Object

Representation ID: 5891

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Jonathan Smith

Ilkley's infrastructure is already stretched - schooling, transport and services are not adequate to provide to even more housing in the area. This area suffers form traffic issues due to the railway bridge - to add an exist from a large housing development just metres away is dangerous and would add to the traffic issues residents face.

Object

Representation ID: 5899

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Claire Wilkinson

I object due to the following reasons: The destruction of the green belt land and the detrimental effect that it will have on the landscape, sustainability of the area and character of the surrounding areas are issues that fundamentally cannot be mitigated or prevented if this plan proceeds. The traffic on Wheatley Lane is already excessive, with traffic often backing up beyond Valley Drive, which would be exacerbated by this development and increase parking difficulties already faced by properties on Wheatley Lane. There are also severe drainage issues on Wheatley Lane, resulting in many properties as well as fields and Coutances Way experiencing regular surface flooding, which will increase with the proposed developed. Finally, infrastructure of the area is already insufficient for the number of residents in the area. From schools, transport links and medical care this development would require additional amenities to cater for the influx in local population.

Object

Representation ID: 5905

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Leanne Hollins

Ilkley is already a saturated town with regards infrastructure- schools are oversubscribed, roads are too busy, parking is now a total nightmare, the gps are too full to take on any more patients. The town cannot support the residents it has. We need to improve the facilities and amenities to support current residents and absolutely not bring in more and put further strain on the above.

Object

Representation ID: 6001

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: 6006

Received: 03/03/2021

Respondent: Lois Skilleter

Green belt - no justification for taking green belt when other brownfield sites in Bradford are available
Damage to character and environment- rural setting is large part of areas charm
Site provides a wildlife corridor and has mature trees and curlew feeding
Flooding - underground springs
Sewage - local facility cannot cope now
Schools - limited capacity. A new school should be considered
Road safety- increase of traffic, single lane under railway. Poor visibility onto Wheatley Lane
No consideration of existing permissions including small schemes

Object

Representation ID: 6010

Received: 03/03/2021

Respondent: Nick Greaves

1. Flooding - The more that land is built upon, in addition to current climate change, the more severe the impact will be in these areas and the greater impact upon existing residents and services.
2. Character of the local area - the land separates Ilkley and Burley in Wharfedale, if built upon, will cause a lack of distinction between the town and village as is. Therefore reducing the appeal of either place and it’s appeal to those who visit bringing revenue to the area.
3. Increase in traffic - the A65 is a busy traffic route which is heavily congested. Development on Coutances Way will cause further traffic build up, greater congestion and more pollution in Ilkley and surrounding areas.
4. Environmental concerns - Coutances Way is an area significant for curlew feeding and home to many species of wildlife.
5. Ben Rhydding and Ilkley sewage sites are already stretched and unable to deal with current capacity, regularly overflowing.
5. Schools - the only secondary school serving the whole area is running at full capacity
6. Additional building - the proposals don’t take into account other developments that have been taking place and are already planned

Object

Representation ID: 6014

Received: 04/03/2021

Respondent: Sarah Irwin

Brownfield sites should be prioritised before building on greenbelts.
Flooding/drainage - impact on existing systems- sewage overflows into the river
Primary schools are over subscribed. - Local infrastructure is not sufficient (dentists, doctors)
Parking and road safety with extra traffic and poor access.

Object

Representation ID: 6016

Received: 25/02/2021

Respondent: Adrian Long

The land off Coutances Way is under water most winters and the A65 was closed due to flooding during the recent bad weather.
The field is also a foraging ground for curlews.
Housing will contribute to extra run off and potentially more flooding.
The UK is going to experience wetter, more extreme weather due to climate change building on these sites is unbelievable.
We should be planting trees on the sites not houses.
Has any effect on the potential stability of the railway line being taken into consideration?

Object

Representation ID: 6019

Received: 26/02/2021

Respondent: Mrs Joanne Martin

I write to state my objection to all planned building over the three proposed sites in Ilkley.
I don’t wish to see a large green belt area built on in terms of the Ben Rhydding site. The same applies for the land off the A65.

Object

Representation ID: 6024

Received: 28/02/2021

Respondent: Clare Heap

I understand the fields affected in Ben Rhydding are along the main road below the. railway line near the scout hut and off The Drive and High Wood. The footpath across the latter field leads up to the moor and connects with footpaths to Burley in Wharfedale and Menston. At present it is grazed by horses but there are often sheep there as well. This route is used regularly by walkers and I have noticed how much busier it has been throughout the various lockdowns. It is a precious asset and we need to protect it at all costs. There have been previous attempts to build here in the past but it has remained in the Green Belt and for a very good reason. There should be no change now.

Object

Representation ID: 6033

Received: 01/03/2021

Respondent: Dr Rebecca Barron

The 4 sites will have a negative impact on our community, increasing the population, destroying the landscape and increasing overall carbon emissions due to more cars on the road.

Detrimental impact on uniqueness and tourism of the historic spa towns.

Building (on A65) may result in a merging with Burley.

With 4000 empty homes in Bradford and brown site land available, green belt should be the last resort.

The infrastructure will not support any further housing.

The A65 is already overused.

Inadequate car parks at train stations and trains overcrowded.

Flooding is a problem.

The Wheatley Grove site has 4 natural springs.

Access is limited to Wheatley Grove, extra vehicles will be dangerous.

The railway bridge (Wheatley Lane) causes a bottleneck to traffic.

Destroying green belt and trees protected by TPO should not be allowed.

Land used for recreation.

The old packhorse bridge is a site of historic importance.

Object

Representation ID: 6042

Received: 01/03/2021

Respondent: Kathleen Smith

I object to the proposed housing developments on green belt land in Ilkley, Addingham and Burley in Wharfedale.

Apart from destroying the environment, are there plans to increase the infrastructure to accommodate the large numbers of residents who will occupy the houses. Our schools are full and the existing residents have difficulty getting an appointment at our doctors' surgeries.

The traffic through Ilkley is horrendous and parking is impossible at the weekends.

During the week people travel to Ilkley to take the train into Leeds or Bradford and park their cars on the roads outside resident's houses making peoples lives a misery.

If these proposals go ahead, no doubt in the future Addingham, Ilkley and Burley will become one if further development is allowed.

Please take into consideration the views of the people who live in these areas and reject any further development on green belt land.

Object

Representation ID: 6055

Received: 02/03/2021

Respondent: Julia Richardson

There is no significant justification why green belt land is proposed and plans are hugely disproportionate against Ilkley.

The Council states the three sites as either having moderate or major impact on the green belt.

The sites would reduce the separation between neighbouring towns and create a ‘Wharfedale corridor’ of development.

The proposals would significantly change the character of the town and the surround areas including removal of fields between Burley and Ilkely.

Three sites have significant existing flooding risks.

The proposals go completely against the defined local plan to protect the local environment.

IGS is already operating at capacity.

The site will significantly increase traffic through the Wheatley Road train bridge and the junction with valley drive which are already at high risk of accidents and congestion. No traffic assessment has been carried out on these areas.

Developments in the last few years not taken into account.

Object

Representation ID: 6059

Received: 02/03/2021

Respondent: Dr Sandy Lukats

I would like to strongly object to the proposed use of green belt land in Ilkley for the purposes of building houses. There are multiple unused brown field sites in the Bradford district which should be used first.

There is no justification for destroying natural areas and disrupting local wildlife for this purpose.

The fields off Coutances way regularly flood and are part of the flood plain. This winter the flooded field turned into a large skating rink. Apart from the construction issues this would bring the site is also next to the sewage works which is already at capacity ( and stinks).

The one senior school is already oversubscribed as are the doctors and primary schools.

Please see sense and do not build on this land.

My other concern is the effect this would have on traffic on the A65 which is already a bottleneck coming into Ben Rhydding.

Object

Representation ID: 6062

Received: 02/03/2021

Respondent: Leslie Barber

I am a resident of Ilkley and am making clear my objection to the proposed housing development in Ilkley and Ben Rhydding.

The 3 largest proposed areas for building and development are on designated GREEN BELT land. Why? Why? Why?
These GREEN BELT lands must remain just what they are GREEN!

Ilkley is a beautiful town on the outskirts of The Yorkshire Dales and attracts many visitors because it is surrounded by natural scenic Moors , fields and the Wharfe River. Building more homes on the surrounding Green Belt will spoil the natural beauty of the area.

And needless to say adding a further 314 new homes to the area will just add to the already crowded roads, schools, health centre and general infrastructure of the town.

Object

Representation ID: 6070

Received: 31/03/2021

Respondent: Michele Hickie

Loss of green belt- development would have a major impact on the landscape
Use brownfield sites in Bradford District
Impact on character
Traffic increase
Impact on wildlife
Flooding and sewerage overload

Object

Representation ID: 6076

Received: 28/02/2021

Respondent: John and Sue Murphy

Number of people: 2

Access, traffic
Loss of green belt

Object

Representation ID: 6078

Received: 05/03/2021

Respondent: Peter Higginbotham

Green belt - merging and impact on character/tourism
Roads - railway bridge (narrow access), increased traffic and congestion
Schools - over subscribed
Flooding - land absorbs water. Unstable?
Sewage - current facility already overflows
Development should wait to see impact on services once Burley development has progressed

Object

Representation ID: 6086

Received: 05/03/2021

Respondent: Yvonne Bradley

Building on green belt
Increased traffic - pollution
No additional infrastructure- GPs, dentists, grammar school is full

Object

Representation ID: 6091

Received: 05/03/2021

Respondent: Geoffrey White

Loss of green belt - important for walking and runningand mental health. Building will impact recreation, tourism, and the primary appeal of Ilkley

Object

Representation ID: 6095

Received: 06/03/2021

Respondent: Louise Atkinson

lkley Grammar is the only publicly accessible secondary school in the area, and is already operating at capacity and cannot expand. No additional secondary school capacity has been proposed
Increase of traffic under railway bridge and the junction with Valley Drive - congestion and future accidents - traffic assessment required

Object

Representation ID: 6099

Received: 06/03/2021

Respondent: Martin .

Change of local character of Ilkley and loss of fields between Burley and Ilkely.
Development will exacerbate existing flood risk issues on the surrounding areas.
Ilkley Grammar is the only publicly accessible secondary school in the area- cannot expand further. No additional capacity proposed
Traffic congestion and risk of accidents - railway bridge and junction with Valley Drive- traffic assessment needed

Object

Representation ID: 6107

Received: 06/03/2021

Respondent: Helen Thurston

Green Belt - climate emergency which cannot be reconciled when there are brownfield sites available in the Bradford District.
Development will exacerbate flooding
The Ashlands Waste Water Treatment Works is already over capacity resulting in unacceptable pollution of the river Wharfe.
The site provides a habitat for wildlife with mature trees and is breeding ground for curlews.
School capacity - Ilkley Grammar is already operating at capacity and is unable to expand

Object

Representation ID: 6115

Received: 02/03/2021

Respondent: Anne Hornsby

I’m registering an objection to the proposal for building homes in Ilkley at Coutances Way and the Wheatley Grove sites IL1H and IL3H.

Both these sites are:

- green belt land
- prone to flooding or will have an adverse effect on local floods

Furthermore, Ilkley Grammar is unable to accept any further pupils and is already constrained by a small sloping site so is unable to take more, but other good local schools are a bus ride away in Guiseley.

It seems counter intuitive to build on green belt land when there are plenty of brown sites available in Bradford. Having worked in the centre of Bradford for some time, I would suggest there are plenty of opportunities for regeneration amongst the beautiful old buildings slowly falling into neglect there.

Object

Representation ID: 6117

Received: 02/03/2021

Respondent: Laura Dawes

• Concerns about building on Green Belt land.
• With global warning and shrinking habitats how can this be justified?
• IL1/H and neighbouring roads provide quiet and pleasant way to walk from Ben Rhydding to the Moor. This will be spoilt and become more dangerous on Ben Rhydding Drive, which has no pavements.
• Traffic congestion will be inevitable on Wheatley Lane. At rush hour it can be very congested and difficult to get out of Valley Drive.
• What flood risk studies have been undertaken?
• Water regularly pours down Wheatley Lane and IL1/H can be very boggy.
• Do the mature trees on the site have tree protection orders?
• Concern about amenities such as doctors, schools and sewage systems – may be overloaded with an increase in households. As well as those approved but not yet built off Leeds Road/Ashlands Road.

Object

Representation ID: 6120

Received: 02/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Becky Moore

I write this mail to express my objection to the planned development of sites IL1/H, IL2/H, IL3/H, and IL4/H

My main reason for doing so is that almost all houses will be built on Greenbelt areas which surely cannot be acceptable due to the environmental impact including increased flooding risk.

Object

Representation ID: 6125

Received: 02/03/2021

Respondent: Jade Holdsworth

• Flooding in the fields between Ilkley and Burley is very bad. Cars get stranded. The drainage in these fields hasn’t helped. How is it OK to build on top of this?
• It is Green Belt land which helps nature and wildlife. What will happen to them?
• Burley, Ilkley, Addingham are all separate they should not be joined as that will ruin their character.
• Ilkley Grammar School will not cope with extra pupils. Pupils from Burley/Addingham which would include my children will be pushed out. I have stayed in this area because I want my children to go to the Grammar School as I did.
• Road safety is a major issue. The road between Ilkley/Burley is often at a standstill. Ilkley needs a bypass before any more houses are built.
• There are many brown belt areas which should be built on rather than green belt.

Object

Representation ID: 6129

Received: 02/03/2021

Respondent: Martin Chan

•Green belt encroachment. Difficult to justify when brownfield sites could be developed. Green belt is essential to maintain scenic worth/wildlife.
•Character of the area will be changed significantly. Green space between Burley/Ilkley/Addingham will be reduced.
•Flooding problems - increasing in recent years. New developments will worsen this.
•Environmental concerns. The moor is near to these sites.
•Pressure on the sewage works will increase. Already discharges into river.
•Schools are at capacity. There are no plans/options to accept more pupils. This includes primary, secondary and preschool places.
•Road network is at capacity. Regular jams/tailbacks are common. No potential for road expansion/parking. Doesn’t fit with green agenda. The rail system is at capacity to Leeds/Bradford. Little room to expand public transport.
•Many roads, bridges, traffic light junctions are snarled up.
•Future development should focus on affordable housing on brownfield sites aimed at regenerating city/town centres rather than damaging Ilkley and surrounding area.

Object

Representation ID: 6133

Received: 02/03/2021

Respondent: Sue Head

•Flooding risks – Coutances Way and land off Skipton Road – causing serve disruption. Building plus climate change will cause greater impact to residents/services.
•Character of current area between Ilkley/Burley will change and cause a lack of distinction.
•Increase in traffic on A65, a major traffic route which is heavily congested. Further development will cause more traffic, congestion and pollution in Ilkley.
•Environmental concerns:
Wheatley Grove within the protected Ilkley moor site. It should specifically be avoided.
Coutances Way is an area significant for curlew nesting and feeding.
Coutances Way and Wheatley Grove provide significant wildlife habitat with protection orders to protect them.
Ben Rhydding and Ilkley sewage sites already stretched/unable to deal with current capacity, regularly overflowing.
•Secondary school serves whole area and at capacity. School cannot accommodate current proposed developments in Addingham/Burley.
•The proposals fail to take account of the developments that have taken place and are planned.

Object

Representation ID: 6137

Received: 02/03/2021

Respondent: Lindsey Spencer

I wish to object to the proposed house building on green belt land in Ilkley for the following reasons:
1. There are brown field sites in Bradford which could be used instead.
2. The areas provide refuge for wildlife including curlews which will be gone forever if built on.
3. Ilkley and Ben Rhydding sewage works cannot cope with current amounts of waste and most days of the year allow waste to overflow into the river.
4. The only secondary school is oversubscribed and has no capacity to expand.
5. The area is one of natural beauty which will be eroded by building hundreds of houses on green belt land.
6. Green belt was designated as such for a reason which should be respected.