Object

Representation ID: 4281

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Mrs Velda Cox

Reasons for Objections:
1. Size: 112 newbuilds is totally disproportionate to the size of Harlaxton Village

2. Location: The proposed land for development with its only entrance is onto The Drift, which is a narrow lane
The canal crossing bridge is narrow and very dangerous since it is not possible to see oncoming cars once on the bridge- no footpaths on the Drift and beyond. Accidents have already happened as villagers have tried to access the Melton Mowbray A607 crossing, with the current number of villagers, already being the maximum.

3. Infrastructure capacity: Based on the fact that most households will have two vehicles, this will mean that at a minimum of 112 additional cars will potentially access the main village for schooling and GP services.

4. Flooding: Surface water drainage and implications of downstream flooding issues is also problematic.

5. Historic Significance: Harlaxton Village is of historic value with several listed properties and a particular village environment with its own culture, history and natural environment which should not be disturbed. Development would intrude upon the open historic setting west of the Drift. The Village also houses Harlaxton Manor with its historic walled garden.

Object

Representation ID: 4322

Received: 26/08/2025

Respondent: Mr Simon Wicks

Reasons for objections:
-This Village is not a large village and has insufficient infrastructure.
-Transport & Affordable housing
-We don’t have a shop
-The public bus service stops at 7 pm (lack of public transport)
-Expense of a taxi
-School is near capacity
-The Doctors surgery doesn’t have medical practitioners /doctors on many days
-Access: The proposed access on the Drift or even the A607 is an accident or fatality waiting to happen
-Surface Water and Sewage: Anglian water has a limited capacity to take more sewage
-The Drift suffers from massive surface water
-Conservation & Design: Historical sight line from The Manor out to Belvoir castle
-Land: Good Arable land being potentially lost to housing. Whilst we do import less than we did after the second world war, the UK is heavily reliant on imports for a much larger proportion of vegetables (around 47-55%). This piece of land has grown both cereals and vegetables since I moved to the village in 1986. Please don’t lose good quality land to this development and potentially set a precedent for even more large-scale development proposals in our small village

Object

Representation ID: 4324

Received: 20/08/2025

Respondent: Bryan Gallagher

My objections echo those given by SKDC in refusal decision to application (S25-0558) for an inappropriate, substantial housing development on the other side of the A607 to SKPR-318.

Road Access: The narrow Drift lacks continuous footways and cannot handle increased traffic. Access points pose safety risks, particularly at blind turns and accident-prone junctions with the A607.

Insufficient Infrastructure
Current GP access, secondary school places, and village amenities (like shops and public transport) are inadequate, and further development would worsen these issues.

Sewage Treatment
Anglian Water has indicated they lack the capacity for substantial new housing in Harlaxton.

Flooding Risk
Development on sloping green fields could lead to downstream flooding.

Agricultural Land Loss
The project threatens agricultural land and may extend the village into exposed farmland.

Inappropriate and Disproportionate Development
To quote SKDC's recent decision:

...the scale of development should be an appropriate small scale, and this development exceeds the general expectation of no more than 11 dwellings...does not have support from the local community or the Parish Council, and would extend obtrusively into the open countryside with harm to wide reaching landscape views, local heritage assets and the Conservation Area...not demonstrated that it would be an acceptable rural exception scheme.

Comment

Representation ID: 4341

Received: 20/08/2025

Respondent: Mrs Anne Hardman

I realise the trend/policy nowadays is to convert villages into small towns but the infrastructure never seems to be in place before these expansions take place.

The proposed number of houses could potentially result in a further increase of over one thousand people being introduced to the village/town. To accommodate this number there needs to be more school positions being available, additional shops, a post office would be nice but the most essential of all Doctors. lt is bad enough now to get an appointment or access to health service.

I am of an age whereby I possibly won't feel the impact of this building project but I do feel the need to make these points to ensure the future success of this lovely village.

Comment

Representation ID: 4342

Received: 22/08/2025

Respondent: Barbara Tipton

l would like to comment on the above planning application.

1. I understand Anglian Water has indicated that sewage system in Harlaxton can only accommodate 50 more houses and I am informed that planning permission has already been granted for 24 on the Drift.
I am not a professional but it may be assumed that more than Anglian Water's recommendation could possibly cause serious problems.

2. My second point is the exit from Harlaxton and the Drift is a busy and dangerous crossing already with a 50 mph speed allowed on the 607.
Adding more traffic into the equation could be dangerous.

I do hope consideration is given to the above.

Object

Representation ID: 4348

Received: 20/08/2025

Respondent: Mrs Jaue Hawkins

Re the proposed allocation of land for 112 new houses off the Drift in Harlaxton.

I think it would not be suitable for several reasons

1. The access roads are too narrow
2. The road is unsuitable for extra traffic
3. The junction at the Gregory crossroads is dangerous and collisions are not uncommon.
4. The village cannot support more development

Object

Representation ID: 4352

Received: 18/08/2025

Respondent: Dr Janet Hannah

My objections echo those given by SKDC in refusal decision to application (S25-0558) for an inappropriate, substantial housing development on the other side of the A607 to SKPR-318.

Road Access: The narrow Drift lacks continuous footways and cannot handle increased traffic. Access points pose safety risks, particularly at blind turns and accident-prone junctions with the A607.

Insufficient Infrastructure
Current GP access, secondary school places, and village amenities (like shops and public transport) are inadequate, and further development would worsen these issues.

Sewage Treatment
Anglian Water has indicated they lack the capacity for substantial new housing in Harlaxton.

Flooding Risk
Development on sloping green fields could lead to downstream flooding.

Agricultural Land Loss
The project threatens agricultural land and may extend the village into exposed farmland.

Inappropriate and Disproportionate Development
To quote SKDC's recent decision:

...the scale of development should be an appropriate small scale, and this development exceeds the general expectation of no more than 11 dwellings...does not have support from the local community or the Parish Council, and would extend obtrusively into the open countryside with harm to wide reaching landscape views, local heritage assets and the Conservation Area...not demonstrated that it would be an acceptable rural exception scheme.

Comment

Representation ID: 4365

Received: 20/08/2025

Respondent: Historic England

112 dwellings - potential impacts upon Harlaxton CA to south, Harlaxton Manor Grade II* RPAG to south east. A detailed HIA will be required to inform the allocation. Harlaxton Manor is positioned on rising ground and faces northwest towards the village and this raised position connects views to the spire of St Mary the Virgin's Church at Bottesford from within the registered park and garden. The housing allocation is on this line of sight. The impact of any proposal on the registered park and garden in relation to the very important long views to the church spire from key locations, within the registered park and garden, from within garden buildings and structures and from inside upper floors of the manor need to be considered within the HIA. If the site is found to be suitable to take forward to allocation following detailed assessment, amendments will be required to criteria f). Our response dated 30 April 2025 to S25/0558 may be of assistance when preparing the assessment.

Suggested change: If suitable to be taken forward for allocation following detailed assessment, amendments to criteria f) may be required on which HE would be happy to assist.

Comment

Representation ID: 4366

Received: 24/08/2025

Respondent: Beverley Jansen

Harlaxton was not the right place then and is still not.

The proposals now cross the A607 to the opposite side of village.

Again, we will lose precious mixed agricultural land and vital flora and fauna.

Again, Harlaxton does not possess the infrastructure to support more housing, residents and transport and we have just lost our one shop and post office.

Again, Anglican Water has insufficient capacity to cope

Again, surface water drainage and the implications of downstream flooding issues and responsibilities arise.

Again this new development would intrude upon the open historic setting, west of The Drift this time.

Again the safety for cyclists, pedestrians and vehicles has been ignored

Again little thought has been put into surrounding roads in the village including The Drift, where this estate will open onto.

Now Grantham hospital has no A&E, no Maternity unit, no outpatient overnight wards and obviously no air helicopter. So even more prospective patients have to travel, mainly by car, to Lincoln, Boston or Nottingham. Melton has no A&E either.

Rather than making developers more money from houses, not required in this area, put money into the local medical care, road improvements and bringing shops back to the Grantham town centre.

Support

Representation ID: 4433

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Wyggeston and Trinity Hospital Estate

Agent: Sheldon Bosley Knight

Fully supportive of the proposed allocation and is actively engaged in promoting the site for residential development to help meet South Kesteven’s housing requirement over the plan period. Site-specific due diligence has been undertaken to address the matters identified through the earlier consultation process, and further technical work is underway to demonstrate deliverability.

Object

Representation ID: 4456

Received: 25/08/2025

Respondent: Ken Whitton

Please consider these comments as my official objection to proposal SKPR-318.

I have significant concerns about the proposed housing project due to its sheer scale and the lack of adequate infrastructure at the proposed location.

The size of the development is far too large for the existing infrastructure, which is already stretched thin. This could lead to severe traffic congestion, increased pressure on local utilities, and a strain on essential public services, all of which could seriously impact the quality of life for both future residents and the surrounding community.

Without proper investment in the necessary infrastructure, this project risks creating more problems than it solves.

Object

Representation ID: 4457

Received: 25/08/2025

Respondent: Wendy Whitton

Please consider these comments as my official objection to proposal SKPR-318.

I would like to raise concerns regarding the proposed housing project at this location. The sheer size of the development seems disproportionate to the available infrastructure, which may lead to issues such as traffic congestion, strain on local utilities, and inadequate public services.

The current infrastructure is not equipped to support the scale of this project, potentially affecting the quality of life for both future residents and the surrounding community.

Careful consideration should be given to these factors before any further planning is authorized

Comment

Representation ID: 4570

Received: 03/10/2025

Respondent: National Highways

Given that this site is close to the SRN, we welcome that the elements of the Transport Assessment to assess impacts on the SRN are agreed upon with National Highways.