Object

Representation ID: 4004

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Polly Hosking

Flooding. We used to live in the area. Our cellars flooded regularly particularly after heavy rain and when any houses were built on the higher roads above the scout hut.
I object to the use of green belt land for housing development. These fields are used as an important feeding site for migratory birds.
If it has to be , affordable housing would be more acceptable. Ilkley does not need any more large houses but it does need smaller properties for local people. I do not agree with the selfish sentiment of Ilkley being the cash cow for Bradford. Ilkley should support Bradford. We are lucky to be residents here but we do need sensitive necessary development, and not inappropriate expensive housing.

Object

Representation ID: 4009

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Ilkley Clean River Group

Ilkley Clean River Group (ICRG) object to this plan because of the adverse impact the new houses and supporting infrastructure will have on river water quality.
The combined sewage and drainage system is already overwhelmed and these new buildings will directly lead to a degradation in water quality through more unauthorised sewage discharges directly into the river.
SuDS mitigation plans for run-off water in Ilkley have been shown to be inadequate as there is currently a challenge on the adequacy of these plans at the new Moss & Moor Garden Centre.
Note: the Ilkley sewage system also serves Addingham so we also object to the plans for Addingham and any increase in sewage and run-off will directly lead to more sewage discharges in Ilkley.

Object

Representation ID: 4062

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Gillian Wilson

Everyone in Ilkley has experienced flooding in the past few years as the town has been cut off several times. This development would overlook an area which floods regularly and, with more land being built up, would potentially contribute to more severe flooding.
The more building executed on the outskirts of town, the more traffic, parking problems, road safety issues and pollution is created. The single file iron bridge traffic queues would increase.
Has IGS the capacity to accommodate more children, particularly if combined with the children from the Burley development.
Visually, a large number of houses built on this green belt, would spoil the entrance to the town.

Object

Representation ID: 4106

Received: 24/02/2021

Respondent: Ian Henderson

The areas proposed for housing off Wheatley Lane and between Wheatley Grove and Ben Rhydding Drive propose to destroy what The Green Belt is supposed to be there to protect. It would be part of a progression to join Ilkley to Burley and via Menston/Guiseley/Yeadon/Rawdon/Horsforth/Kirkstall to the centre of Leeds. The two areas I refer to are beautiful and relatively unspoilt, with the upper area between Wheatley Grove and Ben Rhydding Drive still preserving in the landscape the old coach road from Ben Rhydding up almost to the site of the former Hydro. This area also absorbs a great deal of moisture draining down off The Moor, thereby serving as a sort of elevated/sloping 'flood plain'. If it is built on, more water will descend to the river valley below, where we have seen significant flooding in recent time.

Object

Representation ID: 4119

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Ms Angela Barrow

This is in the buffer zone for the green belt and development should not be allowed. There is very little open space between Ilkley and Burley in Wharfedale.
The site is important for wildlife.
The site is regularly wet and local drains overflow, global warming and increasing amounts of rain will only make this worse
The road under the rail bridge is narrow, it's a high risk junction, vehicles regularly hit the bridge closing the road too. Extra traffic will only make this worse
The junction with Valley Drive is already extremely busy and a high traffic risk
It will significantly increase traffic along the B6382 which is already a rat run for the A65 and which is very narrow closer to town.

Object

Representation ID: 4152

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Thomas Baker

The character of Ben Rhydding and Ilkley is defined by it's rural setting, the moor, surrounding fields, and close-knit community feel that will be jeopardised by building on this green-belt site.

Curlew's as well as blue Jays and red kites use this particular site for nesting and hunting.

Building on this land will have a significant negative impact on local wildlife.

Significant Increase in traffic - The roads in Ben Rhydding are not suitable for the increased vehicle traffic and number of additional of cars that will use the roads for access and commuting due to the additional dwellings proposed in the area, and potentially making the area less safe for pedestrians.

Added strain on local services already over due to the new dwellings (schools, doctors, public transport, car parking).

Green Belt land should be protected. Please responsibly develop brownfield sites in the Bradford district instead.

Object

Representation ID: 4166

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Dr Rachel Trowbridge

This large development will lead to an increase in vehicle traffic with planned access onto Wheatley Lane and leading to subsequent congestion on Bolling Rd and Valley Drive. Requirement for traffic control measure could lead to another set of traffic lights in a short distance from the existing sets in place at Ben Rhydding rail bridge and the Wheatley Lane access onto the A65. The increase in traffic will lead to further congestion on the roads into the town centre to access the amenities leading to additional parking facilities being required.
Loss of another green belt area in the Ilkley Ward. The size of development will impact the character of the landscape. Plus the additional issue of this area being prone to surface water and flooding.

Object

Representation ID: 4180

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Ian McHardy

The development will have a significant impact on traffic which is already extremely busy on Wheatley Lane and Valley Drive. The proposed access will create congestion in proximity to the extremely busy rail bridge traffic lights and Valley Drive junction.
Significant increase in foul drainage to a sewerage system and treatment plant that is already stretched. Greater direct pollution of the River Wharfe during storm surge. The River Wharfe is already polluted.
The site is in the flood zone. The increase in hard landscape involved in the site will increase rain water run off increasing flooding risks for the Wharfe Valley downstream. Application of a SUDS solution not considered viable due to flood risk.
The school placements are already over subscribed by the existing established catchment areas and established housing.
The site is designated green belt. The visual amenity of the area will be permanently spoiled by the development.

Object

Representation ID: 4188

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Elizabeth Wilson

Traffic & Transport - 6 roads all within metres of each other impacting onto Wheatley Lane.
Blind spot on Wheatley Lane when exiting Valley Drive
Narrowness of surrounding roads
Danger to pedestrians and children - already a congested area and narrow footpath on the single file road under the railway bridge
Build up of traffic on A65. Iron Bridge and Wheatley Lane
Pollution - Roads already massively congested and blocked. Many elderly people and young people in the area with the number of surrounding schools
Infrastructure - Cannot cope now let alone with further development - See accompanying script
Risk of flooding - excessive rainwater from the moors
Environment - Dilution of character of the open area and its heritage
Develop your Brown Field areas first and these should be prioritised.
Importantly my detailed views are on my Representation.

Object

Representation ID: 4212

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Ellen Stubbs

This is a very beautiful piece of land with irreplaceable views. The roads accessing the land are narrow and the existing neighbourhoods would have problems with any increase in road traffic. As the local schools are already oversubscribed bringing more families into the area would be a further increase in road traffic as children would need to be bussed/driven to other areas. The A65 backs up for several miles at peak times and a potential 280 further automobiles will see traffic at a standstill between Burley in Wharfedale and Addingham. Pollution is high in town when the traffic is at a standstill and as there are two primary schools this could affect the health of our children. Ilkley just cannot cope with such a large increase in population and therefore I object to these plans.

Object

Representation ID: 4219

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Rombalds Lane Residents Association

WHILST THIS AREA CAN SUPPORT SOME MODEST DEVELOPMENT, THE LOCAL INFRASTRUCTURE, IN PARTICULAR THE SINGLE LANE TRAFFIC LIGHT CONTROLLED RAILWAY UNDERPASS AT Ben Rhydding RAILWAY STATION WILL REQUIRE ENLARGING TO A TWO LANE ROAD, AS WILL THE SINGLE TRACK IRON BRIDGE OVER THE WHARFE ON COUTANCES WAY. THIS SITE WILL REQUIRE ACCESS DIRECTLY ON TO COUTANCES WAY. IDEALLY IT SHOULD ALSO BE LINKED BY A TWO LANE ROAD OVER OR UNDER THE RAILWAY LINE TO THE PROPOSED WHEATLEY GROVE SITE. WITHOUT THIS ESSENTIAL UPGRADING THE LOCAL ROAD INFRASTRUCTURE SIMPLY WILL NOT COPE WITH THE INCREASED TRAFFIC VOLUMES. DRAINAGE AND SEWERAGE SYSTEMS WILL ALSO NEED SIGNIFICANT UPGRADING.

Object

Representation ID: 4225

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Sarah Thomas

This plot of land has flooded always every year that we have been in Ilkley and to build housing on this land with the increased hard surfaces for water run off seems an illogical plan.

Object

Representation ID: 4271

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Peter Rowe

Access onto Wheatley Lane is unrealistic. Spend a few days on a deckchair counting traffic currently at standstill during peak times such as school drop offs, commuting, Saturday football. Assumptions for rail use are only as good as the service provider. This is the same theme that runs through my comments. The plan is adding to an old infrastructure that cannot cope currently. Even if people did feel like walking half way up Wheatley Lane to get to the train station they'll not get a place on the train as it'll be full. The train service has to be expanded first to be able to cope with the influx of potentially an additional 450 plus users at an estimate of 1.5 per household across the total suggestion. If we assume 66 seats per typical carriage that's an extra 5 carriages at peak.

Object

Representation ID: 4323

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Miss Abby Tarrant

Although in theory this is a good site for development I worry that the whole area has a very bad history of flooding, to build new housing only for it to be substandard would potentially devalue the whole development and in turn negatively impact the town.

My second concern regarding the flooding is the sewage facilities. Flooding and sewage are not a positive combination and with a development of this size I question the impact it will have on an already stretched waste disposal service.

If a project this size is to go ahead it will likely negatively impact on volumes of traffic on the already congested A65 and through Ben Rhydding which has a school on the main road.

Object

Representation ID: 4401

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Philip Townson

Site 1L 3/H Coutances Way

To build so many houses on this site means that the separation between Ilkley & Burley is reduced dramatically & change Ilkleys character.
It is on green belt land which plan admits will have a major impact.
Plan makes no mention of impact if will have on facilities in Ilkley plus traffic issues.
Exit from this site leads to Wheatley Lane and within a hundred yards or so leads to the junction with the the A65.
Congestion at this junction often goes back as far to Burley.Lately a garden centre has been built a few hundred yards away which will create further traffic issues . In addition traffic from site 1L 1/H will come this way yet no solution is offered.
The sheer scale of the proposal will create huge traffic, infrastructure issues without offering solutions .

Object

Representation ID: 4430

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Miss Victoria Wilson

Having moved to Ilkley two years ago from the over crowded South East of England, it seems a travesty that this additional housing is planned for this area in Ben Rhydding. Not only is there a potential significant problem from the flood plain, but the risk to the preservation of the landscape is considerable. Significantly on the approach into Ilkley the first view is one of the moor and the ascent to it. Obscuring this with a housing development cannot be justified. Once it is gone, it is gone and it will never be the same again. To destroy natural beauty which the residents of Ilkley respect and adore is to destroy our enjoyment of this unspoilt environment. I do not understand how the farmland where the housing is planned for can be sacrificed. The potential impact on our community is in no way justifiable.

Object

Representation ID: 4463

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Deirdre Long

Green Belt is there to check unrestricted sprawl of large built up areas and preserve the setting of historic towns such as Ilkley. Current outline planning approved to build 500 plus houses in Burley-in-Wharfedale and the additional housing granted planning permission in Menston will result in a merging of these villages and is against the reason why we have Green Belt. The site is subject to annual flooding and housing will only make this worse with more closures of the A65.
There will be a negative impact on Ilkley's infrastructure. Where will all these additional children go to secondary school. Ilkley's parking problems are well documented. The site is also the potential site for a park and ride to BR station. Will the aging sewerage system be capable of coping with an increase of 300 houses? Have any studies been carried out to date.

Object

Representation ID: 4473

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Jonathan Lury

Object for the following reasons:
1) these new homes will all be for rich people. They will not be affordable or increase diversity or opportunity.
2) this is greenbelt land. The UK is a small country with a dwindling amount of greenbelt. New housing should be done on brown field sites and be facilitated by central government investment. Bradford area has a large amount of urban brownfield sites which are ripe for regeneration.
3) there is not enough infrastructure for this development (water/sewage, schools, public transport, existing road system is inadequate). In other recent building developments in this area the developers have not delivered the promised solutions to improve infrastructure and have not been held to account. Therefore this development will simply create more problems.

Thanks for your review.

Object

Representation ID: 4487

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: bernadette raven

this is very close to the sewage works there for will be prone to unpleasant smells and this will decrease the house prices.
This will affect our wildlife and flooding the environment is already under threat because of us humans can we really justify harming the environment further. Building these house for a few today will remove life for everyone in the future we need to be protecting the environment as a higher priority.
Ilkley cannot hold more house it just does not have the facilities in its shops, outdoor space and schools. We have few shops that anyone actually shop in and outdoor space is cramped the schools are too full if an accident was to occur do to overcrowding it will be because you did not stop the overpopulation of ilkley which cannot expand because out geography prevents this safety and out environment should be the greatest concern.

Object

Representation ID: 4506

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Miss Rebecca Allsop

I am objecting to this proposal based on the following themes, the detail behind each is included in the attached document:
This site is proposed on greenbelt land with protected natural resources and wildlife

the combined proposals will join up addingham, ilkey and burley

flood risk and impact on flooding in surrounding areas

lack of secondary schooling in the local area to take on additional population

irreversible impact on greenbelt in a backdrop of climate change in an area of outstanding beauty

Dangerous traffic impacts

Lack of other options explored

No justification provided regarding why other brownfield sites readily available across the Bradford district have been discounted in favour of the destruction of greenbelt

Object

Representation ID: 4612

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Keith Allen

More housing development will impact on the infra structure of the small town of Ilkley. Our road net work is already congested with traffic and local health care services overwhelmed. We are also depleting our geen spaces that is impacting on local wildlife.

Object

Representation ID: 4738

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Miss Melanie Dunstan

1. Impact on the environment/ road safety as there would be potentially 200+ cars for this site alone, coursing further congestion in the area
2. Effect on the wildlife in that area
-Curlews.
3. Flood risk
4. Impact on services, schools and Doctors Surgeries etc that are already stretched.

Object

Representation ID: 4781

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Rebecca Scaife

I wish to object to the dwellings proposed on Coutances Way (IL3/H) and Ben Rhydding Drive (IL1/H) based on their impact on residential amenities, the pressure on the local infrastructure and highway safety. The proposed dwellings will affect the character of the neighbourhood and the local eco-system, to the detriment of the local environment. The land is currently open, green space and as such, is valued and enjoyed by local residents. I have genuine concerns about the pressure on amenities such as schools and local health services. I also have real concerns about highway safety. The development will increase local traffic, resulting in more congestion on Coutances Way. In addition, the means of access on Wheatley Lane particularly the traffic lights and one-way system under the railway bridge and the tight, one-way access to Ben Rhydding Drive from Wheatley Lane mean highway safety will only be compromised further.

Object

Representation ID: 4806

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Richard Shelton

Having lived in the area for all of my 50 years, this seems a site choice fraught with natural drainage issues. Most winters will see excess water pooling in this area and any man-made interference with the natural drainage will push the problem elsewhere. Quicker run-off to the river will exacerbate flood issues down stream.

Object

Representation ID: 4835

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Jane Paul

This site is recognised as the only realistic option for a new, larger Ilkley Grammar School, which is already oversubscribed 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 plan for the new school was supported by Bradford Council and Kath Tunstall, Bradford Council’s strategic director of services to children and young people, said the new school represented the best option for the current and future pupils. The project only stalled at the last minute because of a cut in government spending at the time. I cannot believe that new housing is now being proposed on the same site. Surely getting the infrastructure right first is the most important priority. What would make better sense is to move the Grammar School to this site and redevelop the old school site for housing.

Object

Representation ID: 4937

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Trevor Ashall

This is a beautiful area of green space that should not be developed for housing.
Bradford Council should develop brownfield sites and bring back into use the numerous dwellings that have fallen into disrepair before developing such lovely green spaces.
Ben Rhydding school is full and cannot cope with a great influx of children.
Has the Council considered the probability of flooding now that climate change is producing significant rainfall events much more frequently than previously experienced?

Object

Representation ID: 4942

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Ms Vivia Tizard

Green belt
Flooding
Spoil the view as you enter ilkley town. Already ben rhydding is no longer a village but part of ilkley

Object

Representation ID: 5002

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Jo Drye

The road infrastructure is not in place to support additional properties nor is their capacity in primary and secondary schools

Object

Representation ID: 5004

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Adrian Weatherly

Ilkley doesn't have the infrastructure to support this level of housing . There is too much traffic on the A65 which will be compounded by such a development. The recent Garden centre will also contribute as well as BR sports Club. The area is a haven for wildlife and is unsuitable. There are also issues with drainage and springs in the area. Traffic up Wheatley Lane is a problem now and again will be compounded by such a development. Ilkley cant take this level of development as well as the already congested A65.

Object

Representation ID: 5009

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Michael Briggs

Ilkley cannot absorb another 300 homes! The infrastructure cannot support it. The doctors, dentists and schools are all at capacity. Parking in the town is no longer possible because of the new parking measures. Green belt has been established to protect our green and open spaces for all, including wildlife. Whilst I accept that we have a growing population and therefore need to build more homes Green Belt should only be used once all of the Brown field sites have been utilised. Too much green space has been lost to development in Ben Rhydding already a further 2 large development sites would be ruinous!