Object

Representation ID: 2766

Received: 06/08/2025

Respondent: Barrowby Parish Council

Inconsistency with SKDC's Own Site Logic
SKPR-101 was rejected due to access, infrastructure, and landscape impact.
SKPR-327 shares the same constraints (access via The Drift, infrastructure limitations, open countryside impact) yet is proposed for 455 homes — with no new evidence to justify this reversal.
E. Breach of Spatial Strategy
Barrowby is a Larger Village, third-tier in SKDC’s hierarchy.
Policy SP2 restricts growth in Larger Villages to be “limited and proportionate.”
These allocations would double the size of Barrowby, breaching both Policy SP2 and NPPF paras 11, 15, and 29, which require sustainable, plan-led growth in scale with settlement function.

Object

Representation ID: 2835

Received: 10/08/2025

Respondent: Dr Ray Butler

Why not destroy the land next to the A1 and not this area of lovely countryside?

Object

Representation ID: 2848

Received: 10/08/2025

Respondent: Mrs Annemarie Daniele

I strongly object to this land being used for housing development. Barrowby has already had its fair share of development on SKPR-272 with 270 new homes! Another large housing development would mean the scale of growth to Barrowby would be excessive, almost doubling the footprint of the village. This would change the village character of Barrowby and put pressure on infrastructure and services and community life. The impact on the roads and junctions is of a particular concern. The development would encroach on green space and farmland and impact on views and landscape that help define our village identity.

Object

Representation ID: 2849

Received: 10/08/2025

Respondent: Mr Matthew Daniele

I strongly object to any further housing development in Barrowby. We have already had the village extended with 270 new homes and any further development would be excessive and detrimental to the character of the village. It feels like we are edging ever closer to Grantham which I do not want. 270 homes is enough for one village to accept.

I am very worried about the strain on local services: Primary school places, roads and junctions, drainage, sewage and utilities. Our roads are not designed for the undoubtedly heavy increase in traffic - resulting in unwelcome congestion/safety concerns .

Comment

Representation ID: 2900

Received: 13/08/2025

Respondent: Natural England

Natural England has concerns that the site is on BMV land. We also recommend that GI should be incorporated across the site and potentially to the adjoining site.

Object

Representation ID: 2940

Received: 14/08/2025

Respondent: Mrs jenny watson

Our village has already had 3 fields turned into housing almost doubling the size of our village. The latest proposal is for 455 houses with a minor road to come out on NOT adequate for all the extra traffic,the school is oversubscribed as are other local services ! Are you intending to improve the services and local infer-structure ? We are still a village JUST ! and we have already had a large amount of extra housing please consider this before tuning us into a small town without adequate resources .

Comment

Representation ID: 2944

Received: 14/08/2025

Respondent: Mr Gary Sandell

Comment on the proposal the site, Westry Corner/ The drift 455 houses SKPR-327
Together with with SKPR 272 on Low Road this will be 725 houses.
A. This would change the charactter of Barrowby and put pressure on infratructure,services and community life.
B. 400 plus houses would greatly exceed the level of growth planned for in the current local plan.
C. New residents are likely to rely heavily on cars , which will increase local traffic and congestion at school times, drop off and pick up times. 750 more new houses house = around 1500 more vehicles in the village.
D. Stain on local services, Primary school places, roads and junctions, drainage, sewage and utilities.
E. Harm to the village setting . Encrach on green space and farm land.
F. reduce the separation bewteen Grantham and Barrowby. A impact on views and landscape that helps to define our village identity.
G. in effect it may become more a detached extension of Grantham then Barrowby village.

Object

Representation ID: 2959

Received: 16/08/2025

Respondent: Mr Derek Kendall

The main points of objection are:-
The scale of growth is excessive
Poor access to the village center
Strain on local services
Harm to the village setting
Risk of an unconnected, car dependent estate

Object

Representation ID: 2960

Received: 16/08/2025

Respondent: Mrs CELESTE POMPEI KENDALL

The main points of objection are:-
The scale of growth is excessive
Poor access to the village center
Strain on local services
Harm to the village setting
Risk of an unconnected, car dependent estate

Object

Representation ID: 2978

Received: 17/08/2025

Respondent: Mrs Karen Reed

This is terrible so sad the village is getting to big for the roads ,school etc the view of the mannor and local walks will be ruined!! And wildlife
The drift road is tiny won’t cope with all the cars this is an absolute joke and insult to the village. You’ve already taken the field on low road surely this is enough! Rediculous!!!!!!!

Object

Representation ID: 3006

Received: 18/08/2025

Respondent: Sian Wilmore

The village will not be able support this preposal with its current infastructure and Roads, it will only losing the Village presense.
Barrowby is its own Village it is not a borough of Grantham.

Object

Representation ID: 3012

Received: 18/08/2025

Respondent: Mr Alastair Kerr

I object on the grounds of changing the village character, devaluing the properties directly adjacent to Low Road and adding to the known traffic burden that has been 'estimated for the SKPR-272 development. Increased traffic flow is already becoming an issue. Traffic calming through the village to the A52 is virtually non existent and there is both a bottleneck at the village green (Playground) and beyond which presents both traffic and pollution hazards but also a serious safety hazard for children. There has already been one child killed on Low road in recent years.

Object

Representation ID: 3014

Received: 18/08/2025

Respondent: Mrs Jane Billing

My main concern is the infrastructure of this area. The A52 Nottingham junctions are dangerous and with new builds already in progress this is becoming worse as the roads are very busy. Not safe to walk or cycle around the area.. The roads are not fit for purpose. The village is already large. School is over subscribed. No extra Gp surgeries are considered. Loss of natural habit for wild animals, including deer and foxes. The village has increased in size with 2 new building developments already. I have lived here for 7 years and seen a increase in speeding drivers.

Object

Representation ID: 3016

Received: 18/08/2025

Respondent: Mr Andrew Chapman

I am totally against this new proposal for land east of The Drift in Barrowby. Why are certain villages targeted for development and not others? Where are the new estates in villages like Marston, Allington, Harlaxton or Sedgebrook? The services in Barrowby are already stretched, the school is oversubscribed, travelling to other schools will lead to more congestion during peak times. Our PO closed, we have no modern village hall.
I am 100% against SKDC’s policy of targeting certain villages for massive development of housing and feel that the smaller villages should have their fair share of new housing. ARC

Object

Representation ID: 3017

Received: 18/08/2025

Respondent: Mr Chris Handley

Planning application SKPR-327 is unsound and inconsistent with both national and local planning policy because it:

Fails to support or enhance local services, contrary to the requirement for rural sustainability (NPPF, SP2).

Exacerbates traffic congestion without mitigation, risking “severe” highway impacts (NPPF).

Overwhelms infrastructure with no evidence of coordinated upgrades.

Exceeds school capacity without proposing educational investment.

Therefore, this proposal should be removed form the ‘Plan’ as this proposal, along with SKPR-272 increases the households in Barrowby by 80% without any associated increases in infrastructure, amenities and education provisions.

Object

Representation ID: 3018

Received: 18/08/2025

Respondent: Miss Michaela Bradford

Wildlife - deer, fox and badger sets present on the land which will lose habitat. Regularly walk in those fields and is a valued outdoor green space for the locals.
Crime - has increased in the area already and more households will only make this worse.
Traffic - dangerous speeding down low road
Barrowby residents have already dealt with an influx and the village feel has been lost. Low road has become a main road and a race track which is very dangerous through the narrow centre of the village.

Object

Representation ID: 3019

Received: 18/08/2025

Respondent: Miss Holly Edwards

I strongly object to the proposed housing in Barrowby. Our village already suffers from high traffic volumes, speeding, and drivers using it as a cut-through. The development would worsen these problems, particularly as the site sits on a blind corner, creating a serious safety hazard for residents, pedestrians, and other road users. Increased traffic would further strain village life, eroding the safety, character, and quality of living in our community. For these reasons, this location is wholly unsuitable for new housing.

Object

Representation ID: 3020

Received: 18/08/2025

Respondent: Mr Danny Everley

The huge expansion of this small village will ruin it's character and deminish even more the green space and countryside that surrounds it. The convenience store and village pub can be very busy at times as it is. The addition of potentially over a thousand extra residents would be too much, not to mention the extra traffic on the village roads.

Object

Representation ID: 3021

Received: 18/08/2025

Respondent: Mrs Kate Waghorn

Already large number of houses planned for Barrowby. No evidence of need - existing houses not selling fast.
Infrastructure insufficient - village has few facilities e.g, no medical care.
Traffic issues - already huge developments on Barrowby Road/Dysart Rd with no improvements to roads. More housing would make it worse.
Barrowby village will become a cut through - no safe crossing places.
School will not have capacity.
Yet another greenfield site, destroying the character of the village and damaging the countryside. This should not be considered unless all brownfield sites (including those occupied by derelict buildings) have been fully explored.

Object

Representation ID: 3022

Received: 18/08/2025

Respondent: Mr Philip Waghorn

I wish to object to SKPR-327 on the grounds that this development would place a huge strain on the already precarious electricity supply, sewage and drainage infrastructure, road conditions, transport links, and educational availability within this village.
There is limited local employment so many more vehicles would be on the village roads on their daily commute to work elsewhere.
We do not have a village crossing person.
We do not have adequate pavements.
We do not have sufficient street lighting.
Grantham hospital is struggling to cope with the existing demands on its facilities.
Local GP surgeries and dentists are full.

Object

Representation ID: 3030

Received: 19/08/2025

Respondent: Mrs Rachel Shirtcliffe

Village does not have the infrastructure and facilities for more housing in the village

Object

Representation ID: 3032

Received: 19/08/2025

Respondent: Miss Katie Devine

This site will be at the back of the feild facing the bungalow where I live my bedroom also is back of bungalow which faces the propsed plan east of the drift. This worries me for my privacy. I have concerns that building 455 homes on the feild at the back of me will impact the environment Cars on the roads around a quite location.Impact on schools and local amenities. Noise pollution of that many houses on the site and the amount of residents that will be living in them.

Comment

Representation ID: 3033

Received: 19/08/2025

Respondent: Mrs Bridget Wilson

This plan for hundreds more homes is absolutely ruining the look and feel of Barrowby village. Through these new housing estates, its gradually becoming joined up with Dysart Road and eventually it will just become part of Grantham, totally losing its own identity. The sheer number of new homes will look and feel odd in a village our size. We also don’t have the schooling infrastructure to support so many new homes.

Object

Representation ID: 3035

Received: 19/08/2025

Respondent: Mr Graham Cooley

SKPR - 327 (The yellow area) is frankly too much. Barrowby has experienced significant increases in development in recent years and the other allocation will result in hundreds of new houses. Combined with those already built and the ongoing developments within the Parish at Barrowby Gate means we "have done our bit" but more importantly the infrastructure neds to catch up.
This development significantly extends the boundaries of the village and diminishes the separation between Barrowby and Grantham.

The school is oversubscribed currently, there is no post office, doctors, dentists, modern village hall, insufficient parking for the playing fields etc..

Comment

Representation ID: 3039

Received: 19/08/2025

Respondent: Mr David Barney

The new developments (SKPR272 & SKPR327) will generate significant additional traffic. This will try to access the A52 and A1 via Barrowby village centre. Traffic and parking in and around Main Street, the school, the Church and the village green is already dangerous. Minor accidents are common and it's only a matter of time before someone (potentially a child) is injured or killed. How will SKDC ensure that this problem does not get worse?

Comment

Representation ID: 3040

Received: 19/08/2025

Respondent: Mr David Wain

My concern is with how HGV vehicles will access the sites. Low road bridge over A1 has weight restriction the drift is unsuitable and it’s very narrow through the village which means that they will all need to travel via Reedings Rd and Hedgefield Rd. The hundreds of deliveries required to build the houses will damage the road and make it very dangerous for the residents and their children.

Object

Representation ID: 3048

Received: 19/08/2025

Respondent: Mrs Wendy Day

SKPR-327. I object to this application on the grounds that Barrowby cannot sustain this amount of housing on top of the all ready planned for estate. The infrastructure is not in place to support this and the added traffic through the village of both Barrowby and Harlaxton would be dangerous. Not to mention the nesting skylarks and other nature which would be wiped out if this goes ahead.

Comment

Representation ID: 3057

Received: 19/08/2025

Respondent: The Woodland Trust

Both SKPR-327 and SKPR-272 are very close to a Veteran Pendunculate Oak (ATI no 157239). ati.woodlandtrust.org.uk
We ask that this tree be individually identified and protected in any plans, with a suitable root protection area designated.

Object

Representation ID: 3063

Received: 19/08/2025

Respondent: Mrs Susan Barnes

Loss of village identity with large numbers of new dwellings. Will also become a suburb of Grantham without the benefits.
Traffic issues already along Main Street which will get worse with more cars accessing A52 and A1.
Barrowby Road and Dysart Riad already very busy, will become more so.
Not enough room at local school so children will.be ferried by car to alterntives, not good for the environment, or for children.
Bus service for evenings is non existent so everyone requires a car. Nothing except Pub and shop in the village.

Object

Representation ID: 3068

Received: 19/08/2025

Respondent: Mrs Emma Roberts

Needs infrastructure planning.
Bungalows and starter homes should be offered both as affordable housing and general sale.
A1 junctions will need to be modified to cope.