Object

Representation ID: 20335

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: 20364

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Chloe Smith

Dear Sirs

I object to the planning on coutances. I think it’s disgusting that the Bradford Council are cashing in on greenbelt land. There is loads of Brownfield sites where affordable homes could be made. The reason why Bradford Council want to sell this land because they get more money nothing to do with affordable homes. I live opposite the wildlife would be affected.

I object

Object

Representation ID: 20368

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: 20371

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Alison Craggs

Number of people: 2

1) Inappropriate development in the green belt, which would significantly harm its openness;

2) Detrimental effect on the already high flood risk in the area. Site IL1/H has a number of springs under the surface of the land which divert excess run off from Ilkley Moor which is an SSSI to the river Wharfe. Development would limit the natural route of the water, exacerbating flooding along Coutances Way and Ben Rhydding Drive. The water treatment works is at capacity.

3) Road safety would be severely compromised; On Wheatley Grove the pavement is as narrow as 72 cm in places; The road is also narrow at the junction with Wheatley Lane and it is impossible for two cars to pass in places.

4) The wildlife habitat provided by IL1/H and IL3/H would be destroyed;

5) Development will expand the boundaries of Burley, Addingham and Ilkley - this does not maintain the unique character of each settlement- rather merging the areas into one.

6) Local infrastructure will not support the proposed level of development - Ilkley Grammar School is over subscribed with no opportunity for expansion.

Object

Representation ID: 20382

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Peter & Hazel Jamieson

Number of people: 2

- We thought that green belt was protected;

- Increased traffic - Coutances Way, Wheatley Lane; already lack of recognition of local 20mph speed limit;

- no mention of immense housing developments on the searches when we bought or home;

- new shopping facilities will have to follow to cope with the increased size of the population.

Object

Representation ID: 20385

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: 20389

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: 20395

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: 20768

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: 21000

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.

Object

Representation ID: 21061

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Andy Greenall

These large developments are incompatible with retaining the open, village-like nature of the town.

IL3/H - is incompatible with the notion of retaining green belt on this side of Ilkley. The green belt appraisal itself admits this.

It’s in a flood zone, which is addressed minimally with no sign of local knowledge of the extent to which flooding is becoming a serious problem in Ilkley.

The Summary prejudicially concludes that the site is “sustainably located” without having done anything to demonstrate that this is the case (rather the reverse).

I cannot comment on the SA as I cannot find it - if it does conclude that developing this site would be viewed as sustainable I would be very interested in seeing the rationale behind it.

The conclusion (“this is a sustainably located green belt site”) is at best meaningless and at worst a prejudiced contradiction in terms.

Comment

Representation ID: 21067

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Paul Heierman-Rix

- Has the proposed design fully considered zero carbon footprint by design,
- Does the proposed design include space for commuter parking and workers at the Ben Rhydding shops?

Object

Representation ID: 21068

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.
-This site would remove the small number of fields between Burley and Ilkely.
-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,
-Nationally significant area of Curlew feeding
-Site provides wildlife corridors and significant habitat for wildlife.
-Impact on mature trees and TPOs.
-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.

Object

Representation ID: 21085

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Emma & Jonathan Booth

Number of people: 2

Extra houses in our vicinity will bring extra traffic. In normal times Ilkley becomes very congested along Leeds Road and Wheatley Lane.

I can’t drive over the single pass iron bridge at Leeds Road - it gets too congested. There have been several accidents around the railway bridge. Has a traffic safety report been undertaken?

The pressure additional children will put on local schools - if you are going to bus pupils to Keighley to get over that problem then why don’t you just build the houses there?

What is the justification for building on Green Belt land and for not using Brownfield sites in the Bradford district?

Have you taken into account the development that has happened and is planned to happen in Ilkley when coming up with this proposal?

The character of Ilkley and Ben Rhydding will be negatively impacted by extra pressure on an already overstretched infrastructure.

Object

Representation ID: 21098

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: 21102

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: 21255

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Emma Dowson

- The combined proposals with IL/1H is is not at all in keeping with the area
- impact on local highways and infrastructure
- Flooding surface water run off from these sites and the River Wharf on regularly floods in this location.
- Traffic congestion, impact local road network, highway/pedestrian safety and pollution - Leeds Road is already extremely busy. Traffic survey in non COVID times required.
- Local Character- impact on Ben Rhydding & conversation area
- brown field sites should be considered before Green Belt
-Local infrastructure cannot support these developments.

Object

Representation ID: 21285

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: 21371

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: 21382

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: 21394

Received: 21/03/2021

Respondent: Stephen Mann

1. Environmental Issues: The primary concern here is the apparent disregard for the green belt concept - the removal of natural views and living space for wildlife. Loss of a resource for the young. The proposal is contrary to the alleged Bradford council commitment to a zero carbon future.

2. Infrastructure: Transport links are already at capacity, as are schools and medical services. The spread of car parking for and by train users into side roads/streets has been a major local issues for several years, additional housing will only serve to exacerbate this problem;

3. Traffic Management: we can expect in the region of 2000 extra car journeys per day on already congested roads and parking spaces;

4. Land Quality: the land in question is already much affected by poor drainage and is subject to flooding

Object

Representation ID: 21396

Received: 21/03/2021

Respondent: Carole Dawson

There have been major increases in the population of Ilkley with the high density housing in Railway Rd which has put increasing pressure on the local infrastructure and services.

The proposed developments will substantially increase local traffic , require additional primary and secondary school places and further healthcare facilities as well as increased volume on the already overcrowded train services to Leeds.

Object

Representation ID: 21398

Received: 21/03/2021

Respondent: Juhi Bains

I object to the above proposed dwellings because of the sheer number of them, in a small, currently green space.
There simply isn’t enough infrastructure to cope with the extra numbers of people. There will be an increase in traffic in an already congested area and consequently more air pollution.

It appears that the houses will be shoe horned in to a small space with a subsequent drain to the local amenities.

Object

Representation ID: 21400

Received: 21/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Sally Varley

I am writing to lodge my strong objection to the proposed building of homes on both Coutances Way and Wheatley Grove in Ben Rhydding, Ilkley.

As regards Coutances Way (IL2/H) the building of 150 homes would greatly increase the traffic accessing the A65 which is already subject to long queues at weekends, peak times of the day and during holidays. If cars were to access Wheatley Lane then Bolling Road would become far more busy which would be dangerous for children arriving and leaving the Primary School at Ben Rhydding which is already a problem at the start and end of the school day.

Unlike villages West and East of Ilkley, there is no by-pass so all traffic heading in either direction driving through Ilkley have no alternative but to go through the centre of the town which is already very busy.

Object

Representation ID: 21405

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: 21409

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: 21418

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Jane Tindall

Whilst understanding the need for housing, I object to both these developments on the following basis:

• Both in Green Belt - Bradford should develop its brownfield sites and redevelop 4,000 empty properties first.

• Sites subject to serious flood risk - river regularly overtops its banks and field drains water from Ilkley Moor.

• Loss of land for amenity value – existing footpaths/walks, loss of woodland;

• Hopeless access into the road system leading to congestion;

• Dangerous access into the road system and creation of traffic jams down Wheatley Lane towards traffic lights at junction with A65;

• Extension of Ilkley boundary towards Burley in Wharfedale

• Completely out of character - visual appearance of two large modern estates out of keeping with Ilkley’s architecture;

• What happened to the proposal to build a car park for Ben Rhydding Station – to get parking off the local streets?

• Pressure on schools/shops/medical facilities etc. to service the new communities - will be made even worse if North Yorkshire go ahead with housing proposal north of the river.

Object

Representation ID: 21419

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Ben Rhydding Sports Club

Agent: Mr Robin Snook

Bradford Council, in setting out the Local Plan for IL1/H and IL3/H, fails to address many key issues like traffic, access, and infrastructure. However, and I know it will sound strange, but it does clearly state that in adopting the Plan, it would run rough-shod over it’s own policy on the GREEN BELT.

Ben Rhydding Sports Club - first general concern relates to the likelihood of increased flood risk from this side of the A65. We are already vulnerable from the river side, and after the November 2020 floods, we cannot now obtain insurance against future flooding.

Should IL3/H be adopted, the loss of openness will be dramatic, and damaged for ever. To emphasise this point, please take a look at the picture below which perfectly demonstrates the glorious view, as it is today.......now imagine that same view spoilt by 155 new houses on the Green Belt.

Object

Representation ID: 21422

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: 21482

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.