Object

Representation ID: 25303

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Roya Helme

1. Why such a high percentage on green belt? Effecting character of area.

2. Flooding. We have experienced increased flooding living in ilkley last years, removing surface field draining and why build onto flood areas ?

3.School and infrastructure already stretched. Cars and parking a significant problem.

Object

Representation ID: 25308

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: James Garry

Developing Green Belt land unacceptable, and counter to Bradford Councils responsibilities, aims and objectives.
Harming the character of the area.
Lack of local employment opportunities, Ilkley has no major employers, proposed additional population will commute, adding strain to already bottlenecked infrastructure and harming the air quality and noise levels. This places additional mental health stress on local residents.
Local schools are oversubscribed. Provision of a primary school will not alleviate these problems.
Damage to wildlife, including Amber listed Curlew. There are also a large number of mature trees, hedgerows and related eco systems that would be damaged by the construction of the development.
Flood Risk, A portion of the site is at risk of flooding, development will contribute to faster water run-off and adverse downstream effects. These fields act as a sponge to attenuate heavy rainfall.
Effect on the moors and fragile eco system.
Light pollution/other general pollution.
Unsuitable infrastructure.
Additional substantial amount of traffic, noise, pollution and disruption. Ilkley town itself is a bottleneck so transport west will be effected.
Destruction of the very aspects which give these towns an identity.

Object

Representation ID: 25550

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Alison and Toby Starr

Number of people: 2

Flooding Issues.
Represents a high number of houses proposed in a small area, 97% planned on greenbelt.
Bradford Council’s Conservation Area Assessment and Appraisal documents has a section dedicated to Open Spaces and Natural Elements and specifically comments that “Fields and moorland surround the village and serve to remind the resident or visitor of the village’s past rural connections”. The fields are the subject of this planning application and 285 homes on this greenbelt land is inconsistent with the Council’s commitment to preserve the character of the Conservation Area.
No capacity in the local schools. Sewage regularly overflows into the Wharfe. The roads are already full of traffic.
Use of greenbelt land needs full scrutiny.

Object

Representation ID: 25554

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Bradford District Ward Councillor (Conservative)

97% is to be built on Green Belt. Goes again sustainability criteria seeking to “Minimises the use of Green Belt land”.

Would lead to urban sprawl, leading to lack of defined spaces between settlements/developments.

Access to IL3/H would exacerbate issues around Valley Drive/Wheatley Lane junction

Wheatley Grove is unsuitable for higher traffic levels.
Flooding is a serious issue. Will be exacerbated by development.

Infrastructure issues are not addressed.

Likely to create more pressure on sewage system.
Potential increase in students needing to attend secondary school. Ilkley Grammar School is at capacity. No site identified for expansion.

Middleton brownfield site (identified by NYCC for development) would add extra housing to the Ilkley area. Not considered by the plan.

Plan does not benefit Ilkley residents. Town has suffered over-development. Building more houses will add to existing infrastructure issues (parking, flooding, school places).

Look to develop suitable brownfield sites elsewhere in the District.

Support

Representation ID: 25622

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Gordon Perry

There is higher value Green Belt which deserves protection, but other which do not and could be developed. Exceptional cases should be considered for them.

This site has been left un-used for years. Whilst this site is within a Conservation Area appropriate development with similar vernacular would improve the setting. It seems sensible to develop this for homes and again could be targeted at the downsizing high value market.

Object

Representation ID: 25663

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: John Hunt

A very busy area of town and more cars would not be welcome.

Object

Representation ID: 25687

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Emily Sheedy Davies

Green belt land should be protected.

The council decides what we can do to our homes and gardens and should apply the same to keeping green spaces for our children to grow up with. 97% of the land is Green Belt with no justification and it will cause character, flooding and environmental damage.

The schools, particularly Ilkley Grammar, do not have the space and the Council have not taken into account the previous 30 per year houses built and there is no regard for the road safety issues

Support

Representation ID: 26314

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Nicholas Allon

This is a small area of land near to the old bridge and to the start of the Dales Way. It is situated near to the part and should therefore provide houses that are well designed and in keeping with the conservation area.

The plot of land is very steep and access must be made with people with reduced mobility in mind.

Providing these points are acknowledged, I have no objections to this development going ahead.

Object

Representation ID: 26388

Received: 22/03/2021

Respondent: Mark Lawrence

Pushing more people into Principal towns would not be in the best interests of the residents, nor the localised town economy.

This plan represents a significant external influence on that organic balance, and a threat to the green space which helps to drive the attractiveness of the area in terms of visitation.

Loss of open spaces/vistas.

Increasing residential traffic.

The siting of additional housing may well have a positive effect, when located in areas surrounding "principal District towns", as there exists an opportunity
to boost revenues in other sectors important to the locality.

Bradford Council's parking strategy doesn't work.

There is no guarantee of driving the prosperity of a town's High Street, by putting more people on the periphery of that town, owing to the rise of eCommerce (e.g., Amazon) and the ability to travel to major commercial centres (e.g., Leeds and Harrogate).

The proposed plans will devalue existing properties.

Need for parking, or school places.

This plan is risky and based upon assumptions that amount to a false economy.

Object

Representation ID: 26556

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Patricia Hardie

I would like to lodge an objection to the plan of building 9 dwellings at IL4/H Stockeld Road (not Stockheld).

The area around this plot gets very busy. There is a church, a pub and a very busy nursery, not to mention a school at the top of the road. The Old Bridge gets a lot of pedestrians crossing.

The parking will be horrendous. There are a lot of elderly people in this area so noise will also be a factor.

I believe if these dwellings are built it will spoil the whole area.

Object

Representation ID: 26624

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mr A Gudgeon

The river floods and covers the bottom of Stockeld Road, building would exacerbate the problem. The residents are mainly retired or elderly, the increased risk of flooding and isolating residents, as the only access from Stockeld Way and Old Bridge Rise is onto Stockfield Road at the point of the proposed building, is unacceptable.
Drainage issues on Stockeld Road/Bridge Lane flare up annually.

The parking issues on Stockeld Road, even with residents permit parking, is horrendous. The church, Riverside Park and the garden centre contribute far too much traffic/parking issues already. We have seen considerable displacement of traffic from other areas of Ilkley, due to the parking scheme (which must be maintained). Increasing domestic dwellings in this area it will only add to parking problems.
Outlook - The proposed building on the Stockeld Riad site would wholly destroy the current view to the moors towards Cow and Calf Rocks. This is the start of the 'Gateway to the Dales' a much loved and respected Riverside walk, showing off the splendour of Ilkley with far reaching views and a sense on space.

Access for Stockeld Way and Old Bridge Rise, onto Stockeld Road directly by the proposed building site is already compromised due to current parking difficulties through blocking motorists view when entering / exiting.



No consideration has been given to the residents living locally who'll suffer as a direct result. Transparent public consultation must be held locally so all plans can be viewed and scrutinised properly.

314 properties added to Ilkley is deeply concerning. How would the schools, doctors, public transport, Policing, hospitals etc going to manage with this increase in demand?
Ilkley residents feel a great disconnect with Bradford Council.

Object

Representation ID: 26735

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mark Roe

No point designating as Green Belt only to later seek to override that classification. Green Belt should preserve existing natural habitats and outlooks for future generations and to prevent the creep of urban sprawl when a plentiful supply of brownfield sites remain in BMDC area.

Development and carbon-intensive activities is hypocritical in light of BMDC's declaration of a climate emergency and commitment to a green economy: https://www.bradford.gov.uk/environment/climate-change/climate-emergency-and-green-economy/

Insufficient consideration to resurrecting brownfield sites in which the planet's resources have already been depleted to create them, yet remain underutilised: proper and full regard should be given to those before destroying Green Belt areas.

"Significant adverse effects have been predicted in relation to cultural heritage", being so close to the Old Bridge Scheduled Monument.

This site is within an area already consisting of other housing of mixed character (older terraced houses and modern flats).

I'd like to see the impressive surrounding stone wall of some age retained were any development permitted here.

Object

Representation ID: 27530

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Jo Batterham

Hello,

I would like to oppose the planning for the new housing in ilkley and Ben Rhydding.

Please let me know if I need to write anything further.

Many thanks,

Comment

Representation ID: 27786

Received: 19/03/2021

Respondent: Robert Gibson

Number of people: 2

developments should be to the highest environmental standards and design incorporating energy conservation and generation.

Comment

Representation ID: 28058

Received: 24/08/2021

Respondent: Aimee Rawson

I would however question the need for a ‘landmark building’ at the site on Stockeld Road in Ilkley. This seems to be a sensitive site with character buildings all around as well as the historic bridge, and perhaps would suit fewer houses that blend in rather than stand out.

Object

Representation ID: 28180

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Emma Roe

It's noted from the Plan that "Significant adverse effects have been predicted in relation to cultural heritage", being so close to the Old Bridge Scheduled Monument.

However, this site is within an area already consisting of other housing of mixed character (older terraced houses and modern flats).

I'd like to see the impressive surrounding stone wall of some age retained were any development permitted here but, again, it's another greenfield site that would be permanently destroyed with carbon-intensive use of materials when, according to BMDC, we have a climate emergency and insufficient consideration has been given to the multiple of brownfield sites within the BMDC area that remain underutilised.

Object

Representation ID: 28214

Received: 19/08/2021

Respondent: Margaret Huggon

I would like to object to proposed planning proposals for Ilkley.
I am concerned that this will change the character of the town to its detriment.
The development of the green field area proposed will mean a loss of separate identity and will result in a gradual merger of Ilkley and Burley in Wharfedale.
Ilkley already has a shortage of parking is congested and this proposal would make this worse.
If this development is allowed to go ahead, will the developments provide some affordable housing ?
What would the character of the buildings be ? Many of Ilkley”s current new housing developments are predictable and very dull.
I am against proposal. 1L3/H and 1L1/H but do not object to 1L2/H.

Object

Representation ID: 28240

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Jane Bisson

Flooding on Stockeld Road. Developing in this spot increases the risk of disturbing the the land and increasing flood risk to properties. Risk of damage to property and risk to life as well as impact the value of existing properties.

Stockeld Road leads to the Old Bridge which is a scheduled monument. Building properties in this spot will significantly change the approach to the Old Bridge and the view from the Old Bridge. It will negatively impact the entire setting and people's enjoyment of this historic feature.

Increase in traffic and parking issues
Lots of young children use Stockeld Road, many on bikes and scooters. Children walk up and down Stockfield Road, lots of cars parked as parents drop/pick up their children park there.
Risk to the safety of children, other pedestrians and road users.
Increase air pollution and noise pollution.

Green space, protecting the environment, impact for animals and insects.

Pressure on infrastructure, schools and doctors services.

Support

Representation ID: 28369

Received: 17/03/2021

Respondent: Mrs Judith Dennis

Number of people: 2

We would like to record that we have no objection to any of the proposed developments in llkley IL1/H, IL2/H, IL3/H, IL4/H.

We think it would be beneficial to the age and social mix in the town to have at least some sites (or sections of sites) designated for social housing. What are the plans for this, please?

Object

Representation ID: 28373

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: A D Walbank

The proposals do not accord with the draft Ilkley neighbourhood plan.
Green belt should only be considered in exceptional circumstances.
The proposals will exacerbate the overloaded infrastructure.
Traffic congestion on A65 and the roundabout at the east of Ilkley at Burley.
This another area which complements and enhances the green space setting off the Old Bridge as the green space on the north side of the river and should not be developed for housing.

Ilkley has now reached a saturation point with new houses.
Parking issue, roads are permanently lined with cars on both sides.
Schools are oversubscribed.
Many shops are empty as the rates are too high.
Outdoor spaces are overwhelmed with visitors in hot weather.
Developments need to use brownfield sites first nearer the centres of employment to reduce the need for travel.
Impacts for visitors to Ilkley.

Object

Representation ID: 28380

Received: 25/03/2021

Respondent: David Blackburn

Site access to Stockeld Rd, spelt wrongly in 2 locations. Heritage considerations key as noted but has the council the capacity to ensure taken into account. Previous experience of new development close to Ilkley manor House and the Roman fort SAM was not sympathetic to the heritage status.

Object

Representation ID: 28400

Received: 13/03/2021

Respondent: Karen Leafe

I wish to object to the proposed plan to build a substantial number of houses in Ilkley reference numbers IL1/H IL2/H IL3/H and IL4/H.

There isn't the infrastructure to maintain these homes.

The plan would make significant changes to our town.

Object

Representation ID: 28404

Received: 13/03/2021

Respondent: Shirin Borrett

There are so many brownfield sites available in the Bradford District - why is the council even contemplating building in our ever diminishing Greenbelt!

How can they allow development of our green spaces. It is essential for everyone's wellbeing, that we keep our countryside and don't allow the urban sprawl to take over! Ilkley is a beautiful town set in the countryside that contributes significantly to Bradford both financially and by providing countryside for people to enjoy.

If over 300 homes were built, the town does not have the infrastructure to support the people who would live there. Ilkley Grammar school is bursting at its seams and primary schools are full. The surgery is very busy and does not have the capability to service another 300 households!

The developments will be very damaging to the environment and, with climate change, will increase the problems with flooding in the area.

Object

Representation ID: 28410

Received: 13/03/2021

Respondent: Julian Carter

• Greenbelt
Building on green belt sites is directly opposed to the principles of using brownfield sites first, and of urban regeneration via the recycling and repurposing of derelict land or buildings

• Environment
Building on the Greenbelt will have a number of direct and indirect consequences on the environment. The area itself has mature trees (with TPO) and an abundance of plant and wild flower species. In addition, there will be an increase in noise pollution and use of cars, reduced biodiversity

• Flooding
There is already substantial flooding within Ilkley and further run off from hard surfaces will only exacerbate the problem

• School and activities capacity
Local amenities are already at breaking point and cannot cope with the additional proposed housing

• Additional Building
In the last few years approximately 30 houses per year have been built in Ilkley – the plan fails to take into account these numbers, or those currently planned.

Object

Representation ID: 28493

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Michelle Hoggard

A number of photographs included in the attachment showing the problems of flooding and parking.

•This area floods and the problem has become worse in recent years. The road between the site and river frequently floods and extends over the pavement and into front gardens. Drains overflow flooding the road. Building in Flood Zone 1 and 2 will increase run-off. Cellars of existing properties already require pumps.
•Existing permeable areas slow rainwater/help reduce flooding. Increasing hard surfaces will exacerbate existing flooding problems.
•Needs professional evaluation to understand the environmental/drainage consequences.
•The is in a conservation area with the Old Pack Horse Bridge 30m away. Planning has been refused for extensions/dormer windows in this area due to the conservation status.
•This site should be included in the Heritage Impact Assessment and rated red.
•New housing will destroy the character of this area, restrict/mar a site of historic importance.
•Current severe parking issues will worse. Bridge Lane is used as a cut-through from Skipton. Cars frequently speed at busy times. Additional housing will add to these problems as access will be close to a sharp bend.
•New housing in Addingham, Ilkley and Burley is not supported by adequate infrastructure. Ilkley Grammar is over-subscribed and cannot meet the needs of an increase in population on its current site.
•The area available for development does not include the church car park (as shown on the consultation plan). Would question the size of the remaining area and whether this meets the minimum requirement of 0.2ha. At the very least this reduced site could not service the planned 9 houses.

Object

Representation ID: 28494

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Amelia Hoggard-Leathers

A number of photographs included in the attachment showing the problems of flooding and parking.

•This area floods and the problem has become worse in recent years. The road between the site and river frequently floods and extends over the pavement and into front gardens. Drains overflow flooding the road. Building in Flood Zone 1 and 2 will increase run-off. Cellars of existing properties already require pumps.
•Existing permeable areas slow rainwater/help reduce flooding. Increasing hard surfaces will exacerbate existing flooding problems.
•Needs professional evaluation to understand the environmental/drainage consequences.
•The is in a conservation area with the Old Pack Horse Bridge 30m away. Planning has been refused for extensions/dormer windows in this area due to the conservation status.
•This site should be included in the Heritage Impact Assessment and rated red.
•New housing will destroy the character of this area, restrict/mar a site of historic importance.
•Current severe parking issues will worse. Bridge Lane is used as a cut-through from Skipton. Cars frequently speed at busy times. Additional housing will add to these problems as access will be close to a sharp bend.
•New housing in Addingham, Ilkley and Burley is not supported by adequate infrastructure. Ilkley Grammar is over-subscribed and cannot meet the needs of an increase in population on its current site.
•The area available for development does not include the church car park (as shown on the consultation plan). Would question the size of the remaining area and whether this meets the minimum requirement of 0.2ha. At the very least this reduced site could not service the planned 9 houses.

Object

Representation ID: 28495

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Alice Munnoch

A number of photographs included in the attachment showing the problems of flooding and parking.

•This area floods and the problem has become worse in recent years. The road between the site and river frequently floods and extends over the pavement and into front gardens. Drains overflow flooding the road. Building in Flood Zone 1 and 2 will increase run-off. Cellars of existing properties already require pumps.
•Existing permeable areas slow rainwater/help reduce flooding. Increasing hard surfaces will exacerbate existing flooding problems.
•Needs professional evaluation to understand the environmental/drainage consequences.
•The is in a conservation area with the Old Pack Horse Bridge 30m away. Planning has been refused for extensions/dormer windows in this area due to the conservation status.
•This site should be included in the Heritage Impact Assessment and rated red.
•New housing will destroy the character of this area, restrict/mar a site of historic importance.
•Current severe parking issues will worse. Bridge Lane is used as a cut-through from Skipton. Cars frequently speed at busy times. Additional housing will add to these problems as access will be close to a sharp bend.
•New housing in Addingham, Ilkley and Burley is not supported by adequate infrastructure. Ilkley Grammar is over-subscribed and cannot meet the needs of an increase in population on its current site.
•The area available for development does not include the church car park (as shown on the consultation plan). Would question the size of the remaining area and whether this meets the minimum requirement of 0.2ha. At the very least this reduced site could not service the planned 9 houses.

Comment

Representation ID: 28615

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Environment Agency

Flood Zones 2, 3 and the current/draft 3b/3a(i) within site boundary - Site contains FZ2 and 3 and close to the current 3b.

There is to be no development with the 3b/3a(i) extent unless considered water compatible or essential infrastructure. Where this is the case the development must demonstrate no increase in risk to others, no loss of Functional Floodplain and suitable mitigation measures for use and the lifetime of the development.

Development on site should follow a sequential layout so as to prevent unnecessary development within Flood Zones 3b, 3 and 2 wherever possible. If the site is considered Greenfield then surface water discharge rates post development should be restricted to the pre development Greenfield discharge rate.

If the site is considered Brownfield then there should be a 30% reduction in surface water discharges, or restricted to Greenfield rates, there should be no increase in brownfield surface water discharge rates post development. So as to support prevention of cumulative increases to flood risk and should be in line with SuDs design principles. Some SuDs principles such as storage ponds should not be solely relied upon within areas at risk of fluvial flooding as they may not be operational during a flood.

Development must be shown to be safe for the lifetime of the development. See the Adept Guidance of Access and Egress plans. Hazard ratings may need to be assessed as part of the proposal.

Mitigation such a proofing measures and raised Finished Floor Levels, must be set above the 1 in 100 plus Climate Change level for the site. Current Guidance is on .gov.

The applicant must ensure there is no increase in risk to others for the lifetime of the development (including climate change). Where on Greenfield sites compensatory storage must be actively sought.

Consideration must be made to making space for water and providing betterment in terms of flood risk management where ever possible. For development near ordinary watercourses we would recommend an 8 metre easement strip along the length of the riverbank, or a 45degree angle from the bed in the case of culverts, to be kept clear of permanent structures such as buildings. This is to maintain access to the riverbank for any improvements or maintenance. A Flood Defence Consent may be required for the LLFA for works in/affecting an ordinary watercourse.

For main rivers, we generally require an 8 metre easement strip along the length of the riverbank to be kept clear of permanent structures such as buildings, or a 45degree angle from the bed in the case of culverts. This is to maintain access to the riverbank for any improvements or maintenance. Environmental Flood Risk Activity Permits may be required for development near rivers.

It is likely these sites are going to show changes/increases in flood risk as a result of climate change.

The SFRA (to follow) is going to consider future flooding including future Functional Floodplain this may identify sites at more future risk than others which may affect its allocation or how development should be sequentially laid out on the site.

Comment

Representation ID: 29043

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Anne & H Graham Peacock

Number of people: 2

This small site is surrounded by housing and is in the conservation area. It is a sensitive area close to Ilkley Old Bridge and is sufficiently near the Roman Road leading to the believed position of the ford over the river to require archaeological excavation. In view of its location a design brief might be appropriate if development were to be designated.

Comment

Representation ID: 29125

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Miss Cherry Dexter

Number of people: 2

We do not object to the proposed allocation of these two sites for housing as they are small sites in amongst existing housing