WE are blessed to live in an amazing county, whose natural beauty and vibrant local communities are the hallmarks of what makes Britain great.

Yet this is all set to change.

With Bradford Council’s plan to build 42,000 new homes across the region, large patches of Yorkshire will soon be veiled with sheets of concrete.

The problems with the plan are manifest. For example, to date, the council has failed to justify the need for 42,000 homes. In fact, there are sound arguments that put the figure at nearly half this amount.

Further, before allocating greenbelt land for development, the council does not appear to have taken stock of the available brownfield land. In doing so, it runs the risk of releasing greenbelt land while suitable brownfield land is left neglected and ramshackle.

As a result, the cost of maintaining new land will weigh particularly heavily on the public purse, while it must also still maintain the cost of derelict brownfield land. More troubling is the fact this approach ignores the regeneration of parts of the region that are dying economically, in favour of enhancing affluent, mostly unaffordable greenbelt areas. It is difficult to see how such an approach benefits anyone except for large developers, who will always prefer big profit over the considerably smaller yield attached to brownfield developments.

There are also very local problems with the council’s plan for Airedale and Wharfedale. Let’s take the village of Addingham, for example. National statistics show Addingham’s population grew by 3.5 per cent between 2001 and 2011 (3,599 people to 3,730). This increase left the local primary school with an annual intake of 30 pupils, the statutory limit placed on local authorities.

Moreover, greater pressure has been placed on local admissions to Ilkley Grammar School, meaning an increasing number of parents are faced with the prospect of their children being educated in Airedale or Craven. This only adds further pressure to the very areas in need of regeneration.

As for the proposed increase of 200 new homes, it will see Addingham’s population rise by at least 10 per cent. Yet the council has provided no clear vision as to how it will alleviate schooling issues, congestion, local infrastructure deficiencies, the creation of hazardous new roads, etc.

The key question facing us, then, is whether or not the proposed change is good or bad? Will it benefit our communities through the development of affordable housing and by stimulating employment through regeneration? To my mind, Bradford Council has yet to demonstrate this.

Instead, the current ill-conceived plan lacks foresight and innovation; it runs the real risk of reducing our children’s collective inheritance to lumps of concrete, sprawled across Yorkshire’s natural beauty, which are unaffordable and provide no economic hope nor aspiration.

ADAM WALKER Addingham