Object

Representation ID: 9065

Received: 14/03/2021

Respondent: Sandy Thackray

Regarding the proposed development in Ilkley and Ben Rhydding I am strongly apposed to the development numbers IL1/H and IL3H Firstly they are both in green belt and it is your responsibility as our representative to protect them.
If the developers were aloud to go ahead ,it would put a great strain on an already struggling infrastructure Our schools are overstretched and gp’s surgeries are full to capacity.
Building on Coutance Way would surely add to the flooding problems by taking natural Drainage away

Object

Representation ID: 9067

Received: 15/03/2021

Respondent: Tony Short

Moderate/major impact on the green belt without justification.
Impact on birds and wildlife.
Land collects rain water and run-off from the Moors.
Ilkley cut off by flooding, only access being moor road which is unsuited to large volumes of traffic.
Mitigation measures only disperse the excess water into the River Wharfe, causing flooding downstream.
Traffic congestion
Congestion will increase as lockdown eases, additional homes, compounded by housing developments in Burley in Wharfedale and North Yorkshire.
Toll Bridge crossing the river from the A65 over to Denton Road is pinch point, how will single lane bridge with weight restrictions and proximity to a busy traffic light controlled junction cope with the increase in traffic?
Impact of recently opened Garden Centre on traffic.
Impact on infrastructure.
Sewerage system (dysfunctional with raw effluent being pumped into River)
Schools oversubscribed.
Parking problems.
Impact on countryside.
Future years - further pressures to develop GB land

Object

Representation ID: 9070

Received: 14/03/2021

Respondent: Wesley Davidson

These sites are only a hundred meters down down stream from a section of the wharfedale river which regularly floods, blocking the A59. Building on these green belt sites will hasten the passage of water down the valley to the river and will likely worsen the flooding.

My second concern is that these areas act as a buffer between the current urban developements in Ben Rhydding and both Ilkley Moor, allowing a corridor for the passage of wildlife, and is also a significant area for curlew feeding.

My third concern is that Ilkely Grammar School is already operating at capacity, and has no ability to expand.

The proposed sites are almost entirely green belt land. Surely there are other, non - greenbelt areas which can be developed.

Object

Representation ID: 9084

Received: 15/03/2021

Respondent: Jens Schneider

IL3/H (155 proposed dwellings at Coutances Way)

(i) Traffic burden. The increased traffic from IL1 H from both residents and deliveries will overwhelm the capacity of Wheatley Lane, particularly at the single lane bridge at Ben Rhydding station. Similarly the traffic from both developments will produce an unacceptable amount of additional traffic onto the B6382 where it joins the A65. There are already now frequent long tailbacks at these traffic lights.

(ii) In addition an additional 285 homes from both projects will exacerbate the shortage of school places that already exists in Ilkley.

Object

Representation ID: 9204

Received: 15/03/2021

Respondent: Marion Garrod

Plans have been rushed, discriminate the elderly who may not have computer access.
Sites are more about raising revenue than sustainability. Use brownfield sites and derelict buildings in other towns.
Moderate/major impact on the green belt without justification.
Impact on birds and wildlife habitats
Sites keep us independent.
Land collects rain water and run-off from the Moors.
Ilkley cut off by flooding, only access being moor road which is unsuited to large volumes of traffic.
Mitigation measures only disperse the excess water into the River Wharfe, causing flooding downstream.
Traffic congestion
Safety concerns navigating the pavement under the railway bridge
Congestion will increase as lockdown eases and with additional homes
Sewerage system (dysfunctional with raw effluent being pumped into River)
Schools oversubscribed.
Parking problems.
Supermarkets are small, not enough parking won't be able to cope with extra demand for food
Doctors Surgery couldn't cope with extra patients
Ilkley’s unique character

Object

Representation ID: 9234

Received: 14/03/2021

Respondent: Martin Archer

•Primary schools already oversubscribed.
•Grammar site not fit for purpose. School should be relocated to Coutances Way.
•The proposed density of the sites is high and does not reflect the character of the surrounding area.
•Little playground provision in Ben Rhydding. Provision should be incorporated into the design.
•A65 is woefully inadequate. Already severely congested. Additional properties and visitors will cause additional traffic and seriously impact people in Ilkely causing further air quality issues.
•B6382 under the railway bridge is poorly designed and congested. Additional traffic will exacerbate the problem. This should be addressed before development goes ahead.
•Disproportionate impact on Ben Rhydding. Better to distribute houses between Ben Rhydding and west of Ilkley.
•Coutances Way is part of the floodplain. Inappropriate to build on floodplains.
•Brownfield sites in Bradford should be used first.
•Potential for merging with Burley turning Wharfedale into a swathe of housing rather than separate towns.
•Sewerage system incapable of dealing with current sewage. Sewage often pumped directly into the river.

Object

Representation ID: 9469

Received: 15/03/2021

Respondent: Barny Hopton

I would like to object to the following planning proposals:
IL1/H
IL3/H
These will cause more congestion at rush hour on a stretch of the B6382 that is already dangerous for pedestrians and drivers alike.
There are inadequate secondary school places in Ilkley for the current catchment already.
This is green belt which is a big part of why Ilkley is a nice town to live in.

Object

Representation ID: 9522

Received: 16/03/2021

Respondent: Sarah Canelle

Impossible for developers to leave green belt land in a better state than beforehand.

Very heavy traffic, queues, congestion When this route Traffic diverts into Burley and the Moor Road in busy times, increasing pollution, changing feel of village and will lead to more accidents.

What infrastructure is being put in place?

Use disused mill buildings around Bradford for housing.

Protect Green Belt to maintain individual conurbations and stop urban sprawl.

EDUCATION Schools at capacity.

Proposals will change the character of the valley from villages within a green landscape to another suburb.

People who live here do so because of the fields and the good education facilities - Neither of these will exist in a few years time with potentially another 1600 cars on an already busy road and 1600 children trying to get into schools.

Object

Representation ID: 9531

Received: 14/03/2021

Respondent: Liz Wild

•Proposals would remove small number of fields designated as green belt between Burley-in-Wharfedale and Ilkley.
•Proposals would mean the area loses its ‘small town’ character and merge into a commuter belt.
•Developments would damage the local environment. Area forms a green corridor from the moor, to the river, Blubberhouses, Gravel Pits Nature Reserve and sewage plant, which supports insects and food source for local birds.
•Infrastructure not able to support additional development. Secondary school at capacity, difficult to access GP, congestion in A65, Bolling Road and A65 busy and dangerous.
•Developments would increase risk of flooding to the area. These sites act as a natural sink for run-off from the moor. Concreting over them will increase sensitivity and frequency of flooding, which will get worse with Climate Change.

Object

Representation ID: 9627

Received: 14/03/2021

Respondent: Tim Hills

•Will adequate infrastructure, both physical/service, be improved to deal with increase in population?
•GP services already under pressure. Only one dentist offering NHS treatment.
•Traffic/parking already at absurd levels. Town confined to narrow valley bisected by one major route.
•Adding extra vehicles will cause further problems.
•Education capacity in Ilkley is inadequate with some children travelling to Menston.
•Traffic will increase due to development. Only other route out of these sites is via the Wheatley Lane continuation of Bolling Road towards Valley Road or the traffic lights at the A65/Bolling Road junction.
• Bolling Road is a residential street. It suffers from speeding problems, congestion and parking problems. Traffic collisions occur at the intersection with Manley Road.
•Will drainage be able to cope with runoff from IL1/H and IL3/H?
•Both currently absorb and slow runoff from the moor, protecting the A65 lower down. Concreting the valley sides during a period of global warming is plain stupid.

Object

Representation ID: 9643

Received: 14/03/2021

Respondent: Helen Etchell

The reason for my objection to the 305 new dwellings proposed is simple. Ilkley does not have the infrastructure (schools,medical centres, hospital, sewage works etc) in place to support so many new houses. There would not be enough primary schools to provide for so many new residents and Ilkley Grammar School is already struggling to accomodate the needs of the town, a problem which has been going on for many years now. Ironic that the Coutances way site was proposed as a site for an extended Grammar School site but rejected.

All sites are also on green belt land which should instantly deem them inappropriate sites for development. Green belt is by definition a buffer between towns and a space for wildlife to remain undisturbed , something that in the present climate is surely more important than ever.

Object

Representation ID: 9647

Received: 14/03/2021

Respondent: Matthew Henderson

1. Site is part of the Green Belt.
2. Development will significantly change the approach to Ilkley, reducing greenspace between Ilkley/Burley and changing the character of Ben Rhydding.
3. Most of the houses will be over a mile from Ilkley town centre, necessitating car use for most local journeys to use town centre amenities.
3. Site is poorly drained. Is a sink for rainwater. Development will contribute to flooding downstream such as in Otley, Tadcaster and York.
4. Local schools are at capacity.
5. Building of homes will increase road traffic. In particular Wheatley Road where traffic often queues for for the junction at the A65, and also the single-file railway bridge on Wheatley Lane. Has a traffic assessment for this site been done?
6. Part of the site may be earmarked for a car park for the station. There is no longer evidence that this is required given the increase in working from home as a result of the pandemic, which may become a long term trend.

Object

Representation ID: 9755

Received: 16/03/2021

Respondent: Bradford District Ward Councillors (The Independents)

Ilkley/Ben Rhydding, has reached its optimum capacity-except for small and discrete windfall opportunities.
Coutances Way is the entrance to the Settlement, a gateway site.
Impact to the extent, size and prominence of development intruding into the Green Belt.
Development of sites in Ilkley together with the site Burley would result in the narrowing of the “lung” between settlements, creating urban sprawl and ribbon development.
Policy should retain green space between settlements.
Land is in the flood plain and EA flood risk zone, important water courses cross the site.
Issues with Yorkshire Water and Network Rail - blockages of a watercourse which threatens the stability of the railway embankment causing landslips.
Flooding of houses in Wheatley Lane, the A65 road and Ben Rhydding Sports club.
Impact - on habitats, water voles and birdlife.
Impact from traffic at Whetley Lane increased by development of new car park.
Loss of spellbinding landscape.
Damage to the tourist economy.
No evidence for housing need.

Object

Representation ID: 9863

Received: 16/03/2021

Respondent: Roger Whitehead

I am totally against proposed site IL3/H-Coutances Way . This is green belt land and will completely ruin beauty of the town . I was born and bred here and cannot believe this is been considered . Not happy with other proposals either , there are so many brown field sites round Bradford and Leeds or is that Bradford council make more money out of ruin the beauty of Ilkley , disgusted !!!

Object

Representation ID: 9953

Received: 16/03/2021

Respondent: Alison Roberts

loss of greenfield site.
Environmental impact to wildlife and flora.
The squeeze on the agricultural land bordering the A65 between Ilkley, Manor Park Bends and Burley in Wharfedale.

Subsequent developments - and they will be proposed - will see this land eroded and lost.

The corridor of land along the A65 is important in managing rainwater run off and flooding from higher land.

This site is not affected by flooding but development will effect lower lying and adjacent land as the site’s ability to absorb water is lost under hardscaping.

Traffic management will be an issue both onto Wheatley Lane and onto the A65.
Easy walking distance of Ben Rhydding Railway Station and a few local shops.
Of the 2 larger proposed sites this one is marginally preferable on that basis alone. Consideration MUST be given to affordable first time homes.

Wheatley Lane restricted underneath the railway bridge and the junction with Valley Drive is potentially hazardous.

Object

Representation ID: 9967

Received: 15/03/2021

Respondent: Caroline Donnelly

•Sites are Green Belt, also border an AONB, and SSSI and will have a detrimental impact.
•Land is a flood risk to sites and surrounding area.
•Major road network (A65) insufficient to support additional traffic. It is a single carriageway road, could suffer from flooding as a result of runoff from these sites. Closure of the road due to flooding impacts on Ilkley’s economy.
•Local road network, which is already extremely busy, will have to take increased traffic. Pinch points at A65 & Wheatley Lane, Valley Drive & Wheatley Lane, and the single carriageway under the railway bridge.
•Development on a Green Belt site in Burley will reduce the area between Ilkley and Burley. Development to the east of Ilkley will reduce this space further.
•Development at Burley will also increase pressure on the Grammar School and cause increased traffic on the A65.
•Brownfield sites should be designated for housing before concreting over green land.

Object

Representation ID: 10011

Received: 17/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Alistar Hunter

Decisions should be made by residents of Ilkley before planning consent. It's against local democracy and the localism agenda for this decision to be made by Bradford Council.
The council wants more housing to increase its funding to invest in other geographic areas.
Erosion of green belt and the ecological agenda
Inconsistent with the Paris Agreement and the 2050 Net Zero targets.
Impact on Birds.
Insufficient infrastructure to support additional housing
Yorkshire Water Ilkley water treatment facilities discharging sewerage into river.
Schools are at capacity.
The healthcare/medical practices are at capacity.
Case for additional housing is unsupported.
The pandemic has freed up huge volumes of office space that can and will be converted to affordable residential property.
Consultation is driven by the legislative framework, no rationale to support the proposed development.
Development is in the financial interests of Bradford City Council, the developers and the land owners.

Object

Representation ID: 10048

Received: 15/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Valerie Banks

I am looking at the planning proposals for Ben Rhydding especially .
It seems there are 285 dwellings planned -which means potentially over 1000 people plus their vehicles. This will make a disproportionate impact on what is essentially a village once called Wheatley then Ben Rhydding. This will impact on all the infrastructure in particular the schools, medical services and traffic.
There is no indication as to where the traffic is to exit from the two largest estates namely IL1/H and IL 3 but it looks like both will exit on to Wheatley Lane which is very narrow and includes a railway bridge.
Whichever way one views it the proposals are totally unacceptable as they stand and I hope they will be reconsidered please.

Comment

Representation ID: 10064

Received: 16/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Phil Bishop

Wish to respond to the consultation, specifically for sites IL1/H, IL2/H, IL3/H and IL4/H.

I understand the pressures on housing and the need in the UK for additional housing, particularly affordable housing.

I would support increases of this scale in dwellings and consequently in population BUT ONLY PROVIDED:

1) equivalent increases were put in place for necessary infrastructure within Ilkley including School Places, Parking in the town centre, Green/ Sustainable Transport links etc.

2) There is regular flooding within Ilkley in several places. All proposed development must not reduce at all the land available for minimising the impact and likelihood of flooding. IL3/H is a particular concern in this regard.

3) The mix of dwellings is weighted significantly towards properties affordable by those on normal incomes, with priority given to those young people brought up in Ilkley who would otherwise not be able to afford a home within the town.

Object

Representation ID: 10067

Received: 16/03/2021

Respondent: Lucia Smith

I write to lodge my strongest objection to the proposed building of houses on Coutances Way in Ilkley, ref your Site map IL3/H.

This proposed development on Coutances Way is on green belt.

It has been designated green belt for a reason; so to override that, at time when the environment is so important is simply reckless.

This is exacerbated by the huge development at the other end of the green belt to the west of Burley-in-Wharfedale.

In addition, there is no plan relating to the infrastructure, including traffic control, school and healthcare capacity.

THIS AREA SHOULD NOT BE BUILT UPON

Object

Representation ID: 10120

Received: 16/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Chris Cragon

Number of people: 2

IL3/H being considered as Park and Ride. Whilst being abuse of Green belt, it would preferable to many new houses being built.

Site is open aspect Green Belt land, forming initial semi-rural views on approach to Ben Rhydding and Ilkley. Significant wildlife is supported.

Development would add to the joined up step by step creep along the A65.

Recent heavy rainfall has led to significant drainage issues and flooding on the site.

Ben Rhydding Drive is a private road that is narrow, without a pavement and dangerous. Wheatley Grove presents a narrow dangerous approach at it’s junction with Wheatley Lane. Local roads and A65 are at saturation point.

Significant concerns over local high school capacity and its scope for growth.

Over-riding concern is loss of Green Belt and impact on semi-rural nature of town. Significant house building has already taken place and should be recognised and Green Belt maintained.

Object

Representation ID: 10144

Received: 16/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Ken Whittington

Object against proposals for residential development of sites IL1/H, IL3/H & IL4/H.

IL1/H & IL3/H infringe the green belt and this is totally unnecessary as there is a need to develop brownfield sites prior to these. The number of houses being proposed will cause serious issues for the infrastructure of Ilkley (schools, health provision and traffic). The town suffers from traffic congestion and this will only add to the problem. Schools are already full.

It is important to keep green belt and concentrate on using up any brownfield sites that are available.

Development should be in keeping with the locality and schemes of this size are totally unsuitable.

Stockheld Road - any development adds to an already built up area where further houses are not needed. There are problems in this locality with parking and flooding at certain times. Another 9 houses will only add to this.

Object

Representation ID: 10157

Received: 16/03/2021

Respondent: Peter Holmes

Strongly object to this proposal as:

1. Field is Green Belt

2. Infrastructure, schools, traffic, sewage, health centre and hospital are barely coping. Added population will overwhelm them.

3. Traffic is very difficult - railway bridge is a bottleneck. Traffic lights have improved the situation but concerned about this when lockdown is relaxed and how they cope with increased traffic from the site.

4. Serious concerns with flooding. Water gathers in the fields en-route to the river. A large area of tarmac will exacerbate the situation.

5. Concrete flood defence tank installed in this field (east off the fence line between the field and Wheatley Lane below the Scout Hut). It reached capacity (Boxing Day flood) and will do so again.

Decision should be reconsidered due to ability of infrastructure to cope and serious flooding issue. Cannot keep building on Green Belt sites when there are brownfield sites available.

Object

Representation ID: 10176

Received: 16/03/2021

Respondent: Gillian Holmes

Strongly object to this proposal as:

1. Field is Green Belt

2. Infrastructure, schools, traffic, sewage, health centre and hospital are barely coping. Added population will overwhelm them.

3. Traffic is very difficult - railway bridge is a bottleneck. Traffic lights have improved the situation but concerned about this when lockdown is relaxed and how they cope with increased traffic from the site.

4. Serious concerns with flooding. Water gathers in the fields en-route to the river. A large area of tarmac will exacerbate the situation.

5. Concrete flood defence tank installed in this field (east off the fence line between the field and Wheatley Lane below the Scout Hut). It reached capacity (Boxing Day flood) and will do so again.

Decision should be reconsidered due to ability of infrastructure to cope and serious flooding issue. Cannot keep building on Green Belt sites when there are brownfield sites available.

Object

Representation ID: 10196

Received: 16/03/2021

Respondent: JANET SHARPE

COUTANCES WAY
I have given considerable thought to this and am strongly against the land to be developed :
1) GREEN BELT
2) INFRASTRUCTURE. - l would be pleased to know are extra schools going to be built - llkley Grammar is already extremely full to bursting point
3) Are you planning on a making another Health Centre -
As it is at the moment l don’t see how room could be made for what could be over 300 people or even far less.
4) Considerable increase in traffic the roads through Ilkley are at times quite chaotic, and the shopkeepers must loose trade through people not being able to park as it is.
I would ask you to re-consider these very important points. Ilkley is a lovely town why ruin it.

Object

Representation ID: 10228

Received: 15/03/2021

Respondent: Robert Sproule

•Accept that some housing needs to be provided.
•IL3/H forms a significant part of the only major green wildlife corridor from the high ground to the south of the A65 and the riverside and nature reserve on the north of the A65. Although the site doesn’t go up to the road, it takes a substantial areas of the corridor and will put the remaining area under pressure for future development.
•Affordable and social housing should be part of the allocated total of homes to be provided.
•Increases in housing puts pressure on other services and infrastructure. A park and ride scheme to the west of Ilkley is needed to intercept traffic from Lancashire/Skipton/the Dales heading to Leeds/Bradford, giving commuters an opportunity to complete their journey by public transport, stopping traffic using the A65 which is at capacity.

Comment

Representation ID: 10240

Received: 16/03/2021

Respondent: Catherine Meredith

Concern about the 155 dwellings proposed at Coutances Way.
The site is greenbelt land and the proposed development off Coutances Way encroaches on the small corridor of land separating Ilkley and Burley. Avoid urban sprawl linking previously separate communities together.

Given the impact of Covid on working patterns, I anticipate a large number of former office sites will become available for conversion to residential negating the need for development on the very limited greenfield areas.

The amenities for Ben Rhydding and Ilkley residents are over capacity. I am particularly concerned about
Road network -specifically congestion on the A65
Train Service
School Places
Healthcare provision
The construction of more dwellings will impact overstretched services and these services.

The impact of global warming on climate change. Destroying the areas of greenbelt land and replacing with significant impermeable areas will only increase the general risk of flooding.

Remove from Local Plan.

Object

Representation ID: 10242

Received: 15/03/2021

Respondent: Jenny Lawson

•Loss of valuable and protected Green Belt. Detrimental effect on environment and character of the town.
•Development of well-used green spaces, also provide valuable space for wildlife and biodiversity. Also impact on adjacent protected sites.
•IL3/H floods regularly. Site is important in flood management of Wharfe Valley.
•Developments will have a negative impact on local transport infrastructure. Regular traffic congestion and parking issues will be made worse by additional cars from developments. Extra strain on train services in rush hour. Inadequate bus links for IL1/H.
•Negative impact on already over-stretched health, education and community infrastructure. Cannot accommodate additional residents from new housing.
•Recent housing developments have already had significant impact on transport, social infrastructure, environment, air pollution, loss of green space. Proposals will cause more problems.
•Redevelopment of brownfield sites should be considered instead of building on Green Belt.

Object

Representation ID: 10245

Received: 16/03/2021

Respondent: Nick Rhodes

I would like to register my dismay at the proposal to build on land off Coutances way.
The green belt site acts as an important separation zone between Ilkley and the areas of Manor Park and Burley.
Loss of essential farmland.
Once removed from Green Belt will allow further development towards manor park and Burley.
Ilkley, a sought after location - its outstanding attraction is the openness of green belt approaches to the town.
Ilkley is one of the busiest towns in Wharfedale, with minimal car parking and streets are virtually impassible to the emergency services due to limited parking spaces, roads are very busy and full of potholes.
Most of our schools are over subscribed and bursting at the seams, some residents living in close proximity to their preferred school cannot get in.
I believe the plan should not proceed,
Create further traffic congestion
strain on health centres

Object

Representation ID: 10247

Received: 15/03/2021

Respondent: Peter A Williams

•Developments will put a strain on local infrastructure and services.
•During the last 30 years the volume of traffic using Bolling Road to access Ilkley has increased markedly. No traffic calming measures have been put in place. Speeds of traffic is a danger to school children who walk along this road to school.
•Council’s objection to traffic calming is that it is a bus route, but buses often exceed the speed limit on this road.
•Development will bring at least 300 extra vehicles to this road at peak times.
•Where will the additional children go to school? How is the quality of schooling going to be affected?
•Sites are green belt which is currently enjoyed by all for outdoor leisure activities.