Call for Sites

Object

Representation ID: 16

Received: 06/03/2024

Respondent: Mrs Marie Jackson

Reference to the Local Plan dated January 2020 which this update builds upon doesn't uphold the key principles set out in the summary.

Object

Representation ID: 54

Received: 08/03/2024

Respondent: Mrs Elaine Hume

The Prime Minister stated on Prime Ministers question time on Wednesday 6th March that houses should be built on brown field sites and this should be at the heart of all planning for local authorities. Houses should not be built on farmland. Why are there large developments on farmland in the Local Plan?

Object

Representation ID: 267

Received: 14/03/2024

Respondent: Mr Michael Peace

Site SKPR-144 Mill Field Market Deeping

I object to the proposed development of Mill Field Market Deeping.
Your revised local plan mentions as one of its aims 'to protect and enhance'
This proposal is in absolute contradiction to this stated aim,is opposed by the local community,and should be rejected.

Object

Representation ID: 315

Received: 01/04/2024

Respondent: Mr John Bavister

These plots of land if developed would transform overnight a rural village to a sprawling urban bed and breakfast
site. Carlby does not possess sustainable infrastructure to carry development as such. This does not mean there will not
be any development within the SKDC policies.
The Draft Site assessment report is indecisive. It States “As per the proposed spatial
strategy of the local Plan review - no sites are being allocated within identified 'smaller villages’.” That other more
suitable sites have been identified rather than stating that the Carlby sites are not policy compliant.

Object

Representation ID: 512

Received: 15/04/2024

Respondent: Mrs Rhona Repton

The width and scope of proposed Development Sites across the District suggests a naive, scattergun approach to Residential Planning by an Organisation that doesn't appear to bear the better being of the local populations at heart. Surely, there are enough development opportunities already earmarked within the District - Poplar Farm, Rectory Farm, RAF Spittlegate, Stamford Quarry Farm and many, many more, PLUS the opportunities opened up within the Grantham Southern Relief Road - between 2021 to 2041. Just liaise with Brownlow Esates. They hold the answers. Spare your Residents - if you care? If not, where are your loyalties, SKDC?

Object

Representation ID: 530

Received: 15/04/2024

Respondent: Mrs Patricia Mistry

Objections for SKPR -144:
Historical Significance: Highlights Mill Field's century-old heritage and natural green space (LGS).
Health Benefits: Stresses its role in combating obesity, pollution, and flooding.
Environmental Importance: Notes it's function as a biological carbon capturer and flood buffer.
Local Support: Overwhelming local endorsement for >15 years for preserving Mill Field as an LGS.
Policy Contradictions: Conflicts with health, environmental, and community policies of SKDC and LCC
Sustainable Strategy: Advocates for prioritising Mill Field's as LGS for long-term community benefit.
Reconsideration Call: Urges SKDC to reconsider housing plans to safeguard LGS for public health and environmental sustainability.

Object

Representation ID: 984

Received: 23/04/2024

Respondent: Dr Ray Butler

I cannot support any ‘plan’ that advocates widespread destruction of the local countryside.

Object

Representation ID: 1137

Received: 24/04/2024

Respondent: Mrs Helen Anders

Developers and councils involved must fulfill all aspects of original proposals to ensure integrity of agreed allocations, no removing acoustic bunds, employment designation, affordable housing targets. Stamford cannot function as a giant housing estate for Rutland whilst it's own infrastructure is willfully ignored and unable to cope with the needs of its own residents.