scale development.
- Majority of development within the small village of Ben Rhydding which is not large enough to sustain this new number of dwellings, not enough school spaces, public transport, play facilities.
- Affordable housing often bought up and re-sold at market value for profit/rented for profit by landlords - no long term gains in terms of affordability.

Object

Representation ID: 5851

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Ms Pauline Munro

the plan is acceptable but for the houses which fly in the face of any concept of making Ilkley sustainable . Ilkley does not need new homes to be sustainable - it needs better and more targeted investment and future planning so that the town centre is still of relevance to those who live here and to visitors. New homes especially on the Ben Rhydding side will will increase the pressure on already struggling transport infrastructure; the A65 on a typical non covid work day is nose to tail to burley. This will worsen with the planned 500 homes in burley. The access to the A65 from both these sites is poor and the impact on Wheatley Road from approx 300 additional households will create further problems and increase the use of the already over used moor road to avoid t he jams elsewhere..

Object

Representation ID: 5993

Received: 03/03/2021

Respondent: Christine Gibson

Loss of green belt-
Loss of identity
Use empty buildings in Bradford
Flooding
Lack of infrastructure

Object

Representation ID: 5994

Received: 27/03/2021

Respondent: Patricia Bell

Loss of green belt

Object

Representation ID: 6003

Received: 03/03/2021

Respondent: Joanna Glover

Loss of green belt - reducing divide between settlements
Unfair weighting on Ilkley
Brownfield sites in Bradford
Change to local character - damage to perception of town, tourism and local economy
Development will exacerbate flooding
Impact on wildlife
Lack of school places, doctors and trains
Increase of traffic

Object

Representation ID: 6719

Received: 09/03/2021

Respondent: Marion Payne

A simple email please to urge you not to build on our green spaces. With our planet in such a delicate position, we need all the open green spaces we can preserve. This is so important for climate change.

There are so many derelict or simply unused buildings in our cities, why can’t they be converted to flats for people to live in? It wouldn’t take up any more space and would make the cities look better. A win win situation.

Please - reconsider.

Object

Representation ID: 7043

Received: 02/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Sam Hadfield

Summarised by Local Plan Team
New housing in Ilkley will not address the housing crisis - will be prohibitively expensive and will not reduce house prices in the area. Estate agents will determine value. Development will risk the natural beauty of the area by polluting it with ugly buildings, cars and destroying more natural landscape and provide more rich people with another holiday home. That is an outcome I do not think anyone wants.
Infrastructure in Ilkley and Ben Rhydding area is already strained. The main road running through the area is backed-up with traffic on a daily basis, and to learn that no traffic assessments have been done to evaluate the effect of these new houses on the already high-risk areas of road is distressing to say the least.
The local sewage treatment plant is consistently overloaded due to current demand.

Object

Representation ID: 7225

Received: 11/03/2021

Respondent: Drusilla Wiggins

I am very concerned about the plan for more housing in ben rhydding.

My question is about the infra structure of our area to accommodate more families.

Traffic?? Schools?? Medical facilities??

These are important questions that need to be answered realistically.

We moved into ben rhydding 41 yrs ago and it was a lovely town with a lot less traffic, only 1 set of traffic lights and green fields. It is now becoming an extension along with Burley to Otley.
The traffic which will be going thro the benrhydding station bridge is already considerable.
Have you considered ALSO the traffic situation at the traffic lights and the" toll bridge" road.
That is already a dangerous "road rage" position

Please please reconsider

Object

Representation ID: 7246

Received: 11/03/2021

Respondent: W P Hawkesworth

I write to object to the plan that 300 houses be built in Ilkley and Ben Rhydding including on three green belt sites. There are brown field sites that have yet to be built upon and until these have been fully developed and even after that the green belt should be left for what it was created for. The infrastructure of Ilkley could not possibly cope with the extra pressure that these proposed houses and their occupants would cause, The construction of houses on Leeds Road leading out of Ben Rhydding on green belt land can only lead in the future to Ben Rhydding becoming joined to Burley an event the green belt was created to prevent

Comment

Representation ID: 7422

Received: 07/03/2021

Respondent: Maureen Johnson

Green belt encroachment and ribbon development
Ilkley is compact and is surrounded on all sides by countryside which means it is a tourist attraction. Good transport links to Leeds and Bradford by the railway but commuters drive to railway station and there is insufficient parking. The A62 is the main artery for vehicular traffic to the Dales, the Lake District and the north and at weekends and during holiday periods, is very busy. More houses mean even more cars and I submit that the town is already saturated.
Current infrastructure will not support more people - schools are over subscribed. GP surgeries will have to cope with an excess of about 1000 new patients.
The sites proposed could affect the already vulnerable flood plain, either directly or indirectly.
Alternative sites - I suggest you look at a couple of care homes which are currently empty on the south west side of the town which could be converted into flats.

Comment

Representation ID: 8195

Received: 11/03/2021

Respondent: Martin Smith

•Ilkley is a thriving tourist town and also has a thriving business sector.
•No deceleration lane for the new garden centre.
•More houses will be for high value homes with high rateable value – not obtaining a balanced community.
•Windfalls not addressed in this plan and is another miss reading of community needs.
•People will now partially work from home and this is not considered.
•We need affordable homes for our young.

Object

Representation ID: 8431

Received: 15/03/2021

Respondent: Betty Pagnillo

objection to further housing within Ben Rhydding.
The roads into Ilkley are already congested and the turning out of the sports club, garden centre and Denton bridge are hazardous. I also believe the continued increase use of cycling (whilst not a rider) means that the competing demands on the roads is going to cause a serious accident.
I think we should invest in widening Denton back road to allow for a path or cycle path and invest in keeping people safe not adding more people to an area that is already struggling.