Addingham Neighbourhood Plan 2016 
Summary of comments left at the meeting

Housing

Size of Developments
•	Housing developments in smaller areas, ensuring properties in keeping with original “village” housing
•	Smaller developments rather than one large development (but road access must be considered - access from using road (bypass?) not through village
•	Suggest that Housing developments in smaller areas rather than all in one big development. This will help new residents integrate better into the village community. We moved onto clays estate 13 years ago and had comments about “those up there” only using the bypass, not coming into the village etc. Many people from our part of the village do use the centre of the village, but a big development tends to segregate the new residents - not a nice feeling!
•	Large developments would not equate quick integration
•	No large developments, only small ones please
•	Smaller developments, a) no larger estates. b) do not join the 2 estates
•	More small developments - a)not large estates b) Keep green space
•	Smaller pockets of homes at reasonable prices. Any housing should include sufficient parking to enable fire engine access
•	Several smaller developments preferable to one or two larger ones
•	No large developments, only small ones to preserve character of village
•	No large estates. a) Small developments are more appropriate. b) Variety of housing needed
•	Houses should not be built solely on one site. Access/pavements/cars will cause no end of problems. Variety of sites of houses to appeal to all
•	No tract housing (tract = large estates?) this style of development would ruin the character of the entire village
•	Land owners trying to cash in by selling off large areas of land. Small areas to be developed which are not green belt
•	One larger development may provide an asset for the village, rather than cramming other spaces - if it is thought out properly and community outdoor facilities are included ( cycle track, park/nature reserves etc)
•	Small developments would be preferable to one huge estate
•	Housing should be distributed in the village and not built in one area to encourage integration
•	Small infill sites only - a)No large developments b) No access to main street
•	Would not support a large housing site development
•	I think that new housing developments should be small in scale and should not bring more traffic into the centre of main street, especially near dangerous bends
•	Prioritise small - scale building plots to assist local firms, not major mega companies
•	Fulfil housing requirement with small infill projects using local builders and local labour. This will also provide more variety

Location of Developments
•	Use green space areas not in conservation area, therefore protecting the conservation area and green belt
•	If  we have to have any housing at all, of  which I’m not convinced, is to go for the infill between bypass option, with access off bypass in order to maintain character and atmosphere of the village
•	Addingham is a desirable place to live. As a result of the green space and the fact that it is a village, too many houses could impact on the village appeal
•	Sites AD011/014/015 - flooding already experienced in this area. Increased run-off from more housing would need major drainage works
•	Keep green space
•	Sites AD007/008 -already prone to flooding
•	AD003/004- Not suitable for housing development - valuable green space makes this village desirable
•	Build at the lower end of village to save congestion in the centre
•	Who would want to live so near sewage works (re -low mill sites?)
•	AD011 - Could be sacrificed. AD017 - Under no circumstances AD003 + 004 - Too much for village to swallow
•	Build first on old Dickinson garage site at the bottom of village or first school site before lovely green fields
•	Wouldn’t it be a better place to build at the bottom end of the village near cricket field, where access would be easier
•	Allow green fields to overlook the centre of the village to help remain village character. Also there are established oak trees
•	Bradford local plan says “No release of green belt is required” and this should be a key principle in our Neighbourhood Plan
•	AD013 -Unsuitable for housing - first it is green belt and second, access would be dangerous as it would be less than 50m from a blind bend in one direction and a blind hill brow in the other
•	New areas to be considered for housing - Council staithe (old cornerstones) - Area next to bowling green, originally earmarked for another school. - Old motel site - Land west of Hall Croft Drive
•	Brown sites must be used before any green belt is used, meaning in and around Bradford
•	No integration of St Pauls/Big Meadow sites - would destroy nature of the village and community
•	Addingham needs its green spaces, it’s a semi rural village, and it’s why it’s a village not a suburb of Leeds. It must maintain its individuality

Type of Housing
•	Will those houses be built for first time buyers?
•	More bungalows, affordable housing and warden assisted accommodation
•	Need a mix of smaller and affordable houses
•	Consider - better sizes of houses -smaller, starter homes with pricing caps? - ecological issues - water capture, solar - radical designs
•	More affordable housing to encourage younger adults to move/remain in the village
•	Ensure new housing reflects local need and is in keeping with other housing stock
•	As can be seen from the people here, Addingham is an ageing village. There must be affordable houses for young people to help get village vibrant again
•	A housing mix is preferable to fewer, larger houses as this will lead to a population mix. Bigger houses probably attract commuters who do not tend to contribute to the life of the village
•	Please ensure truly affordable housing is included in the developments. Please ensure adequate parking is provided on developments
•	Please - Affordable and social housing, not all large 4/5 bedroom properties
•	Affordable housing needed to encourage young people to move and live in the village
•	We need more affordable housing, not all expensive
•	Affordable housing required. 
•	Smaller houses and bungalows needed - in particular for the top of Addingham
•	We do not need any more executive type housing. We do need housing for young people = more affordable 
•	Any new housing needs to be affordable, the current new builds are not
•	Will these houses be what’s needed - low priced for young families - or will they be expensive houses with 2 or 3 cars adding to traffic
•	More affordable homes please I.e. Really affordable (Housing Associations?)
•	There are already many family homes but apart from the older cottages, fewer smaller homes, - bungalows favoured by many are clustered on the outskirts, making them less attractive to the less mobile
•	Affordable housing ; first time buyers, independent living for elderly
•	New housing must be affordable for young families
•	What about retired people - no where to go, too expensive new houses
•	If any new housing, needs to be affordable not executive. If any new housing, more for elderly independent living
•	The new Mulgrave houses seem to have set a new price ceiling and of course the builders of any new housing will want maximum profit and this will encourage more executive homes

Design of Housing
•	This village was a leader in technology in its day. Consider new forms/styles of housing that meet the needs of the 21st century and beyond and reflect a forward thinking village
•	Need for new housing to be in the local style
•	No 3 storey except where in where in keeping with old buildings eg, 3 storey on/near Main Street
•	Houses must be in character of village - 2 storey, stone faced
•	Ecological issues - water capture, solar. Radical designs
•	Stone or stone faced buildings to match old village
•	All new houses should be fitted with solar panels. Rain water should be used for gardens and toilet flushing (grey water)
•	New houses need to look stylish as the old ones  

Housing Requirement
•	Bradford’s “200” plan is total rubbish. 50 in Addingham (of right style) would be ample. Redevelop Bradford!
•	Addingham will no longer be a village. Restrict the number of houses
•	BBC Look North confirmed that Bradford Met is building 500 houses that are not needed

Other Comments
•	Any housing should provide adequate car parking
•	Any housing should include sufficient parking to enable fire engine access
•	Better access for larger developments
•	Please ensure adequate parking is provided on developments
•	We’ve set out and agreed our plan of 200 homes, so why do David Wilson homes want to build 200 when we have 70 on the go already?
•	Green spaces (communal) within housing developments
•	No places allocated for children at Ilkley G.S for top half of Addingham
•	Increased housing requires increased utilities and road use - where will they go without major upheaval
•	Infrastructure already inadequate
•	School already full
•	Roads cannot cope with any more traffic, neither can the doctors or Hospitals in the area
•	The infrastructure cannot cope with the current population
•	House prices will suffer if too many houses are built

Summary of comments made on Housing
Size of Developments = 22
Location of Developments =19
Type of Housing = 24
Design of Housing = 8
Housing Requirement =3
Other Comments = 13
Total Number of Comments = 89

Business and Local Economy

Parking
•	Parking near Main Street an issue for shops
•	Parking issues
•	Need more parking on Main Street to encourage business
•	Shops in village need better parking -central shops because of lack of parking
•	Reasonable rents on Main Street with some access to parking to encourage trade
•	Parking?
•	Parking is huge problem for local shops
•	Business requires off street parking for residents and visitors (particularly walkers)
•	Local shops not used by village - no parking
•	Shops not viable as customers are limited to walking distance because of lack of parking
•	Boost local shops by improving off street parking 

Type of Shops
•	Shops need to provide goods villagers need on a regular basis
•	Butcher/ deli would be great
•	Good to encourage local businesses, not large corporations
•	Restaurant/bar would be good
•	Keep it local - Baker/Grocer/Butcher/Post Office/Newsagents
•	Independent shops suffer as in any other village. More shops will bring in more customers. Need the Fleece back
•	Shops that want people to stay and shop in the village

Improvements Required
•	Needs up -dating
•	Main street shops look a bit sad. Are planning regulations preventing their regeneration or re development?
•	Bradford Met must make public council tax collected in Addingham each year AND how much has been spent in Addingham - repairs/ improvements
•	Main Street must be regenerated

Employment/Job Types
•	There must be a focus on employment opportunities in Addingham, not only to generate jobs but to create a supportive environment
•	Need to build/provide new premises fit for the digital economy for start-up and technology companies. Providing jobs in Addingham means potential local job opportunities and employees buying services/goods locally
•	Addingham needs to create jobs - avoid becoming more commuter town
•	Starter business facilities required - but where?
•	Very little employment in village and little space to develop any unless there is the will and it’s economically viable so commuting from the village will continue to be the norm
•	Small businesses of suitable aesthetic size and content

Support of Local Businesses
•	More of our council taxes should be spent in our community to encourage more local business
•	Shops in the village are disappearing and this will eventually make the village a commuter town without a heart. Support for local business and even new shops
•	Need to support local businesses - I hope they are being consulted

Other Comments/Ideas
•	Perhaps produce a pack to give to Estate Agents showing how lovely the village is
•	We need more access to supplies -how would Co-op cope with increased demand
•	Not enough going on to sustain more folk
•	How many residents use the facilities of the village?
•	Local shops not used by many residents
•	It has only taken 30 years for our village to be without vital shops - butchers, bakers etc. No one seems interested anymore

Summary of comments on Business and Local Economy
Parking = 11
Type of Shops = 7
Improvements Required = 4
Employment/Job Types = 6
Support of Local Businesses = 3
Other Comments/Ideas = 6
Total Number of Comments = 37

Traffic and Transport
Parking
•	More parking needed
•	Parking a problem
•	More off street parking - for shopping. If local population is going to increase need for faster route through Ilkley
•	Any plan must incorporate appropriate traffic and parking issues. It a problem now without additional housing - local businesses suffering as a result
•	On road parking on Main Street/ Bolton Road is a nightmare. Increase in traffic will only make route through village even worse
•	More car parking needed. Businesses and shops need customers to be able to park
•	Parking non existent  - roads too busy, can not expand width of Main Street
•	The village desperately needs more off street parking to reduce Main Street congestion
•	More parking is needed in Addingham for cars and business vans and lorries
•	Not enough parking space at present in village. Cars do not adhere to the 20mph speed limit
•	Designated parking areas needed. Less parking up first 100 yards on St Pauls Rise
•	Parking around Addingham Primary school is already an issue, especially off road parking and around Back Beck Lane exit on to main road (by entrance to Garth) Already poses a risk to kids walking to school
•	No parking to speak of
•	Parking in the village needs addressing
•	Traffic mayhem! I.e. parking off street- restrict on Bolton Road to the Garth
•	Not enough parking in village, drains can not cope with extra traffic in heavy rain
•	Car parking? Where are all the cars going to park?
•	No parking facilities for residents. So where do they go to free up Main Street-Bolton Road
•	What is the car park behind the Swan? Is it public? If so better signage is needed
•	St Pauls Rise and Memorial Hall car park are becoming a “Park + Ride” for Ilkley and further
•	Parking facilities - not enough now
•	Roads - already very busy for village and no parking in village/Main Street
•	Opportunity to create one way system around Bolton Road/ old First School access. Parking areas required
•	Just too much traffic for village, more parking for local people

Traffic Congestion
•	This village is a nightmare to drive through! We use the bypass to visit the Medical Centre and Bolton Abbey. Too much speed, selfish parking
•	Concerns over the volume and speed of traffic through the village - particularly Main Street
•	Streets are narrow enough causing major problems. Can not see where to increase infrastructure or change it
•	Every effort should be made to ensure there is no further increase in traffic on Main Street, even now there is congestion with several “pinch points”. Impossible to widen Main Street
•	Traffic is already bad enough, can you imagine the chaos that extra traffic, lorries would cause
•	Traffic control requires improving
•	No more housing development that gives extra traffic onto Main Street - which cannot cope now
•	The village already has a problem with traffic and parking. This needs careful consideration going forwards
•	Main Street already a give-way to oncoming vehicles system. More cars will bring traffic to a standstill unless all street parking is removed
•	Less through traffic on Main Street
•	Traffic speed calming
•	The Main Street cannot  cope with more transport
•	2 cars plus for every new home, village could not withstand it
•	St Pauls Rise is already congested and no development that adds traffic should be included in the plan
•	More housing would inevitably cause traffic congestion in the village, both in the construction phase and once completed
•	Traffic through the village could return to pre-bypass levels as new homes increase cars and associated traffic delivery vehicles etc
•	Pollution
•	Traffic chaos
•	Road rage
•	Difficult to cross roads
•	Proposed entrance/ exits for David Wilson home development is a non starter
•	Traffic travels too fast along Main Street and the junction to Silsden Road. Its very dangerous
•	Avoid big estates which create lots of traffic in one outlet, eg outlet from old Station Way. Prefer smaller pockets and infill of Brown Land
•	Roads can’t cope with the current traffic anyway
•	Single large development leading from single point on Main road would create issues
•	Access to new developments needs careful consideration. Two hotspots would be Main Street/Old Station Way and Silsden Road/Big Meadow Drive
•	Impact of large scale housing on roads etc and environment needs to be considered. Will they all be 2 or 3 car households?
•	Extra traffic will add to already congested Main Street
•	Speeding/dangerous traffic on Silsden Road must be controlled
•	No more access to Main Street (built 1730!)
•	Exit from proposed development near Sailor, very narrow footpath and existing parking make for dangerous corner, re buses and “heavy” traffic
•	A large development will create problems in the Main Street. There is congestion at present and substantial development will exacerbate this problem .Quite apart from  the above, this will create additional pollution, buses already encounter difficulties in negotiating the Main Street
•	AD/011/AD014/AD015 access to these sites is already problematic and could not cope with more traffic. Main Street also already difficult
•	Access from the proposed site AD003/004 is a) on a dangerous corner , b) will encourage traffic to come down through the village out to the by-pass and Bolton Road, c) will also push traffic onto St Pauls Rise. This site should not be considered viable
•	Roads - Old Station Way already lots of parked cars leading to poor sight lines. Any access to new housing via Old Station Way and St Pauls Rise would be problematic
•	Don’t want a road between Coppy Road and St Pauls Rise, creating a rat run and problems for residents of St Pauls
•	When snowy, more cars abandoned at the bottom of St Pauls
•	All avenues off St Pauls Rise, all goods vehicles have to reverse onto the above. I have asked B.M.D.C to put no parking signs on the limited turning places but NO action to date
•	Area of Main Street between Old Station Way and Bolton Road already under severe strain. Traffic brought to a halt for several minutes when vehicles turning right from Bolton Road become gridlocked with Main Street traffic. Bolton Road not suitable for two directions of traffic and cars often double park and exacerbate the problem. Pity the bus drivers
•	We live on St Pauls Rise and often can’t turn left to exit our drive because of parked vehicles opposite; phase 2 development would bring severe problems along Old Station Way and St Pauls Rise. NB problems of skidding on icy gradients in winter with parked cars allowed as at present
•	St Pauls must not be connected through to Big Meadow  Drive, would create dangerous traffic and change the character of the existing area
•	Concerns about the road between St Pauls and Coppy Road becoming a rat run with more cars and speed
•	Traffic down St Pauls Rise has to turn right to Ilkley with blind spot on left- bad enough now!
•	Traffic needs to be calmed by the Co-Op - I live with a clear view of this and witness dangerous situations daily. Speed limit and/at a pinch points further back needed
•	Sugar Hill  - The fire brigade cannot get up here - this is why OAP housing was cancelled in the 70’s
•	Stop large Lorries, coaches etc using Bolton Road especially at 5am!
•	Main Street /Bolton Road already crazily busy! Speeding already exists
•	Pavements are in poor repair in many areas with trip hazards, far less money spent here than on road repairs in Ilkley!
•	School/Doctors/Traffic through village all require more thought
•	Noise from extra traffic - noise and mess from construction traffic/work
•	Extra traffic and noise to spoil the environment

Parking Provision on New Housing
•	Housing developments should have proper provision for off street parking, bearing in mind many households have 2-3 cars
•	Houses, including flats to have dedicated parking space

Bus Services
•	The strategic plan argues that because the village is “well served” within public transport ( 3 bus routes per hour) the village can cope with the additional houses, virtually everyone who will live in those houses will use a car to move in/out of the village. The bus is not a “substantial” argument
•	Bus service ok, but many people have to (or prefer) to use cars. Through traffic is very slow on many occasions. Can Bolton Road become one way with not access from Bolton Abbey end?
•	Public transport will meet demand, currently very expensive
•	Excellent transport to Leeds/Ilkley etc Major benefit to Addingham - retain
•	Commuting to Leeds/Bradford - buses too slow and infrequent
•	More bus links to Skipton and other places

Rail Links
•	Train - Ilkley station inadequate parking. More people in Addingham will mean more pressure on above. Extend rail line to Addingham?
•	We need a train station in Addingham - re-instate railway!
•	Re-instate rail link to Embsay railway and link to Skipton
•	When suggestions for opening up railway, taking more land off from people as well as building - Are you just trying to put some people out of business altogether

Car Share/Bike Friendly
•	Car sharing schemes? Anything to reduce impact of all these extra cars
•	Bike friendly zones?

Knock on Effects - Ilkley
•	Parking problems
•	Congestion leading to traffic jams into Ilkley
•	Roads congested, No parking by station for commuters
•	A65 already very congested, it will only get worse. Ilkley is a bottleneck for traffic, Addingham growth will only add to this
•	Traffic in the village will be difficult, but also what about the “knock on effects” to Ilkley which has heavy congestion

Suggested Solutions
•	One way or access only to Bolton Bridge road
•	It may be a good idea to make the road from the Crown pub, one way only, would help with traffic flow
•	Bolton Road should be restricted to local traffic or one way
•	Access to development to the south of the village should be from the by-pass- (roundabout paid for by developers) with pedestrian access only to the village. NB roundabout would also slow traffic on by-pass - a bonus!
•	A “village only” sign would be good. The houses behind Main Street (new estate) could be accessed from by-pass and roundabout
•	If proposed Wilson homes are allowed, why not put 3 way roundabout into by-pass to provide access thereby eliminating traffic on Main Street

Summary of Comments on Traffic and Transport
Parking = 24
Traffic Congestion = 51
Parking Provision on new housing = 2
Bus Services = 6
Rail links = 4
Car share/Bike friendly = 2
Knock on Effects = 5
Suggested Solutions = 6
Total number of comments = 100

Community Facilities

Schools
•	If Ashlands Primary and All Saints Primary are expanded (see gazette Nov 3) and (presumably) Addingham also, a further secondary school will be essential. Simply to expand Ikley GS will result in an unwieldy size situation. This issue in turn affects house prices
•	Secondary school allocation i.e. in Ilkley not Keighley is already a big issue amongst young families - housing to be built in Ilkley will make less places there for Addingham 11+
•	Schools are full
•	Schools with development across Wharfedale, the need for 11-18 year olds school in the village becomes urgent
•	Primary school full and Ilkley Grammar some places not in catchment now
•	Where’s the new school going to be built?
•	School places a concern - would need provision and planning
•	Schooling is stretched from Nursery through to College
•	School accommodation all age groups? - Where?
•	More secondary school places
•	School places are full now for both Primary and Secondary. Where are extra children going to go?
•	School places - especially secondary school places - needs to be increased. Bradford has room in schools at a distance - i.e. Keighley - so will wait to fill there rather than providing more places in Wharfedale. This is not acceptable to parents, With more residents in the village schooling places need priority attention
•	Schools are already crowded
•	Addingham children unsure about Grammar school places every year now
•	Which secondary school will additional pupils attend? Ilkley GS is already full to bursting
•	Schools full
•	Addingham Primary school has 212 full time pupils and on an intake of 30 per year, where will all the additional kids go?
•	Will the school be able to accommodate an increase in pupil numbers? Where will new buildings be put?
•	Are there sufficient school places?
•	Schools - Secondary IGS  is already overcrowded and is in need of expansion - ideally a new build to improve learning environment for students
•	Please ensure adequate Primary school places
•	Ilkley Grammar school ability to accept all the new children from Addingham
•	Serious concerns about schools, both Primary and Secondary, both quantity and quality
•	Ensure adequate Primary school places
•	Schooling - not enough school places to accommodate 200 home increase
•	School already at breaking point
•	The question of school provision needs to be addressed as a priority, not just for immediate term but long term, think of demographics!
•	School is great but full. Parking areas, not on the main road - paying parking next to the Memorial
•	Schools - doctors - roads
•	Not enough Secondary school places at Ilkley now. Some go to Keighley or South Craven. Where are the next group going?
•	Secondary school places
•	Please keep our village a village. More houses, more people and their children which means a bigger or new school
•	Primary school full - secondary schools - Ilkley Grammar, some areas of Addingham not in catchment now, so where do kids go?
•	Schools - Primary and Secondary not sufficient now! Main street not wide enough to cope with extra traffic
Medical Facilities
•	Healthcare provision
•	Strain on medical centre of extra housing - demographics to be considered again
•	Healthcare - enough Doctors, Sheltered Housing, Dentists?
•	Medical is already stretched and effort is needed to resolve or improve this
•	Does the Medical Centre and local Hospital have capacity for 500+ new patients? If not, what provision is being made?

Sports Facilities /Community/ Play Areas

•	Community facilities for all community -not just one section of society
•	Improve public facilities at sports field so visitors can be accommodated
•	Safe play areas for children, park and playground
•	More sports facilities please
•	More play areas for children. Better equipment
•	Sports facilities offering job opportunities
•	Compared to many large villages, Addingham is lacking in sports facilities and this will be worse with 200 more houses
•	More variety of sporting facilities required for locals and to encourage jobs/people from outside to visit
•	Lack of sports facilities
•	Cycle track
•	Very few facilities at the moment. Only sports field and 2 small children’s playgrounds
•	Facilities need to be built into plans considering people of all ages
•	A range of community facilities for young people
•	Would some sort of music festival be possible? Or other sort of festival?

Shops
•	How about an Art Gallery?
•	Need reviewing and updating to meet needs and interests of current population
•	To encourage shoppers to use village shops there needs to be easier parking - some “free” spaces seem to be in use for 24 hrs - are some of these commuters taking the bus to Ilkley station?

Nature Reserve
•	Nature reserve with bird observation facilities - pond?- meadow?
•	Wildlife community activity facility perhaps along side the school
•	More green areas needed - not less!

Other Comments
•	Builders not interested in local facilities
•	A new housing development could be a fantastic opportunity to create new facilities for the village to enjoy - eg, cycle track for families, wooded/ park areas - think Highroyds development!
•	Plenty of these exist - but a crowded village will destroy atmosphere and discourage tourists

Summary of comments on Community Facilities
Schools = 34
Medical Facilities = 5
Sports Facilities/Community/Play Areas = 14
Shops = 3
Nature Reserve = 3
Other Comments = 3
Total number of comments for Community Facilities = 62

ENVIRONMENT & HERITAGE

Protect Green Belt - Use Brownfield Sites
•	Green entrance to village be preserved beyond cricket pitch
•	Any development should avoid Green Belt
•	No building on green space - those areas are very precious elements in the village open aspect
•	What is Green Belt if you can build all over it?
•	The history in the village needs protection whilst regenerating Main Street. Green Belt should stay Green Belt and the various “Brown” sites should be regenerated
•	We must preserve the Green Belt between Coppy Road and St Pauls, otherwise it ruins the character of the village
•	Green Belt sites should not be built on - the village needs communal green spaces
•	Do NOT use Green Belt. The fields are an amenity enjoyed by humans and wildlife alike
•	If the Green Belt is eroded now, what is to stop a further degradation of our natural heritage
•	Why build on Green Belt when there are Brown belt spaces that could be used!
•	Village open space as well as Green Belt should be protected to maintain character of village
•	Must have green spaces for wildlife and oxygen levels from lack of trees
•	More wild flowers to encourage and preserve our wildlife - bees, birds…in public places 
•	The green spaces are used by migrating birds as stopovers and as foraging areas for local wild birds
•	Hands off Green Belt
•	58% loss of wildlife  - breaking EU rules on pollution - why do we allow the rape of our green fields while we still have Brown sites in Bradford and around
•	Keep the village green space
•	Green belt and green spaces need protecting. Also consider carbon footprint of major building projects, how “green” will the houses be?
•	Bradford have started that “no green belt land needs to be released in Addingham to meet the housing need”. Unless the village votes overwhelmingly to put housing on Green Belt land, any green belt land, (including that which David Wilson homes want) should be jealously guarded!
•	A “village” with no easy access to green spaces which encourage wildlife, play areas for children is called a “town”
•	Brown sites first. Green belts must be conserved to protect wildlife etc and oak trees
•	Make sure empty houses within the city are made habitable before building elsewhere
•	Improving derelict properties will be more beneficial to lower income families and first time buyers
•	Use the Brown field sites like old junior school for parkland and possibly parking
•	Use fill in brown sites eg, first school, “motel” site etc to keep Green Belt and the character of village
•	Maintain Green Belt, infill needs to be sympathetic to surroundings 
•	Green Belt must be protected
•	The essence of Addingham is its mixture of the built environment and green space around it. Areas such as manor Garth and the paddocks in sugar hill are key to this old and attractive pattern of development
•	Green Belt is precious! There must be a lot of Brown sites in the vicinity
•	The special character of the village is because of the “green spaces” a reminder of our rural past and present day oasis visible from a busy Main Street
•	Existing Green Belt should be protected from threats to development
•	Addingham green space must be protected to keep village atmosphere
•	The use of all the brown sites for housing could restrict any future industrial resurgence in the village
•	Garth access for families to pass through with children. Damage to this area will endanger children due to being re-routed near to roads
•	There is sufficient non Green Belt land to meet the 200 house allocation, Therefore no Green Belt land needs to be released
•	There is enough room for any housing within the village- no need to go into green space or green belt
•	Please consider the impact on well being of removing green open spaces shared by our community
•	Retain Green fields from Main Street to keep open views to moorside. Encourage village based activities
•	Any Green Belt building over looking central Addingham will destroy our village, it will become swallowed up!!

Wildlife Protection
•	We need to keep the connection between the village and the surrounding countryside wildlife corridors
•	At a time when Hedgehogs and Barn Owls are on Britain’s endangered list - destroying the green belt is not a sustainable nor smart idea
•	Curlews are regularly observed feeding in in the green belt area AD004
•	We get Sparrow hawks and Nuthatches in our garden coming from green belt fields (probably AD/004) destroying this green belt space will destroy the local amenity and we will lose these birds locally
•	Improve the river Wharfe and local becks to encourage wildlife
•	Green Belt land sustains threatened wildlife and should be vigorously protected
•	Please consider the impact on wildlife of “developing” wooded areas and green areas
•	Using Green Belt damages wildlife which is already under pressure 
•	Think it would be awful if the Garth was built on - a key part of village open space and habitat for many animals
•	Many important trees are located in areas that are “suitable” for building
•	We should be enhancing hedgerows and planting native trees and increasing local wildflowers in green spaces right into the heart of the village

Small Developments Only
•	Character of village will be irrevocably changed with large developments
•	Development scattered, otherwise one hillside will be one large housing estate
•	Addingham is a small village and needs fields and open spaces and wildlife - not a massive housing estate
•	The likes of David Wilson homes will wish to develop the full quota of 150 units at once. This will pressure Brad Met and have no concerns for either heritage or environment. Addingham will become a commuter village

Listed Buildings & Heritage Centre
 
•	Conservation first!!!
•	Addingham is renowned as a “quaint” village - why can’t we keep it like that?
•	Lots of history - lots of listed buildings, lots of blue plaques. What we need is an Addingham Heritage Trail to encourage visitors to spend money locally in pubs/shops etc
•	We need an Addingham Heritage Trail
•	Include small Heritage centre
•	Addingham is gateway to Wharfedale, the heritage building and green spaces make it so. To create jobs, tourist traffic could be encouraged, but only if environment is ok

Flooding Issues
•	Flooding will be increased with less land to drain water
•	Reduce grazing on upland peat areas - so prevent flooding in village becks - soakaways!!
•	Keep as much open space as possible, trees etc, what about flooding!!

Air & Light Pollution
•	No carbon issues - no coal or wood fires - renewable heating systems
•	Environment - village businesses to observe a “no lights” rule from 23.00 to 07.00 in conservation area

Other Comments
•	We already have at least three “resident builders”…No more!

Summary of comments on Environment & Heritage
Protect Green Belt - use brown filed sites = 39
Wildlife Protection =11
Small developments only = 4
Listed Buildings & Heritage centre = 6
Flooding Issues = 3
Air & Light Pollution = 2
Other Comments = 1
Total number of comments on Environment & Heritage = 66

Infrastructure
Flooding
•	The dreadful flooding of Dec 2015, will it occur again?
•	I have not heard convincing proposals within
- Flooding risk
- Provision of school places
- Drainage and road improvements
- Affordable housing
•	Major worries about drainage from any new developments
•	Flooding!
•	Flooding is an issue
•	The sewers won’t stand it. Already had problems on St Pauls Rise
•	Flooding a concern to be taken into consideration. Any new building should feed into new or adequate sewage systems
•	Is sewage systems capable of taking more?
•	Water running down from the moors - no field for water to disperse means flooding
•	Run off surface water already a problem
•	Flooding!! All new properties must have consideration as to what happens to run off water. Addingham didn’t flood 30 years ago
•	Surface water drains into streams so land is not allowed to act as a sponge - increase flood risk in village
•	Water run off. Our property floods on Main Street, more run off  will increase the risk
•	Drainage/drains, electric, gas, water, all need updating and improving. Adding ham a village  - not housing estate on Ilkley suburb!
•	Flooding issues
•	Better drainage for Main Street - already over capacity
•	The mains drainage in the village needs to be looked at /improved - Yorkshire water did an investigation but said that an upgrade would require major funding
•	Garth has flooded in recent years, can it be used for housing
•	New sewage mains plus bigger sewage works
•	Building on flood plains is unrealistic
•	Adequate drainage/sewers etc. Think flooding issues!
•	Several sewer problems on St Christopher’s Drive
•	Will more houses on fields make this worse
•	Sewage system not adequate for the amount of houses on St Pauls at present   

Traffic
•	Traffic calming measures
•	Building suppliers will cause a large increase in lorries, will cause chaos along Main Street
•	Traffic through the village - Limitations- A65 in all directions
•	Main Street cleared of all parked cars - car parks required. No more access to Main Street for new builds
•	Roads already congested
•	Roads not capable of increased traffic
•	Main Street overly congested and dangerous in places - pavements far too narrow and dreadful maintenance - very dangerous
•	Roads are already congested
•	The main road is full of cars (mostly driving at speed) can’t take lots more
•	Worries about traffic movement? Why not plan designated car parks? - need ways to avoid using Main Street
•	Safety with increased traffic flow up and down St Pauls Rise
•	Roads into the area are unable to cope with existing traffic, let alone housing to accommodate cars for a further 150 houses. 
•	Main Street- buses/cars/motorbikes, far too busy already
•	Main Street not capable of coping with all the additional cars etc
•	Bolton Road -Nightmare! Traffic not controlled
•	Encouraging school children to walk to school - discourage people to drive to school

Housing
•	Village population expanded by circa 6% from 2001 to 2011. This proposed development is huge by comparison
•	“Look North BBC” - it was stated that each of the Yorkshire authorities had over estimated by 500+ their housing needs
•	Infrastructure must be in place before all housing is approved. This will not happen after the properties are occupied
•	Infrastructure must be considered in tandem with housing requirements
•	200 houses = 400 more cars
•	Schooling and roads should be considered long before housing sites are preferenced

Parking
•	Lack of parking now- more parking areas needed for centre of village
•	Too many parked cars on St Pauls at present
•	More “no parking“, so where do people with no garages park?

Safety and Access
•	Needs to be access to A65 heading towards Ilkley and a new roundabout at the Ilkley end of Addingham, to allow traffic flow to Bradford/Keighley
•	Snow and ice on St Pauls difficult to drive down
•	Separate access roads to avoid use of St Pauls Rise as a rat run
•	If any construction starts, we need safety for pedestrians and cars -meaning No Parking, road sweeping, traffic control
•	Access to proposed site behind Bolton Road “The Garth”
•	Access to some of the green field sites proposed a non starter
•	Access proposed by David Wilson homes to green field site dangerous!

Other Comments
•	Reduce Council Tax to reflect the loss in value of existing homes
•	Locality of areas so close to school. Traffic, noise pollution affecting children
•	Schooling- parking- one way system needed on Bolton Road - shops
•	Not enough Doctors
•	High water pressure in St Pauls Rise -low water pressure in School Lane
•	Infrastructure(roads) only just copes 
•	Schooling only just copes. Full further infrastructure required

Summary of Comments on Infrastructure
Flooding = 24
Traffic = 16
Housing = 6
Parking = 3
Safety and Access = 7
Other Comments = 7
Total number of comments = 63

Feedback left from Comment Forms (Nov 2016)/ other comments received.

On the feedback forms handed out at the meeting, we asked for residents ideas, and 3 issues which they thought were most important. These issues will help identify the key priorities for further work on the plan. These issues covered several topics which were important to the residents of Addingham. The highest number of concerns were on Housing, mostly in favour of more affordable houses and only in small developments. Traffic, green spaces and community facilities were among the other most concerned about too.

Housing
•	No indecent haste to build - the plan is till 2030
•	Smaller developments ie, 5-15 houses spread throughout the village. This will help on the aesthetics and balance of the village.
•	Get the housing right. Size, prices and the possibilities for resident using local schools
•	Type of housing - pricing bracket of homes will affect how local village is effected - low cost homes will not bring members of the community that will spend money in local businesses. Too expensive. High cost homes will bring people with disposable incomes to spend in the local area
•	Too many houses/cars for the amenities, eg parking/ facilities/ doctors the village has
•	If we need 200/150 houses, these should be built on smaller sites NOT the David Wilson homes option
•	Affordable housing
•	Affordable housing for less affluent people/families
•	Keeping the village vibrant means providing affordable housing for young people to buy. I think that small scale developments with easy access to the bypass (ie not down the main street) should be the way forward. Addingham already has some very large housing estates but there is room for small development at the extremities of the village. The motel site and AD 012, AD 002, AD 001
•	There should be avoidance of big developments creating large housing estates. It would be far preferable to have a large number of smaller developments with a mixture of different housing types and sizes, including affordable housing
•	Small housing schemes only - No large estates
•	Housing - small scale and in keeping with village environment
•	Mixed housing to include some executives and some starter houses
•	Housing - need affordable housing to encourage more of the younger generation into the village
•	Housing needs in the village should be met by small developments, not one large development, and all developers should be forced to incorporate low cost housing and appropriate infrastructure (green spaces, flood prevention etc) into their plans. Also we do not need yet more executive 4 bedroom houses (which developers only want to build because it gives them more profits) but we need a mix of housing to accommodate all needs from young adults just getting on the housing ladder to retired people wanting to downsize, and a certain proportion of this housing should be made available for rent, not just purchase
•	Better several small developments than one large
•	Limit of 200 houses to be built. Ensure no building on - large, green belt, village green space, conservation area. Use small sites which will minimise environmental and infrastructure issues
•	Housing - can the village support extra population?
•	Housing development - more houses affect all other topics
•	Do not connect St Pauls rise to Big Meadow drive
•	Greater usage of building sites other than those outlined in the Wilson proposals
•	Use brown field sites for development, results in 2 advantages - reduces use of green belt - tidies up unsightly areas
•	Maximum build should be no more than 200. Land available AD/005 AD/007 AD/008 AD/009 should be seriously considered because of access to A65
•	Affordable housing for youngsters of Addingham 
•	Could we have affordable and social housing to accommodate local youngsters who want to stay in the village!!
•	Using brown field sites for housing
•	Affordable housing rather than luxury houses to encourage young blood into village
•	Small housing scale developments -brown field first
•	The Coppy road estate and St Pauls rise estates are quite large estates, in No way should they be joined together, must be smaller. Housing clusters to try and keep the shape of the village, also the site of the previous Junior school and land next to the telephone building?
•	Cannot land used by the council for dumping road repair material and salt be used for building?
•	Priority on brown site development first within West and North Yorkshire, in fact nationally
•	Housing - keep to minimum and disperse into small developments
•	Housing - keep the number of houses to a minimum and taking into account the impact on local infrastructure
•	Limiting housing developments
•	The bulk of the reviewing houses we have to take should be built between the Big Meadow drive and St Pauls rise estates. This will minimise the impact to the feel of the centre of the village. Access should be via Big Meadow drive and St Pauls rise, not straight off Main street where there is already pinch points
•	Not creating giant estates
•	Development should be in smaller areas so that the village can evolve gradually rather than in a large burst. This would also help integration of the expanding population
•	Using small pockets of land for housing developments
•	Location of housing is key
•	Small developments rather than large sites, to retain the community feel of the village. Big Meadow drive -St Pails rise should not be integrated into a large estate
•	To provide affordable housing with adequate parking
•	Housing should be appropriate in terms of size, site, location, type of housing
•	New houses to include affordable/social houses, not just executive
•	Type of property to be built (because it’s inevitable some will be) to take into account the village demographics and in particular the needs of the young families. Family, not executive homes
•	New housing must be for the lower income families, so those born in the village who wish to live here can do so as well as those moving in. Executive multi-car homes are not necessary
•	Control development to no more than 200 houses or less if possible
•	Developments within existing village boundary only
•	200 houses by 2030 means an average of less than 20 houses a year. These should be built by local builders in small developments, not by the corporate box builders. This will also help to manage the impact on the infrastructure locally
•	There is a fundamental need for housing that is affordable for young families, otherwise the village will simply become a geriatric community, or perhaps worse- a commuter ghost town
•	Housing - disruption and noise for current residents
Number of comments received on Housing on feedback forms = 52

Traffic/ roads
•	The issue of the amount of traffic travelling through the village needs to be addressed. We have 2 suggestions on this front. Firstly Bolton Road needs to be made one way (preferably towards Bolton Abbey) and then all traffic returning from Bolton Abbey should be directed around the bypass. Secondly if housing development is approved in either areas AD/003 and/or AD/004 the access should be provided from the bypass by installing a roundabout. This would have 2 benefits. Firstly it would reduce through traffic in the centre of the village and secondly it would slow traffic down on the bypass, because getting out at the bottom of the village onto the Ilkley road is becoming increasingly difficult due to the amount and speed of the traffic coming down the bypass - there have already been accidents and there will continue to be more unless something is done
•	Traffic and parking
•	Roads - driving through the village at any time of day requires pulling over to let cars pass. The developments must go ahead so improving the road systems are critical - most other areas of the plan require suitable access
•	Road access is also a concern with certain key access roads being vulnerable to flooding and already being congested 
•	Traffic levels would increase cars by approx 400!!
•	Traffic control 
•	Limitation of traffic in Main street and calming, especially near the Co-Op- dangerous 
•	More traffic through the village will cause access and parking issues. Roads are too busy now. Emergency access is difficult; some areas for proposed housing only have single road access. Development in those areas would need potentially excessive road development as well
•	Traffic levels - increased 
•	Too much traffic
•	More parking and better traffic management
•	Traffic management is important because there are already problems - bottlenecks (Bolton Road) speeding, blind bends and exits
•	Traffic - no development should be allowed which substantially increases traffic using Main Street. Even now for much of the day, Main Street is congested and operating at full capacity, often with traffic stationary, particularly in certain places. Any new junctions onto Main Street would obviously increase traffic and also affect the character of the heart of the village and its construction area. Widening the carriageway would also have an adverse effect on the character of the street, as well as reducing the width of the pavement (already inadequate in places) One possible solution for any development south of the village would be to create access from the bypass, with a new roundabout paid for by the developers. Direct access to Main street would be for pedestrian/ cyclists only
•	Less traffic through the village
•	Traffic  - obvious “trouble spots” around the village - need to be improved/ managed
•	Traffic and parking must be a priority, I consider land surrounding the cricket field would cause minimum disruption
•	Vehicle access to any new housing must be safely controlled
•	Traffic management
•	Traffic flow/ parking -limit parking on Main street and adjoining streets to improve traffic flow/ safety
•	Traffic and parking
•	Traffic and parking and access to Main street is an important consideration
•	Already congested roads
•	Bolton road one way system
•	All avenues off St Pauls Rise - goods vehicles have to reverse out onto the above. I reported this to BMDC last April but no action has been taken
•	Congestion through the village Main street
•	Increasingly high level of traffic through inadequate road provision (especially Main street) 
•	Main concern is traffic on Main Street. Already difficult to negotiate through village with parked cars, buses and narrow points in the road. Would make sense to build a new roundabout on bypass to take traffic from new developments whilst also slowing traffic down along the bypass
•	Discourage through traffic from coming through Main street, by encouraging more use of bypass - modify road layout on Bolton Abbey road - Bark Lane junction and at Ilkley old road
•	Reduce traffic congestion
•	If more housing is needed to be built, then traffic congestion needs to be a priority. I feel as Main street in particular cannot cope as it is now
•	Traffic through the village - too much at present
•	Traffic management and pedestrian safety
•	Traffic - bypass was built to remove traffic from Addingham, 200 houses will only put us back 30+ years. Cars can’t be removed from the parking on Main street as residents need them and removal will drastically increase speed of traffic. The actual building of the houses - with lorries, diggers etc will create congestion
•	Transport, road and parking - many modern houses eg, 3 storey town houses don’t allow for multi car owning occupants with vehicles bigger than small cars
•	Traffic - serious consideration needs to be made to keep traffic through the village manageable
•	Traffic - controlling the volume and speed of traffic through the village (particularly Main street)
•	Feel strongly about not joining Coppy Road and St Pauls Rise and creating a dangerous level of traffic down St Pauls
•	Traffic safety - David Wilson homes want an access at the corner above the Sailor - visibility / roundabout etc would need consideration. Other areas could present similar issues
•	Traffic and parking plan
•	Traffic in the village 
•	How to cope with increasing traffic through and around the village
•	Traffic and parking issues
•	Traffic in the village should not increase. We battled for the bypass for many years; we don’t want the Main street back with high volumes of vehicles. Current housing estates and areas should not have to endure high volumes of cars, children need to be able to live and play in safety, away from pollution and noise. The elderly also need to feel safe walking around their own streets
•	Traffic control - particularly through traffic
•	The plans need to be reconsidered as the village is going to be a death trap with all the traffic, it won’t be able to cope.
•	Traffic - how will the village cope with increased traffic?
•	Road access out of the Acres into Bolton Road needs improving. Parking from parents re school is already a big problem, more houses on the Acres will considerably increase the problem 
•	Better public transport
•	Also possible pedestrian area between Bolton Abbey Road and Co-Op. Pedestrians and cars, but pedestrians have priority
Number of comments received on Traffic on the feedback forms = 51

Parking
•	Increased parking capacity required
•	Main street cleared of parked cars. New car parks needed 
•	Sufficient parking
•	Parking
•	Perking - to maintain sustainability of village (jobs) outsiders need to be able to park in the village
•	 More off street parking
•	Parking 
•	Parking issues
•	Improve parking for local businesses
•	Parking - struggle at times to park near house
•	Off road parking
•	Parking congestion
•	Parking in the village centre
•	Transport and local businesses require additional off street parking. At the moment frequent visitors (walkers) often park on the Main street and St Pauls Rise
Number of comments received on parking on feedback forms = 14

Environment & Green Space
•	Pavements far too narrow and in poor repair - dangerous. New improvement urgently needed
•	Fields/ open spaces between housing needed for wildlife for the environment and the fact this is supposed to be a village
•	Protecting access to green spaces within the village is also vital
•	Why is the site of the old first school not in trajectory? I know access is an issue but if it cannot be built on it could be made into an accessible green space by developers, as part of allowing them to build elsewhere, maybe a wildlife area?
•	Wildlife conservation
•	Wildlife is under threat and green lungs need protection for the sake of future generations being able to breath fresh air
•	The interleasing of buildings and green space needs to be preserved. This is part of the historic pattern of the village, provides habitats for wildlife and makes Addingham an attractive place to live
•	The village is amazingly rich in wildlife, so particularly sensitive areas (longnecks, near ancient boundaries, places where there are special trees) should be avoided, flood risks also need to be taken into account
•	Not to build on land adjacent to town head fold. The area is abound with wild deer, and the view from the Sailor beer garden would be ruined!!
•	Green spaces- Addingham is the gateway to wharf dale, to build on this, the village and its environment must reflect this. This can only help business in the area
•	Environment
•	Character of village - use local stone and no 3 storey except where existing stone 3 storey old houses already exists - eg Main street. Green spaces to be kept
•	Solar panels to green up the proposal
•	Retaining the character of the village 
•	The fields behind the Sailor pub and Manor Garth are vital for quality of life in the village
•	Towngate field next to the cricket field is especially important at the entrance to the village
•	Plant more trees along bypass to absorb more noise and pollution
•	Protection of the environment 
•	Retention of green space within the village eg, the Garth
•	Maintaining green areas/ environmental beauty
•	Environmental / wildlife/ construction
•	Environment - wildlife must be protected including but not limited to hedgehogs, barn owls, wild flowers for bees etc. All prominent and relevant issues globally and for Britain’s sustainability, removing any large area of green belt is irresponsible - will other green areas be made to compensate/ encourage wildlife? Additionally, what waste/ pollution will be created when building the houses let alone having 200 new families? Are they sustainable houses?
•	The wildlife in the area is most important. I’m not sure if it’s commonly known but we do have barn owls nesting and bringing up young. They use the fields consistently near St Christopher’s drive. Also bats are common using the area for roosts
•	Retaining green areas within the village
•	Local habitat
•	Environment - ensuring that the beauty of the village and surrounding areas is not damaged by housing and road developments. Protecting existing green space and wildlife areas
•	Protecting the wildlife. Bats, barn owls, voles, sparrow hawks, buzzards, need  green areas for feeding near St Christopher’s drive
•	Maintain green spaces and enhance wildlife in the centre of the village - keep and enhance green corridors. Link up throughout the village with accessible paths
•	Ensure all new buildings is environmentally sustainable - the specs for new buildings should include features for saving energy, water etc
•	Green spaces
•	Firstly that previously used or brown filed sites be fully developed before considering developing green spaces, some of which are wildlife rich. Secondly to maintain open green spaces in the centre of the village and along Main street to maintain the attractive appearance of the village and well being that these spaces contribute
•	Environmental impact - carbon footprint, car use, impact on green belt/ green spaces
•	Maintain the nature of the village by ensuring the green spaces remain to ensure the semi rural aspect of Addingham continues, local walks are vital and should not be lost
•	Developments must not encroach on existing green spaces, which give the village its character - areas like the Garth and the green belt that protects the village edges
Number of comments received on Environment and green spaces on feedback forms = 36

Schools
•	Schools and feeder schools, ie Ilkley Grammar school
•	Schools- adequate?
•	Given the increase in the number of households I am concerned about schools, particularly the impact of children being sent to Keighley rather than Ilkley, which impacts house prices and has forced some to leave the village
•	Schools could not necessarily cope with additional families moving into the proposed number of houses. Further primary and secondary schools will be needed
•	Need new schools
•	Schools and roads
•	Primary and secondary school places must be provided in local area
•	School places
•	More places at Ilkley grammar school for Addingham pupils
•	Sufficient school places
•	Schools
•	Provision of amenities - school places, nursery places
•	A larger new school
•	Would builders agree to build 2 classrooms and pay teachers to accommodate all the new children? Builders always put up large family houses so more children for school/ doctors plus all homes 2/3 cars
•	School is full at present!
•	School places - overstretched
•	Education, with large developments taking place in Ilkley and Wharfedale, 12-18 year olds education could become critical
•	Schools
•	Availability of places in schools, nursery and doctors
•	Education
•	It is essential that families can be confident that their aged 11 children can secure secondary school places within easy access
•	Greater thought must be given to secondary provision so pupils can attend a local school with friends they have known in Primary school
•	Schools
•	Education - with APS already close to reaching the maximum number of students, particularly the early year’s children, how can future students be guaranteed places at APS? Further, how can IGS cope with such a large increase in numbers?
Number of comments received on schools on feedback forms = 25

Green Belt
•	Green belt land
•	It is imperative that NO development in the village should be done on green belt, as this will permanently harm the character of the village. Also the newsletter that you sent round states that Bradford council have said “sufficient land can be identified to meet the proposed apportionment without using Green belt or sites in flood risk areas” However the map on the back of the newsletter then shows possible development sites many of which are on Green belt and/or flood risk areas - why is this? Surely these areas should be removed from this map?
•	No building on Green belt land
•	Loss of Green belt land/ wildlife
•	Maintain Green belt and conservation areas
•	Protect Green belt
•	Green belt preservation as a separate village - not joined on to Ilkley or Silsden
•	Green belt need not and must not be built on
•	Preservation of Green belt land
•	I am very concerned that the Green belt and village green space designations are respected
•	Protection of green space and Green belt
•	Preserving Green belt
•	Conservation areas and Green belt protection
•	Keeping Green belt and green areas
•	Not using Green belt land
•	Green belt land
•	Precious Green belt and conservation areas to be retained
•	Preservation of existing Green belt 
•	Common sense tells us to use brown field sites first- surely only developers greed is the only reason for Green belt use
Number of comments received on green belt on feedback forms = 19

Flooding/ Drainage
•	Drainage -recent flooding in the village along Main street shows it is already well over capacity. Any new development should not use this route
•	There is flooding potential for some areas for proposed housing
•	Flooding
•	Before any more houses are built the land must be surveyed for any drainage problems 
•	How can we be reassured that flooding risks will be addressed
•	We have flooding. More houses would only make the matter worse. Black Thursday 1981 the drains could not clear the water and raised the road outside the Crave Heifer
•	Sewage systems not adequate in St Pauls for the amount of houses at present! Only 4”…should be 6”
•	Drainage and sewerage is not capable of taking a large addition to housing
Number of comments received on feedback forms for Flooding and drainage = 8 

Conservation & Heritage
•	A large area of the village has a special and distinctive character and this has been recognised in its designated as a conservation area, and this must be protected at all costs. Not only must buildings and their distinctive character be preserved, but also the open spaces (often not green belt land) between the older parts of the village and new developments
•	Looking after the historical buildings, maintaining the environment (ecological/ public paths etc)
•	Local history and heritage
•	Retention of conservation areas 
•	Wildlife and heritage
Number of comments received on conservation & heritage on feedback forms = 5

Infrastructure
•	I love the village and lived here for 35 years, but really fear for its future
•	Maintaining the village infrastructure as in some parts of the village this is already very stretched, Bolton Road/ high street
•	Infrastructure - roads, traffic levels are rising already. Medical- already stretched - schools - from nursery through to college
•	Services - expand school/ doctors, health services. Provision to cope with increased population
•	Infrastructure
•	Maintaining a rural feel to the village 
•	Access to countryside - people move to a village for the quietness and easy access to countryside. There must be a stopping point - a village cannot grow continuously and not lose what it is. If the council must build houses in the district these must be done in Towns/Cities. Creating 200 homes will mean a definite need for more infrastructure and mean Addingham is no longer a village. Residents have quick and easy access to countryside for kids to play ( small holdings/dog walks), don’t remove this massive selling point for the village and local businesses
•	Infrastructure - schools, secondary schools, pre school
•	Infrastructure - Main street in particular
•	Infrastructure - including traffic management, school places, medical facilities to be considered alongside increase in housing
•	The population of Addingham could be increased by as much as 20%. How can local facilities, businesses, employment opportunities support such a large increase in number at such a rapid and engineered increase? What benefit does such a rapid increase provide both Addinghams current and future residents? If Bradford council is to approve such an increase, why do we not have infrastructure improvements to match this increase?
•	Infrastructure to support additional housing
Number of comments received on infrastructure on feedback forms = 12

Regeneration & Community
•	Invest in the regeneration of Main street. Easier said than done I know, but attempts must be made. Could the Parish Council subsidise one or two community enterprises, eg a community café?
•	Encouraging local businesses
•	Involve community, how to keep as much of the community included as possible
•	All improvements/ facilities must be for all community not just one section
•	Retail shops/cafes/services
•	The doctors surgery is also struggling to cope with existing numbers, so extra provision will be needed
•	Local business encouragement
•	I agree Addingham is a fantastic place to live - so many businesses seek to open in Ilkley but I feel some could be enticed to Addingham if it was possible to show potential, perhaps via a pack for estate agents showing all that goes on here and the potential market
•	Would it be possible to have some sort of festival, perhaps folk music, Jazz or similar, good for local business
•	Maintain the community feel within the village - rather than becoming a small town
•	Health care facilities will have to be increased
•	Preservation as a separate village, not joined on to Ilkley or Silsden
•	Develop Addinghams wonderful rural position. More information should be displayed about local walks, habitat etc
•	To preserve village identity and character
•	Regeneration - it is sad to see shops closing. A plan is needed to bring this back. I do not know how but serious consideration is needed to this end
•	The destruction of a village community
•	Recreation facilities for all 
•	Community shared sporting facilities
•	Employment opportunities
•	Local businesses need to fill up empty shops
•	Maintaining a sense of community and identity within our village
•	More facilities for young people to access
•	Maintain a village feel and having no worries about access/ places at local schools for our children
•	Business - don’t allow large conglomerates. Keep business local and Addingham unique
•	Sports facilities
•	Help to support local business/ promote Addingham as a place to live and work
•	Trade- ie opening of shops such as butchers in the disused buildings down Main street
•	Creating a demand for local business (Tourist trail?)
•	Keeping “village feel”
•	Avoid Addingham becoming a commuter town, ie bear in mind local jobs, facilities
•	Medical amenities
•	Provision of a community hub which is non denominational and is suitable for general casual community use, much of what there is eg, scout hut, memorial hall is not open for casual use, only for organised or planned events
•	Continue to encourage young families
•	Ensuring the character of village is maintained
Number of comments received on regeneration & community on feedback forms = 34

In conclusion to the many comments left at the Neighbourhood Plan meeting and from the completed feedback forms, where residents were asked “which 3 issues you think are most important” these were the most concerned about issues;
1. Housing….all in favour of small developments only, no more large estates, with most of the houses being affordable. This will help the younger generation in Addingham get onto the housing ladder, that want to remain in the village they grew up in! No more executive houses, enough already.
2. Traffic….mostly all concerned with already congested main street and will be worse with more houses. Parking an issue on main street, as well as other bad areas, such as Bolton road and St Pauls rise
3. Environment….residents feel Green belt land should be protected at all costs, and preserve precious green spaces, that make Addingham a wonderful rural village
Schools were also a concern, with an ever increasing population, that local schools are inadequate now, and they fear for their children’s places. They do not want their children to have to travel further a field for their education