Comment

Representation ID: 4723

Received: 09/03/2026

Respondent: Ellen Campbell

There are sadly substantive concerns regarding the current draft of the Barrowby Neighbourhood Plan. The following comments focus on areas where the Plan does not adequately reflect the evidence base, is insufficiently robust in policy terms, or fails to protect Barrowby’s distinctive rural character and status as a separate village.
The issues raised below should be addressed in order for the Plan to be effective, locally representative, and capable of withstanding development pressure
1. The Neighbourhood Plan Fails to Align With Its Own Evidence Base on Housing Need
The AECOM Housing Needs Assessment forms part of the statutory evidence base and clearly confirms that Barrowby’s housing requirement to 2041 is already exceeded by existing commitments. In planning terms, this means that no demonstrable need exists for additional allocations or for permissive policies enabling further growth.
Despite this, Policies 1 and 3 retain an unjustifiably permissive stance that lacks both evidential justification and policy safeguards. As a result, the Plan is not sufficiently robust to prevent speculative applications, especially on greenfield and edge of settlement land.
This failure is even more concerning given that over 500 formal written objections to further development in Barrowby have already been submitted to SKDC in response to S25/2471. We have overwhelmingly objected to ALL future development in Barrowby. This represents an exceptional and unequivocal community mandate. The Neighbourhood Plan must acknowledge or respond to this overwhelming level of documented public opposition.
Requested revisions:
• A clear presumption against additional development unless a specific, evidenced, locally arising need is identified.
• Explicit policy protection against the release of greenfield or edge of settlement land for housing.
• Text acknowledging that Barrowby’s community has expressed substantial, documented, and unprecedented objection to further growth. The community has spoken: enough is enough.

2. Insufficient Protection for the Western Edge: One of Barrowby’s Most Sensitive and Exposed Landscapes
The western edge of Barrowby is:
• Elevated and visually prominent
• Integral to the village’s historic rural setting
• The defining landscape feature that maintains its identity as a separate settlement
The current wording (“land immediately adjacent to the Developed Footprint”) is imprecise, open to interpretation, and provides no meaningful protection for this critical landscape. The failure to distinguish high sensitivity locations from lower sensitivity areas undermines the Plan’s effectiveness and leaves Barrowby vulnerable to landscape harm that would be irreversible.
Requested revisions:
• Explicit wording that residential development to the west of Barrowby will not be supported, other than in genuinely exceptional circumstances supported by compelling evidence.
• Formal identification of the western edge as a high-sensitivity landscape requiring specific policy protection.
3. The Plan Does Not Provide Adequate Protection for Views, Skylines, Rights of Way, or the Village’s Landscape Setting
Policy 6’s narrow focus on a limited number of mapped viewpoints is insufficient and does not reflect best practice for landscape policy. It fails to safeguard:
• Key skylines and ridgelines
• Long distance and panoramic views
• The wider setting of Harlaxton Manor
• Cumulative impacts, which are a significant planning consideration
Policy 7 does not provide strong enough protection for the rural setting of public footpaths, bridleways, or the western green wedge. These features are essential to Barrowby’s identity and are highly valued by residents.
Requested revisions:
• Policy protection for undeveloped skylines, ridgelines, and view corridors.
• A defined western green buffer.
• Clear safeguarding of the landscape, amenity, and tranquillity of public rights of way.
• Recognition of the cumulative effects of incremental development.
• Explicit protection for greenfields that form an essential part of Barrowby’s character.
4. Failure to Guarantee Barrowby’s Continued Existence as a Distinct Village
Without firm safeguards, Barrowby faces a significant risk of functional and physical coalescence with Grantham. Incremental development pressure threatens to erode the village’s rural character and would, over time, result in Barrowby ceasing to function as a village in any meaningful sense.
This outcome is directly contrary to the stated intention of the Neighbourhood Plan and contradicts the aspirations of the local community. We want our historically important village, which dates to the Doomsday book, to remain a village.
Requested revisions:
• A formally delineated green buffer between Barrowby and Grantham.
• Stronger wording requiring that Barrowby’s separate settlement identity is preserved.
• Explicit recognition that the village cannot sustain further development, as evidenced by the over 500 objections submitted to SKDC.
Overall Summary
As currently drafted, the Neighbourhood Plan:
• Does not reflect its own evidence base
• Must respond to overwhelming community objection
• Does not provide adequate landscape or settlement protection
• Leaves Barrowby vulnerable to development that would fundamentally alter, and ultimately destroy, its character as a rural village
Significant strengthening is required to ensure that Barrowby remains a distinct, rural, sustainable settlement, rather than being absorbed into the expanding urban area of Grantham. Barrowby village community has objected vociferously to more development as outlined in the overwhelming responses to S25/2471.

Comment

Representation ID: 4724

Received: 13/03/2026

Respondent: Paul Clarke

Number of people: 2

We wish to comment on the above Draft Plan as follows:-

Whilst compliance with the planning requirements is stated in summary and in the various matrices at a high level, we do not believe that the plan is specific or strong enough particularly in respect of planning policies 1,2,3,4,5,6, and 7. We think that the wording needs to be revised to be much more robust to avoid unwanted and unjustified developments, ruining the village life we enjoy.

We already have too many developments ruining the make up and nature of our village. This is completely contrary to the independent report by AECOM that demonstrates that we have already met our housing targets up to 2041, with schemes underway and already committed. Unless a clear local defined and agreed need is identified, we should NOT be accepting any further developments in this plan period and I think that this should be clearly stated.

The basic conditions statement states that development must be sustainable. However, we do not believe that the plan sufficiently precludes poor design and unsustainable, unrequired developments. Any development should be plan led and appropriate infil/edge growth, in scale, character and mix. I think that greenfield sites should be protected and other less intrusive and impactful options fully explored (infills/brownfield/redeveloped areas) first. The area to the west of Barrowby (together with other similar open countryside views) creates a unique countryside setting, with protected views from the nearby Grade 1 listed Harlaxton Manor, together with other sites of listed status. These areas and views define our village nature, set up and ways of life. We are already in severe danger of merging into the sprawling and uncontrrolled developments from Grantham and loosing our rural identity. These areas need to be specifically referenced in the plan to avoid speculative development approaches and the loss of our "village" identity, with appropriate greenfield buffers being put in place and maintained. The public footpaths and bridleways in these areas should equally be clearly referenced and protected from any nearby development that would ruin their "open" views.

We have to categorically disagree with the environmental and habitat screening presumptions that say that there will not be any significant impact from developments. Given our experience from the current Grange Paddock planning application, in my professional opinion, I completely disagree with the same screening opinion. Full SEA and HRA assessments MUST be undertaken on any proposed schemes to identify the risks, harms and any acceptable mitigation strategies (or avoidance). Protected species exist adjacent to us and need to remain undisturbed - this should be clearly outlined in the plan.

Please consider our comments in the re-drafting of the plan, to protect our valuable village identity and control/achieve sustainable and appropriate, plan led developments.

Paul & Yvonne Clarke

Object

Representation ID: 4725

Received: 13/03/2026

Respondent: Neil Hayes

I wish to register a formal objection to this planning application.

In recent years, Barrowby has experienced substantial levels of development on previously undeveloped greenfield land. The official AECOM assessment indicates that the village has already satisfied its housing allocation through to 2041. As a result, there is growing concern that the current proposal would lead to an excessive concentration of development and an unsustainable expansion of the settlement. This is particularly problematic in a location where road capacity, utility provision, and statutory safety considerations are already under pressure.

The western side of Barrowby occupies elevated ground and is visually prominent within the surrounding landscape. This area contributes significantly to the village’s rural character and identity and offers valued access to the nearby countryside. Public routes such as the Gingerbread Way, which leads towards Pancake Hill and provides views toward Harlaxton Manor, are well used by residents and visitors alike. Many people choose to live in villages such as Barrowby specifically because of the proximity to open countryside and the distinctive landscape setting. Further greenfield development in this location would diminish these qualities, resulting in the loss of important views and a gradual erosion of the village’s rural setting. Protecting these landscape assets from further encroachment is therefore essential.

The proposed development would substantially change the character of the village’s western boundary, replacing open countryside with built form and placing disproportionate development pressure on a relatively small settlement. This appears to conflict with the Local Plan’s principle that growth should be proportionate and supported by adequate infrastructure, and that larger, more sustainable settlements should accommodate the majority of new development.

There are also significant concerns regarding infrastructure capacity. Local water infrastructure is already known to be under considerable strain, with frequent leaks having been acknowledged by engineers from Anglian Water. Introducing further demand before necessary upgrades or replacement of the network has been secured would be premature and unsustainable. In addition, there has been no clear evidence provided to confirm that existing foul drainage systems, GP services, or local school capacity are capable of supporting the cumulative scale of development currently being proposed.

Highway constraints within the village are another serious issue. Recent construction projects nearby have already demonstrated the limitations of the local road network, with large construction vehicles becoming stuck on narrow village streets and blocking access through the conservation area for extended periods. The access arrangements suggested for this proposal appear to rely on routes that are not well suited to regular use by heavy goods vehicles, emergency services, or significantly higher traffic volumes. This raises clear safety concerns and could reasonably be considered to meet the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) threshold for a severe cumulative impact on the highway network.

Furthermore, a number of sites within and around Grantham have been identified as appropriate brownfield opportunities for redevelopment. Prioritising these locations would help meet housing needs while avoiding unnecessary loss of greenfield land and protecting the surrounding countryside.

Conclusion

Given that Barrowby has already met its identified housing requirement and that suitable brownfield alternatives exist elsewhere, this proposal represents an unsustainable form of development. For these reasons, it should not be granted planning permission.

Comment

Representation ID: 4735

Received: 12/03/2026

Respondent: David Keeling

It is with great disappointment that I read again of SKDC planned increase of housing in the Barrowby village area.
No consideration of Safety has been considered. Access from the A1is not planned which means already dangerous roadways will be charged with over 1,000 extra vehicles if Planning is approved. Access from planned new estates is not clear and cannot be seen to be anything other than potentially dangerous and life threatening to villagers.
The local primary school will not be able to handle any increase in students as it is full already and will mean extra A52 and Low Road traffic taking them to school on already very busy congested routes/roads.

Comment

Representation ID: 4736

Received: 12/03/2026

Respondent: Mr Richard Burrows

Great credit is due to Barrowby PC for having produced such a comprehensive overview of the special Parish in which we are fortunate enough to reside and their vision and aspirations for the future.
The draft plan highlights many aspects which we believe it is essential to preserve in order that Barrowby remains a thriving, rural village, adjacent to, but NOT part of the town of Grantham. Modifications to the plan should clearly and explicitly confirm the requirement to protect the current edges of the village and limit ANY LARGE SCALE development which would contravene this.
Since Barrowby has already exceeded housing targets for the next 15 years, “local community needs” [Policy 1: Sustainable Development] have been well and truly met, therefore no more applications to build on GREENFIELD sites should be approved. This is referenced in NP (draft) Objective 4 [Appropriate scale of residential development], which seeks to “meet the community’s housing needs, enable further residential development OF APPROPRIATE SCALE, form and type in APPROPRIATE LOCATIONS within the village’s developed footprint.” More robust and specific wording within a revised Barrowby NP would help reinforce the necessary constraints in order to limit unnecessary, unwanted development beyond the village’s current footprint, particularly to the west.
A crucial aspect of our identity as a rural village is created by the open aspect and views to the west. Views of (and from) Harlaxton Manor and of the Harlaxton Denton Bowl, need to be preserved and not compromised. Specific wording within a reworked NP could highlight this.
Public responses during the consultation process indicate strong support for Policy Plan, Objective 7: Footpaths and green spaces, to “preserve and maintain the existing network of footpaths and green open spaces . . .” I believe rewording of the Plan should make clear the necessity of protecting our existing footpaths around the village and, consequently, the views therefrom.

Support

Representation ID: 4737

Received: 09/03/2026

Respondent: Mick Dwane

I wish to make a short comment in support of the Barrowby Neighbourhood Plan.
The village has changed a great deal over the years, and many residents value the countryside that still surrounds it. These open spaces help maintain the quiet and rural feel of Barrowby.
For that reason I believe it is important that the Plan continues to protect the fields around the village and avoids unnecessary expansion into the surrounding countryside.
Sensibly managed development within the existing village area seems more appropriate than large developments on open land.
I appreciate the work that has gone into preparing this Plan.

Comment

Representation ID: 4738

Received: 10/03/2026

Respondent: Mr Danny Everley

ENOUGH IS ENOUGH ON HOUSING
The current wording in the neighbourhood plan is too vague and a clear NO must be included to any more housing on greenfield sites to the west of Barrowby. Barrowby village has already met its housing targets up to 2041.

SAVE OUR VIEWS AND WALKS
The current plan only protects a few specific dots on a map. It does not mention the whole skyline to and from the village across the Denton bowl. The view from Barrowby, looking out across our countryside and from the footpaths looking back towards Barrowby must be identified, better protection of our rural public rights of way must be included.

KEEP BARROWBY A VILLAGE
Barrowby's status as a village is slowly being eroded by developments and will very soon just be part of Grantham. A green buffer zone around the village must be defined and maintained to protect our village boundary and the surrounding countryside.

Comment

Representation ID: 4739

Received: 10/03/2026

Respondent: Mrs Karen Munton

I am writing to submit comments on the Draft Barrowby Neighbourhood Plan. I appreciate the work that has gone into preparing the document and its supporting evidence. However, I am concerned that several of the policies do not currently provide strong enough protection for the character of the village, particularly on the western edge.
The AECOM Housing Needs Assessment shows that Barrowby has already met, and exceeded, its housing requirement up to 2041. In light of this evidence, I believe Policies 1 and 3 should be strengthened. As currently written, the wording appears too open-ended and could allow additional development on greenfield land or around the edge of the village. The plan should make it clear that further housing development, beyond that already approved, will only be supported where there is a clearly demonstrated and specific local need.
I am also concerned about the potential for development on the western side of the village. This area is elevated and highly visible from the surrounding countryside, forming an important part of Barrowby’s rural setting. The phrase “immediately adjacent to the Developed Footprint” is vague and could allow gradual expansion westward into the sensitive Harlaxton Denton Bowl. I would encourage clearer wording that strongly resists development to the west of the village, except in truly exceptional circumstances.
Finally, the surrounding countryside and rural walks are clearly valued by residents, as shown in the consultation results within the plan. However, the current policies may not provide sufficient protection. Policy 6 focuses mainly on specific mapped viewpoints and does not fully safeguard the wider skyline, panoramic views, or the setting of Harlaxton Manor. Similarly, Policy 7 should do more to protect the rural character of public footpaths so they do not become enclosed by future development.
Given that the evidence shows Barrowby has already met its housing contribution, the Neighbourhood Plan should now provide clearer and stronger protection for the village’s landscape and rural character. I would therefore encourage the strengthening of Policies 1, 3, 6, and 7 to ensure the western landscape, local views, and rural walking routes are properly protected.
Thank you for considering my comments.

Object

Representation ID: 4740

Received: 10/03/2026

Respondent: Lisa Morris

In response to the Draft Neighbourhood Plan, I am objecting to the current version and provide comment for this and what changes, if any, to the Neighbourhood Plan I consider necessary.

We need to protect the future of Barrowby. Enough is enough!

The official report (AECOM) shows Barrowby has already met its housing targets up to 2041; There must be NO MORE housing on greenfield sites unless there is a very specific local need.

The western side of Barrowby, a key feature of the Harlaxton Denton Bowl is elevated and gives our village its rural identity through access to the countryside; We need to stop the development of new housing to the West of the village to protect our countryside and views.

Our footpaths and views are what make Barrowby special. The plan only protects a few specific ‘dots on a map’ rather than the whole skyline. There is not a single ‘important’ view identified in the plan over the Harlaxton Denton Bowl; We need important views looking out towards our countryside and back to Barrowby from our footpaths and better protection of our rural public rights of way so they don’t just become alleys between houses.

Keep Barrowby a Village!

Barrowby is in danger of joining Grantham as its greenfield edge gets eroded by housing developments; We need a defined ‘Green Buffer’ around the village to protect our village boundary and surrounding countryside.

Comment

Representation ID: 4741

Received: 10/03/2026

Respondent: Mr Dan Beard

I am writing in response to the consultation on the Draft Neighbourhood Plan for Barrowby. While I appreciate the effort that has gone into preparing the plan and recognise that it contains some positive elements, I believe the current policies are not strong enough to properly protect the future character and identity of our village.
First, there must be a clearer position on housing development. The independent AECOM report indicates that Barrowby has already met its housing targets through to 2041. In light of this, the plan should include a clear policy stating that no further housing development should take place on greenfield sites unless there is a very specific and demonstrable local need. Without this safeguard, there is a real risk that additional greenfield development will continue unnecessarily, permanently altering the character of the village and placing additional pressure on local infrastructure.
Secondly, it is vital that Barrowby retains its identity as a distinct village. At present, there is a growing risk that ongoing development will gradually erode the countryside between Barrowby and Grantham, effectively turning the village into an extension of the town. To prevent this, the Neighbourhood Plan should establish a clearly defined green buffer around Barrowby. Such a buffer would protect the village boundary, preserve the surrounding countryside, and maintain the separation between Barrowby and nearby urban development.
These changes would strengthen the plan and ensure it truly reflects the wishes of residents who want to protect the character, setting, and long-term sustainability of the village.
Thank you for considering these comments as part of the consultation process.

Comment

Representation ID: 4742

Received: 11/03/2026

Respondent: Mr Timothy Gadsby

Number of people: 2

Barrowby has had considerable housing development over the last few years with it ongoing on at the moment! I find it somewhat ironic that less than 500 meters from the current development on Low Road Barrowby there is a large part completed housing estate off Dysart Road that is non complete and appears to be lying in ruins!
Enough is enough and there should be NO more housing on greenfield sites in Barrowby. Barrowby must be kept as a village and a defined green buffer is required for the village.

Barrowby is large enough already and is surrounded with (particularly on the South, West and North sides) with outstanding views and walks / footpaths and there needs to be specific wording in the plan that stops new housing in these areas to protect them and so they can be enjoyed for years to come. These became of particular importance during Covid and could be used and enjoyed by many people including a large amount of people within the town of Grantham itself as many live on the edge of the southern aspect of Barrowby in particular. There must be explicit wording that stops new new housing to the South, West and North to protect our countryside and important views.

Thank you for the opportunity to express our views.
Tim and Jane Gadsby

Comment

Representation ID: 4743

Received: 11/03/2026

Respondent: Karen Sterling

Number of people: 2

I welcome the work undertaken to prepare the Draft Barrowby Neighbourhood Plan and the strong evidence base that supports it. The following comments are offered constructively to help ensure that the Plan’s policies fully reflect that evidence and provide clear guidance for future planning decisions.

Alignment between Evidence and Housing Policy
The AECOM Housing Needs Assessment indicates that existing commitments already exceed Barrowby’s identified housing requirement to 2041. In these circumstances, it is important that the Neighbourhood Plan clearly reflects a plan-led approach to development.
Policies 1 and 3 would therefore benefit from clearer wording to ensure that additional housing development beyond existing commitments is only supported where it demonstrably meets an identified local need and can be accommodated without harm to the village’s landscape setting, character or separation from surrounding settlements. There should be no incremental speculative development on sensitive greenfield land.

Protection of the Western Edge
The reference to “land immediately adjacent to the Developed Footprint” is broad and open to interpretation. The Plan would benefit from distinguishing between areas with differing landscape sensitivity.
The elevated land to the west of Barrowby forms a prominent and highly sensitive landscape that is fundamental to the village’s rural setting, contributes to important long-distance views and plays a key role in maintaining Barrowby’s clear visual and physical separation from Grantham. Given this sensitivity, the policy framework needs strengthening so that residential development to the west of Barrowby is clearly resisted.

Landscape Setting, Views and Public Rights of Way
Policy 6 focuses mainly on mapped viewpoints, but the character of Barrowby is also defined by wider landscape qualities including skylines, panoramic views and the cumulative visual impact of development. Policy 7 should also provide stronger recognition of the landscape setting and amenity value of public footpaths, bridleways and the western green wedge.
The Plan should therefore be strengthened by recognising and protecting key view corridors and undeveloped skylines, acknowledging cumulative landscape and visual impacts, protecting the setting and amenity of public rights of way, and recognising the contribution that surrounding greenfield land makes to Barrowby’s rural character and identity.

Maintaining Separation from Grantham
Maintaining the physical and visual separation between Barrowby and Grantham is important in preserving Barrowby’s identity as a distinct rural village. The Plan would benefit from explicit recognition of this objective, potentially through the identification or strengthening of a green buffer between the two settlements in order to avoid gradual coalescence.

Conclusion
The Neighbourhood Plan as it stands is not fit for purpose. Several policies would benefit from clearer wording to ensure that the evidence is fully reflected in the planning framework. Strengthening Policies 1, 3, 6 and 7 would provide greater clarity and help ensure that the Plan effectively protects Barrowby’s landscape setting, rural character and distinct identity while guiding future development in an appropriate and sustainable way.

Mr M Sterling and Mrs K Sterling

Object

Representation ID: 4744

Received: 11/03/2026

Respondent: Margaret Davies

I am writing to you to protest about the recent planning applications. There should only be more building in Barrowby when there is a specific social and local need for it. Therefore, it is a strong NO from the inhabitants of this village. Also the views of the surrounding countryside need to be protected from money grabbing contractors. The view behind the church is spectacular, and the view across towards Lincoln Cathedral is also wonderful, and should not be spoilt by unwanted housing.

There needs to be a "green buffer" around the village to stop it becoming joined on to Grantham. We should not have to tell you this, you should be aware and vigilant about the protection of villages and villagers. I hope that my protest is acknowledged and taken note of. We vote for you at election to look after our beautiful countryside!!!

Comment

Representation ID: 4745

Received: 11/03/2026

Respondent: Christine Howard

I wish to comment on the above plan as follows:-

The official report (AECOM) shows that Barrowby has met its housing targets up to 2041 so the plan must clearly say NO to more housing on Greenfield sites.

The village footprint should not be extended to land adjacent. The plan should explicitly state there must be NO new housing to the WEST of the village in order to protect our countryside and important views which gives Barrowby its rural identity and access to countryside.

Barrowby is an elevated site and there are numerous important views over the Harlaxton Denton Bowl which need to be identified both looking out from Barrowby and back to Barrowby from our footpaths and give better protection for our rural public rights of way. They shouldn’t become just alleys between houses.

Barrowby has been a settlement of importance for 1000 years, being mentioned in the Domesday Book. So much history should not be allowed to be swallowed up in Urban development becoming a district of Grantham. A defined GREEN BUFFER around the village is needed to ensure our village boundary and the surrounding countryside is protected and preserved.

Comment

Representation ID: 4746

Received: 11/03/2026

Respondent: Lynn Carr

Number of people: 2

We understand that the Draft Neighbourhood Plan for Barrowby (the Plan) is out for consultation and we wish to make our comments known. In its current form it does not protect us at all from inappropriate development. In fact the draft plan cites land immediately ‘adjacent to the existing village footprint’ - this we wholeheartedly disagree with as it shows a permissive stance with which we cannot concur. In the light of the AECOM official report showing that Barrowby has already met its housing targets up to 2041 we think the Plan fails to take this into account and should, in fact, include a very clear “NO’ to more housing on greenfield sites and should restrict edge-of-settlement housing. We feel there should be a clear and explicit presumption against additional housing beyond existing allocation unless there is a specific local need that proves beyond doubt that the findings of the AECOM report were wrong.

We are also concerned that the Plan does nothing to protect the western edge of the village, an area with many merits. The wording in the Plan permits development in the village ‘adjacent to the existing village footprint’ - this is far too vague and is wide open for developers to exploit. In fact developers are likely to use this to their advantage. There must be explicit wording that stops new housing onto the west of the village. This should be so explicit that it cannot be open to misinterpretation.

One of the key features of Barrowby, and the reason why we took up residence here, is that Barrowby has a rural identity, particularly exemplified by the western edge and side of the village which is elevated; also gives access to the countryside; gives views to Harlaxton Manor AND viewed from this Grade1building gives rural views back to Barrowby. These views should be emphatically protected and we look to the Neighbourhood Plan for Barrowby to do just that and to protect these key features of the Barrowby-Harlaxton-Denton Bowl which has so many fine rural features.

We feel the Plan seems to downplay the rural aspects of the village, the very things that make Barrowby special to us. There are many footpaths giving access to the countryside around the village - an aspect that proved to be so very important to the whole UK population during the pandemic and one which we should protect when we are lucky enough to have it on our doorstep. We believe the Neighbourhood Plan should reflect this rural aspect and should safeguard the western edge of the village. We are highly appreciative of the views from the village when making use of the public footpaths: looking over towards Harlaxton Manor; the wonderful view from the stile at Surprise View; and the views of the Vale. Whoever would want to take a walk through housing estates instead of being able to enjoy a walk from your own house and into the countryside. Not only that, views towards the village are also important to its rural identify: when mentioning we live in Barrowby we have had many people over the years remark ‘is that the village with the church on the skyline?’…illustrating that whole skylines are very important. The lack of protection given in the Plan for the western edge of the village takes little account of these aspects.

We therefore need the Plan to protect the view corridors and to protect the village so it retains undeveloped skylines.
The Plan needs to provide protection for our greenfields and importantly a well-defined green buffer to the west and, indeed, around the whole village. This should be incorporated into the Plan in order to stop the erosion of Barrowby by more and more developments.

We left a town to come to live in a village and we want Barrowby to remain a village, with its own rural identity. We do not want Barrowby to be subsumed into the town of Grantham.

The Draft Neighbourhood Plan needs its policies strengthening to prevent harm to Barrowby’s western landscape and the whole village’s rural character. The Plan should give clear grounds to resist inappropriate developments that so many of its residents fear will happen unless the Neighbourhood Plan is strong, thoroughly robust and not open to misinterpretation. It should reflect the wishes of the residents.

We appreciate the opportunity to submit comments on the Plan and appreciate the work put into it already. However, we feel the Plan needs significantly strengthening and hope our comments will be taken into account towards a positive outcome for the village residents, both existing and in the future.

A A CARR
L CARR

Comment

Representation ID: 4747

Received: 11/03/2026

Respondent: Lisa Lynn

Number of people: 2

We are writing in response to the Draft Barrowby Neighbourhood Plan to raise a number of concerns regarding the recent proposed scale of housing development and the damaging impact it will have on Barrowby as a rural village.
The identified housing requirement for Barrowby is 167 dwellings up to 2041. However, this figure has already been exceeded by the currently approved development off Low Road on the southern side of the village (SKPR-272). As such, the village has already more than met its allocated housing need.
Despite this, there are multiple additional large-scale planning applications currently being promoted, including SKPR-327 for 455 dwellings and the recent application S25/2471 to the west of Grange Paddock for approximately 190 dwellings. The cumulative impact of these proposals would represent a dramatic and disproportionate expansion of a small rural village.
Crucially, the infrastructure required to support this level of development is simply not in place, and there is no clear indication that it will be delivered within a reasonable time frame. For example:
• Anglian Water, in its response to application S25/2471, has already highlighted concerns regarding insufficient capacity within the existing sewage network.
• The local electricity provider has also raised concerns about the lack of available grid capacity, indicating that a new substation would be required to accommodate the proposed scale of development.
These concerns clearly demonstrate that the village and its supporting infrastructure are not equipped to absorb such significant growth.
There are also strong concerns about the loss of Best and Most Versatile (BMV) agricultural land. In an increasingly uncertain global environment, it is vital that the UK protects land capable of producing food. Barrowby is surrounded by productive agricultural land which plays an important role in food production. Once this land is built upon and permanently covered by development, it is lost forever.
The local road network is already under pressure and cannot realistically cope with the traffic generated by hundreds of additional homes. Given the very limited employment opportunities within the village itself, the vast majority of new residents would be required to commute elsewhere for work, significantly increasing traffic levels and congestion.
Similarly, local healthcare services and schools are already operating at or near capacity. Without substantial and guaranteed investment in these services, further large-scale housing growth will place unsustainable pressure on essential community facilities.
Perhaps most importantly, the scale of development currently being proposed threatens to fundamentally alter the character of Barrowby. It is presently a rural village with a distinct identity. However, if these developments are approved, Barrowby will effectively become an extension of Grantham, losing the very qualities that make it an attractive place to live.
Large developments are often delivered gradually over many years, meaning that nearby residents are subjected to prolonged disruption, construction traffic, and a continual loss of amenity. This “drip-feed” approach can make daily life extremely difficult for those living in close proximity to the building works.
Doubling the size of a rural village without the necessary infrastructure, services, or amenities in place is neither sustainable nor appropriate. Barrowby’s appeal lies in its quiet rural character, which is precisely why many residents chose to live here. If people had wished to live in a large urban environment, they would have chosen to live in a town rather than a village.
For these reasons, the scale of additional development currently being proposed is excessive, unsustainable, and fundamentally at odds with preserving the rural character of Barrowby.
In summary, the plan should reflect the concerns above and protect the character of the village.

Mr & Mrs Lynn

Comment

Representation ID: 4748

Received: 12/03/2026

Respondent: Peter Smith

Number of people: 2

While I recognise the considerable work that has gone into preparing the Plan and welcome its intention to protect the village’s character and countryside setting, I believe several policies require strengthening to ensure they properly reflect the evidence base and provide consistent protection around the whole village.
Housing Need
The Housing Needs Assessment undertaken by AECOM indicates that the housing requirement for Barrowby to 2041 has already effectively been met by existing allocations and commitments. In this context, it is concerning that the current wording of Policy 3 remains relatively permissive and could allow further greenfield development. The Plan should include clearer wording that additional housing development beyond existing commitments will only be supported where a specific local need is clearly demonstrated.
Development Adjacent to the Developed Footprint
Policy 3 currently supports development on land “immediately adjacent to the Developed Footprint”. This wording is vague and risks being exploited by speculative developers seeking to promote edge-of-village housing estates. The policy should be strengthened to ensure that land outside the defined footprint is treated as countryside and that development adjacent to the boundary will only be supported where it is small in scale, demonstrably meets local need, and does not harm the village’s landscape setting or rural character.
Protection of the Village’s Rural Setting
The Neighbourhood Plan correctly recognises the importance of Barrowby’s countryside setting, including its elevated position within the Harlaxton Denton Bowl landscape and the open countryside surrounding the village. However, protection appears to focus primarily on the western side of the village. It is important that the Plan provides consistent protection for the rural setting on all sides of Barrowby, including the northern and north-eastern edges of the settlement. Without this, development pressure risks simply being displaced from one side of the village to another.
Important Views and Landscape Character
Policy 6 identifies a limited number of mapped viewpoints, but the landscape character of Barrowby is defined not only by specific points but by broader skylines, panoramas and the open countryside that surrounds the village. The Plan should recognise the importance of protecting undeveloped skylines and the wider landscape setting, particularly views across the Harlaxton Denton Bowl and the countryside surrounding the village.
Public Rights of Way and Countryside Access
The network of public footpaths and countryside walks is a valued feature of Barrowby and contributes significantly to the village’s character and residents’ wellbeing. These routes should not become enclosed corridors between housing estates. Stronger policy wording should ensure that development affecting public rights of way protects their rural character, openness and amenity.
Maintaining Barrowby’s Identity as a Distinct Village
The Plan highlights the importance of maintaining Barrowby as a village separate from Grantham. This objective would be strengthened by identifying and protecting a clear green buffer around the village to prevent incremental expansion and preserve the village’s rural identity.
Summary
The Neighbourhood Plan has a strong evidence base, but its policies require clearer and more robust wording to ensure that the countryside setting, views, footpaths and rural character of Barrowby are effectively protected. Strengthening Policies 1, 3, 6 and 7 would better align the policies with the evidence and ensure that development pressure does not gradually erode the qualities that make Barrowby a distinctive rural village.

Peter & Lesley Smith

Comment

Representation ID: 4749

Received: 12/03/2026

Respondent: Mark Orbell

I am writing to comment on the proposed draft neighbourhood Plan for Barrowby.

Barrowby has already met its housing targets till 2041 so additional houses are NOT required and should not be considered. Especially on Greenfield sites unless a very specific local need is identified.

There is a need to protect the Western Edge of the village from further development. The Western side is elevated, visible and gives the village its rural identity through access to the countryside. There are views through to Harlaxton Manor that would be totally destroyed by further development on this side of the village.

The footpaths and views around Barrowby village are part of what makes it a special place to live and be a part of the community within.
The Plan does not protect this aspect of the village. Only a very few specific points. The skyline should be protected and the important view over the Denton bowl. These views and aspects looking both away and towards the village should be protected. The public rights of way should also be protected in ways that they don't just become alleyways through endless new houses!

As the village expands it is in danger of becoming just an extended housing estate as part of Grantham. A definitive Green Belt buffer around the village should be defined to prevent this from happening. This would preserve the countryside around the village boundary.

Comment

Representation ID: 4750

Received: 12/03/2026

Respondent: Mrs Natasha Debenham

I've recently read the draft neighbourhood plan and I feel it needs to be updated as follows:-

Barrowby is a beautiful village with picturesque views and idyllic walks, we need these protecting. Barrowby should remain as a village and have a defined village boundary.

Our western edge needs protecting, this is elevated and gives Barrowby it's rural identity. There should be wording that stops new housing to the west of the village to protect the countryside and views.

The official report AECOM shows Barrowby housing targets have already been met up to 2041. We must say no to building on greenfield sites. Enough is enough.

Comment

Representation ID: 4751

Received: 13/03/2026

Respondent: Mr Gareth Debenham

I've recently read the draft neighbourhood plan and I feel it needs to be updated as follows:-

Barrowby is a beautiful village with picturesque views and idyllic walks, we need these protecting. Barrowby should remain as a village and have a defined village boundary.

Our western edge needs protecting, this is elevated and gives Barrowby it's rural identity. There should be wording that stops new housing to the west of the village to protect the countryside and views.

The official report AECOM shows Barrowby housing targets have already been met up to 2041. We must say no to building on greenfield sites. Enough is enough.

Comment

Representation ID: 4752

Received: 12/03/2026

Respondent: Neil Smith

I’ve read through the Neighbourhood plan proposed to cover the period up tio and including 2040 and whilst I support large amounts, there are some things I would like to raise.

Housing Development.
It is well documented that Barrowby has met its future requirements up until 2041 in line with the official AECOM report. This proposed neighbourhood plan runs to 2040 but makes little or no reference to this. Barrowby should not accept any further housing built on greenfield sites unless there is a clear and demonstrable local need for such housing.

Retention of the village status
The plan falls short of insisting on a defined green buffer around the village in order that Barrowby remains a village and not an extension of Grantham . As an example the current and expected development to the south leaves Barrowby in very real danger of becoming an extension of Dysart Road. This should be resisted at all costs – the A1 bridge is not a sufficient break

Views & Walks
Having moved to Barrowby in the midst of a National Lockdown due to the Covid Pandemic this topic is especially close to my heart. The access to open countryside and a vast network of walks and views around the village were one of the key draws when choosing where to spend the next decades. These rights of way need to be protected as do the views to and from them. The plan focuses on the internal views within the village and, with the exception of the view across the A52 towards Lincoln, never looks outwardly. With the village laying within the Harlaxton Denton bowl area the views surrounding the village are plentiful, yet not referenced. Harlaxton Manor and Belvoir Castle are two examples of views requiring protection looking out and Barrowby Church from the a52 is a welcome site on my return from travels. Villagers will have their own favourites but this section clearly needs some enhancement

Thank you for taking the time to read these comments

Comment

Representation ID: 4753

Received: 12/03/2026

Respondent: Mrs Molly Brown

I am writing to support the need for strengthening of the draft Neighbourhood Plan for Barrowby so that it properly protects the character, landscape setting, and identity of our village.
Barrowby sits within the distinctive landscape of the Harlaxton Denton Bowl and has strong visual and physical connections to the surrounding countryside through public footpaths such as the Gingerbread Way and views towards Harlaxton Manor. The Neighbourhood Plan should ensure these defining features are properly protected.
I would like the following key changes to be made to the plan.
1. Housing Provision – Barrowby Has Already Met Its Housing Requirement
Evidence prepared by AECOM confirms that Barrowby has already met its housing requirement up to 2041.
The plan should clearly state that further large-scale housing growth is not required and that development on greenfield sites will not be supported unless there is a clearly demonstrated local need.
Without this clarification, vague wording could allow speculative development proposals that are not justified by the evidence.
2. Protect the Western Edge of the Village
The western edge of Barrowby is elevated and forms a key part of the village’s landscape setting within the Harlaxton Denton Bowl. This area provides important countryside access and valued views from routes such as the Gingerbread Way.
The current wording allowing development “adjacent to the existing village footprint” is too vague and could allow housing schemes to expand westwards into the countryside.
The plan should include explicit wording preventing new housing development to the west of Barrowby in order to protect its landscape setting and important views.
3. Protect Important Views and Rural Footpaths
Barrowby’s countryside views and network of public footpaths are central to the character of the village.
The draft plan currently identifies only a small number of protected viewpoints and does not recognise important views across the Harlaxton Denton Bowl.
The plan should identify and protect:
• important outward views from the village into the countryside
• views of Barrowby from surrounding footpaths
• rural public rights of way so they remain open countryside routes rather than enclosed paths between housing developments.
4. Protect Barrowby as a Distinct Village
Barrowby’s identity depends on maintaining clear separation from the urban expansion of nearby Grantham.
The neighbourhood plan should establish a defined Green Buffer around the village to protect its boundary and surrounding countryside.
This will help ensure that Barrowby remains a distinct village rather than gradually merging with surrounding development.
Conclusion
The Neighbourhood Plan is an important opportunity to protect the character and landscape setting of Barrowby for the future. Strengthening the policies in these areas will ensure the plan reflects the evidence and the priorities of the community for the long term good of the village.

Comment

Representation ID: 4754

Received: 12/03/2026

Respondent: Chris Brown

On my own behalf I wish to point out significant weaknesses in the Barrowby Neighbourhood plan consultation response.

1. Barrowby is a village and need to maintain a distinct separation from Grantham. There needs to be a Green Buffer around the village.
2. There is inadequate protection of views and footpaths which are in danger of being lost through housing development. In particular views to the Harlexton Denton area from the village and surrounding fields and footpaths.
3. The plan clearly states the aim of providing housing for the needs of the parish but developments being considered are greatly in excess of the local requirement going into the future.
4. Roads and footpaths throughout the village and particularly of Low Road, Casthorpe Road and the High street are narrow and provide only single file space for pedestrians, children and cyclists. This already presents a danger. There is no provision or space for this to be mitigated.

The Plan must give emphasis to the above points and properly consider the views of the parish residents.

Comment

Representation ID: 4755

Received: 13/03/2026

Respondent: Bianca Spencer

I believe that Barrowby doesn't need any more housing developments within the village or even the parish. There is several underway and multiple in the planning stage.
Barrowby will simply turn into an extension of Grantham rather than a village, we need to keep some kind of green space around us to protect the village boundary, wildlife etc.

The local primary school is already at full capacity, residents who currently live in Barrowby aren't guaranteed a place. Barrowby pre-school has just announced that they will be closing down soon too. It simply doesn't have the amenities to cope with the current amount of residents, never mind 100's more houses.

The green space is what drives people to move and visit Barrowby, the majority of this is set to be lost for all of these new developments and all that will be left is tiny 'green space' and alley ways where beautiful fields once were.

Comment

Representation ID: 4756

Received: 13/03/2026

Respondent: Joe Spencer

I do not believe Barrowby can sustain any further housing development. Several projects are already underway, with more in planning, and the village risks losing its identity as it becomes an extension of Grantham. Protecting our remaining green space is essential for the village boundary, character, and local wildlife.
Local infrastructure is already stretched. The primary school is at full capacity, current residents aren’t guaranteed places, and Barrowby Pre-School is due to close. The village does not have the amenities to support additional growth.
Barrowby’s green spaces are a key reason people choose to live here, yet these would be largely lost to new developments, leaving only small, token areas where open fields once existed.

Comment

Representation ID: 4757

Received: 13/03/2026

Respondent: Leigh Bowman-Perks

I am responding to the consultation on the 'Draft Barrowby Neighbourhood Plan' as a village resident.

I acknowledge the work that has gone into producing the draft Plan, but in its current form it is not robust enough to protect Barrowby from overdevelopment, the loss of its rural character, or the cumulative harm from repeated speculative applications. Unless significantly strengthened, the Plan risks becoming a tool for developers rather than a safeguard for the community.

1. Housing requirement has been met – no justification for further greenfield allocation
Evidence in the AECOM report confirms that Barrowby has already more than met its identified housing requirement to 2041. In that context there is no planning justification for leaving the door open to further general greenfield development around the village. Any vague or permissive wording will be used to argue that “more” is acceptable, regardless of local harm.

The Plan must therefore:
• state explicitly that Barrowby does not need any further market led greenfield housing allocations to meet its housing requirement to 2041;
• include a clear policy presumption against new open countryside / greenfield housing outside the existing built up area, other than in truly exceptional circumstances where there is a clearly evidenced, locally specific need (for example for genuinely affordable or specialist housing that cannot be delivered within the settlement).
Without this clarity, developers will continue to submit large, speculative schemes on the edges of the village and argue that the Plan “supports” growth adjacent to the footprint.

2. Western edge and Harlaxton Denton Bowl – development should be expressly ruled out
The western side of Barrowby is the most visually sensitive and environmentally important part of the village edge. It is elevated, highly visible over long distances, and forms part of the distinctive landscape of the Harlaxton Denton Bowl. This landscape is fundamental to Barrowby’s rural identity and to the experience of residents and visitors using local rights of way.
The current phrase “adjacent to the existing village footprint” is dangerously ambiguous and would enable exactly the kind of western expansion that the community is trying to prevent. That wording must not remain.

The Plan should instead:
• identify the western edge as a landscape and visual sensitivity area where new housing development will not be permitted;
• include explicit policy wording that no new housing will be supported to the west of the existing settlement boundary, to safeguard the Harlaxton Denton Bowl, protect key views, and prevent coalescence with Grantham.
As someone whose garden directly abuts these fields, I am already experiencing the anxiety and uncertainty created by speculative proposals. The Plan is the main opportunity to close that loophole.

3. Views, footpaths and public rights of way – protect the experience, not just “dots on a map”
Barrowby’s character is defined not only by individual viewpoints but by the wider panorama over open countryside and the quality of its footpaths and rights of way network. At present the Plan protects only a handful of specific vantage points and fails to designate a single “important view” across the Harlaxton Denton Bowl, despite its obvious importance.

The Plan should be strengthened to:
• designate a series of important outward views from and back towards the village (e.g. towards Harlaxton Manor and across the Harlaxton Denton Bowl) and require development to preserve and, where possible, enhance those views;
• provide stronger protection for the setting and amenity of public rights of way, ensuring they remain genuine countryside routes with open outlooks, not squeezed into narrow green corridors between housing estates;
• resist any development that would suburbanise these paths, remove their rural setting, or turn them into estate cut throughs.
Losing the rural setting of these paths would permanently diminish what makes Barrowby special for both residents and visitors.

4. A defined green buffer to keep Barrowby separate from Grantham
There is a real and immediate risk that Barrowby will be physically and visually absorbed into the edge of Grantham if development continues to nibble away at its greenfield surroundings. Once that separation is lost, it cannot be recovered.

The Plan needs to:
• define a clear “green buffer” around the village, especially on the western and southern sides, where encroachment would most quickly erode the village’s separate identity;
• include robust policy wording that resists development which would narrow or breach this buffer, or contribute to the coalescence of Barrowby with Grantham.
This is essential if Barrowby is to remain a village rather than an indistinct suburb.

5. Infrastructure, services and delivery – lessons from other developments
Experience from large schemes across the country shows that communities are too often left waiting years for promised infrastructure, or see it diluted or never fully delivered, even when it formed part of the justification for the original permission. Residents move in, but roads, community facilities and open spaces are left unfinished or delayed to later phases that may never come forward.

On some well publicised estates, local authorities and residents have had to fight to get basic infrastructure completed, resorting to enforcement action or calling in financial bonds where developers failed to deliver what was promised. National reports have also highlighted that substantial sums agreed through developer contributions are not always converted into timely delivery of facilities on the ground, leaving communities feeling misled.

Given this track record, the Neighbourhood Plan must not simply assume that “infrastructure will follow”. Policies should:
• require that critical infrastructure (including safe access roads, drainage, walking and cycling links, green spaces and any community facilities) is tied to early phases and occupation triggers, not left to the very end of a build out;
• support the use of robust financial guarantees or bonds so that, if a developer fails or walks away, the council has the means to complete essential infrastructure;
• state clearly that large new developments will only be supported where there is high confidence that all necessary infrastructure will be delivered in full and on time, not just promised at outline stage.
Without such safeguards, Barrowby risks repeating the mistakes seen elsewhere: rapid housebuilding on greenfield edges, followed by years of living on unfinished, under served estates.

6. Climate resilience, flooding and nature recovery – currently underplayed
The draft policies under represent the capacity constraints and environmental responsibilities that should guide any future growth:
• Infrastructure and services: Existing roads, parking, public transport, schools, healthcare and utilities are already under pressure. Further large developments on the edge of the village, particularly to the west, risk worsening congestion, parking stress and access to essential services. The Plan should make clear that any new development must demonstrate that it can be fully supported by infrastructure and that schemes creating or worsening deficiencies will be resisted.
• Flooding and drainage: Large new estates on greenfield land can increase surface water run off and flood risk both on site and downstream. Policies should require rigorous evidence that any proposal will not increase flood risk and will provide betterment where possible, with a presumption against building on sites that play an important informal role in local drainage.
• Biodiversity and nature recovery: The open fields and hedgerows around Barrowby support wildlife and provide vital green corridors. The Plan should clearly state that development proposals must deliver measurable biodiversity net gain on or adjacent to the site and avoid breaking up existing wildlife corridors. Sensitive areas, including the western edge, should be recognised as priorities for protection and enhancement rather than development.
Without strong wording on these points, the Plan will not meet the spirit of current national policy on climate, flooding and nature recovery.

7. Cumulative impact and precedent
Finally, the Plan needs to recognise the cumulative impact of repeated edge of village proposals. Each individual application is often presented as “modest”, but together they dramatically increase the scale of the settlement, traffic levels and pressure on services, while steadily eroding the countryside around the village.

The policies should therefore:
• require decision makers to consider the cumulative impact of past and committed developments when assessing new schemes;
• make clear that previous approvals do not create a precedent for further expansion into the same or adjoining fields, particularly on the sensitive western edge.

On a personal level, my concerns are reinforced by the experience of my own children who purchased new homes on nearby new build estates (The Colleys and next to Poplar Farm School). They have endured years of incomplete roads, unfinished public areas and a failure to deliver the infrastructure that was promised when they purchased. My son’s property has recently been valued at 11% less than the sale price, showing how speculative edge of village schemes can leave ordinary first-time buyers financially exposed when promises of quality, infrastructure, and long-term value are not delivered. Some properties on these developments remain unsold or unoccupied, which strongly suggests that the pace and quality of delivery, including basic infrastructure, is putting buyers off. Barrowby must learn from these examples and ensure that any future development is genuinely infrastructure led, not left to residents to cope with the consequences of unnecessary and ill-thought through development and half finished schemes.

In summary, I support the principle of a genuine Neighbourhood Plan for Barrowby but do not support the draft in its current form. I urge you to:
• make it explicit that further general greenfield housing is not required to meet Barrowby’s needs to 2041;
• expressly rule out housing development to the west of the village;
• significantly strengthen protection for views, footpaths and the Harlaxton Denton Bowl;
• define and protect a firm green buffer to keep Barrowby separate from Grantham;
• embed stronger, enforceable policies on infrastructure delivery, flood risk, biodiversity and cumulative impact.

Only with these changes will the Neighbourhood Plan genuinely reflect local evidence, protect Barrowby’s unique character and landscape, and provide a robust framework for future planning decisions.

Comment

Representation ID: 4758

Received: 13/03/2026

Respondent: Andrew Foster

I'm writing to give my feedback on the proposed neighbourhood plan.

1) Given that in the community survey, the rural footpaths are by far the most used community resource, I would like to see more protection to the greenfield space around the village provided. With the repeated plans for further building outside of the current village boundary, we lose footpaths every time. In addition, the views of significance could be far more extensive and include the views experienced from these footpaths that are the most important and used village "amenity".

2) More could be done to remove heavy traffic from the conservation area, where buildings are not built with the same foundations as modern buildings. Whenever a lorry travels down these roads, the buildings shake and this is very slowly damaging some of our most historic buildings.

3) Without the definition of a green buffer around the village, we risk merging into Grantham and losing our village identity. Given that Barrowby has already met its official housing targets to 2041, we should be able to define this green buffer.

Comment

Representation ID: 4759

Received: 14/03/2026

Respondent: Andrew Cartlidge

Overall, the preparation of the plan is welcomed, and the work undertaken by the Parish Council and volunteers is commendable. However, several policies would benefit from clearer wording and stronger safeguards in order to ensure the plan achieves its intended purpose of protecting the character and setting of Barrowby.
In particular, the current wording of some policies appears open to interpretation and could be vulnerable to exploitation through speculative planning applications or at appeal. I therefore offer the following comments for consideration.
Housing Growth and Greenfield Development
The AECOM Housing Needs Assessment indicates that Barrowby has already met its housing requirement for the plan period to 2041. In light of this evidence, the plan should provide stronger clarity regarding the circumstances under which additional housing development would be acceptable.
At present, references to development “adjacent to the existing village footprint” may create an unintended opportunity for incremental greenfield expansion around the settlement.
The plan would benefit from clearer policy wording stating that:
• Housing development will normally be supported only within the built-up area of the village, through infill, redevelopment or the reuse of previously developed land.
• Development on greenfield sites outside the established built form will be supported only where it demonstrably meets an identified local need, such as small-scale rural exception housing or community-led schemes.
Such wording would help ensure that the plan reflects the evidence base while remaining consistent with national policy.
Protection of the Western Landscape Setting
The western edge of Barrowby forms part of the wider Harlaxton–Denton Bowl landscape, which provides an important rural setting for the village and contributes significantly to its character and identity.
This elevated landscape, including routes such as the Gingerbread Way and views towards Harlaxton Manor, is highly visible and forms a defining element of the village’s setting.
The plan should therefore include explicit recognition of the importance of this landscape and make clear that development proposals affecting the western edge of the village will be expected to demonstrate that they:
• conserve and enhance the landscape character of the Harlaxton–Denton Bowl;
• avoid harm to key views and the wider rural setting of the village; and
• do not erode the clear visual distinction between the village and the surrounding countryside.
Without such clarity, the current wording may leave this landscape vulnerable to incremental expansion.
Important Views and Public Rights of Way
The identification of important views is a positive feature of the plan, but the current approach appears limited to a small number of mapped viewpoints.
Barrowby’s landscape character is strongly influenced by wider panoramic views and the experience of the countryside from its network of public rights of way.
The plan could be strengthened by:
• identifying a broader set of important views, including views towards the surrounding countryside and towards the village from key footpaths;
• ensuring development proposals demonstrate that they do not harm the skyline or key visual relationships between the village and the surrounding landscape; and
• recognising the importance of public rights of way as rural routes, rather than allowing them to become enclosed corridors between development.
Maintaining the Separate Identity of Barrowby
The plan should also give clearer consideration to maintaining Barrowby as a distinct village settlement rather than allowing gradual coalescence with the urban edge of Grantham.
The introduction of a defined green buffer or strategic landscape gap around the settlement would provide an effective means of protecting the village’s rural setting and ensuring that development does not erode its distinct identity.
Conclusion
Neighbourhood plans play an important role in ensuring that development reflects the wishes of local communities while remaining consistent with the wider planning framework.
Strengthening the wording of the policies outlined above would help ensure that the Barrowby Neighbourhood Plan provides a clear and robust basis for decision-making and is less vulnerable to challenge through speculative applications or appeal decisions.

Comment

Representation ID: 4760

Received: 13/03/2026

Respondent: Mrs Bridget Wilson

Number of people: 2

We write to bring to your attention a number of points in relation to the referenced numbered parts of the BNP:-

CLARIFY
2.3 states that Barrowby is 2 miles from Grantham and references 'centre to centre'. We believe leaving it as this to be misleading; the reality is that the gap between the edge of Barrowby and the edge of Grantham will be reduced to barely 100m, from the edge of the Low Road development, over the A1 bridge to the start of Dysart Road. This itself already shows the erosion of the rural edge of the village to the south eastern side. It should be clarified.

CLARIFY
2.33 Relating to the bus service. As of February 2026, the Barrowby bus service ceased operating, with a temporary bus service currently in place only for 6 months. The policy ought to be updated to reflect this.

OBJECT/CLARIFY
2.47 and 2.49 Barrowby has more than met its local housing need, as per AECOM Housing Needs Assessment (February 2024). That Assessment stated that the housing need figure was set at 167 homes up until 2041 (paragraph 96); the Low Road development is already set to increase the housing stock by a total of 270 homes. The reference to future-proofing stock therefore seems superfluous since Barrowby is already up over 100 homes on the evidence-based figure. The wording in this section does not reflect this fact. (This is without taking into account the proposed allocated site off the Drift, which incredibly suggests another 400+ homes could be built within the village, almost doubling the size of it).

We should also like to draw to your attention to point 1.7, which (correctly, in our view) states that the BNP should be evidenced-based and supported by the community: the AECOM Housing Needs Assessment is evidence. However, there could also be reference to the Barrowby Action Group vote of late 2025, in which Barrowby Parish residents unanimously voted that the Barrowby Parish Council should oppose every large scale housing development in Barrowby. This shows that there is at least a majority of residents in Barrowby who oppose large scale development (ie developments of more than 10 houses). This is backed up by the recent proposed Grange Paddock development in Barrowby, which garnered some 500 objections to the planning permission. Accordingly, the BNP should more strongly reflect the community's clear views on development and use the evidence more strongly to support that.

Policy 1
OBJECT/CLARIFY
The language used in Policy 1 appears to be vague and permissive. It is at risk of being interpreted by developers as being widely permissive of any developments where sustainable development is sought. Should the BNP clarify so that any approved development must be sustainable, rather than it reading as though any sustainable development can be approved?

Policy 3
CLARIFY
2.23-2.27 relating to housing development: sets out important components of Barrowby's Green Infrastructure. Map 4 sets out the village's "open spaces". It states at 2.24 that the "open spaces and facilities are particularly valued by the community and contribute substantially to residents’ enjoyment of the place they share and, probably, their physical and mental well-being."
Policy 3 then at 6.13 provides for 'suitable site locations' for development: given the importance of 'open spaces', should the BNP clarify that "land immediately adjacent to the developed footprint" in fact should not include 'open spaces'? Could this be part of the 'green buffer'? It seems from reading the BNP that the preferred sites for development would be land to the east of the A1 and land already under development on Low Road. It would be useful to clarify this because on the one hand it reads that the BNP is acknowledging the importance of "open spaces" as set out on Map 4, but then does not seek to protect it from development within the current policy wording.


Policy 6
OBJECT/CLARIFY
Views towards/from the Grade 1 listed Harlaxton Manor is not considered to be an "important view" within the meaning of this report, which ought to be corrected. You will no doubt be aware that under the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, local authorities have a duty to consider the "setting" of a listed building when deciding on nearby planning applications. As this is the case, it seems logical and indeed necessary that this Harlaxton Denton Bowl view is protected, and in the very least considered an "important view" in the BNP.

More generally in relation to the BNP, it is of huge importance that the green spaces, Public Rights of Way and rural setting of Barrowby is preserved and therefore reflected in the BNP. Barrowby should remain a village; it is in grave danger of becoming just another suburb of Grantham and losing its rural edge and village identity due to the ongoing bombardment of planning applications.

Bridget Wilson & Stephen Wilson

Object

Representation ID: 4761

Received: 13/03/2026

Respondent: Paula Hayes

I wish to formally object to this application.

Over recent years, Barrowby has experienced a significant amount of development on greenfield land. According to the official AECOM report, the village has already met its housing targets through to 2041. There is therefore considerable concern that this proposal represents an over-concentration of development and an unsustainable expansion in a location already constrained by highway capacity, utility infrastructure, and statutory safety considerations.
The western side of Barrowby is elevated and highly visible, forming an important part of the village’s rural character and identity. It provides valued access to the surrounding countryside, including routes such as the Gingerbread Way leading towards Pancake Hill, with notable views towards Harlaxton Manor. Residents choose to live in villages such as Barrowby precisely because of this access to open countryside and landscape character. Further greenfield development would erode these qualities and result in the loss of important views and rural setting. It is therefore essential that the countryside and these landscape assets are protected from additional housing development.
The proposed scheme would materially alter the western edge of the village, leading to the loss of open countryside and placing disproportionate development pressure on a small settlement. This conflicts with the Local Plan’s requirement for proportionate, infrastructure-led growth directed toward larger and more sustainable settlements.
Local water infrastructure is already under significant strain, with frequent leaks acknowledged by Anglian Water engineers. Introducing additional demand before the necessary network replacement or reinforcement is secured would be unsustainable. Furthermore, no robust evidence has been presented to demonstrate that foul drainage capacity, GP services, or school places are sufficient to support the cumulative scale of development now proposed.
Recent construction activity in the area has already highlighted the severity of local highway constraints. Large construction vehicles have become stuck on narrow village roads, blocking access through the conservation area for extended periods. The proposed access arrangements appear to rely on routes that are unsuitable for heavy goods vehicles, emergency services, or a sustained increase in traffic volumes. This creates an unacceptable safety risk and, in planning terms, could reasonably be considered to meet the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) test for a severe residual cumulative impact.
In addition, several sites within and around Grantham have been identified as suitable brownfield locations for redevelopment, which would reduce the need to develop greenfield land and encroach upon the countryside.
Conclusion
Barrowby has already met its housing quota, and there are numerous brownfield alternatives available. For these reasons, this proposal represents unsustainable development and should not be approved.