Object

Representation ID: 4762

Received: 13/03/2026

Respondent: Alan Newcombe

Barrowby must stay a village, your destroying village life with all the extra building, enough is enough stop trying to destroy our way of life.

Comment

Representation ID: 4763

Received: 13/03/2026

Respondent: Patricia Scriven

Please note my suggested additions to the Draft Barrowby Neighbourhood Plan.

1. Housing development targets.
Barrowby Parish includes land to the east of the A1. This land is being developed now. Barrowby parish has exceeded the expected development burdens for a village. Further development within the parish and village is unnecessary and excessive.

May I suggest the following wording

“There should be no more housing developments on greenfield sites within and adjacent to Barrowby village.”


2. Setting of Barrowby.
Barrowby, meaning a village on a hill, sits atop a ridge overlooking the broad expanse of the rivers Witham and Trent valleys to the north and the Harlaxton and Denton bowl to the south. All the roads leading into Barrowby climb up into the village. Importantly these approaches emphasise Barrowby’s separation from anywhere else.
Barrowby is marked by a church spire seen from some distance away with only a few other houses visible. As you get closer, roads leading up into the village are enclosed by hedges. These pleasant approaches should be preserved. Description in Barrowby Conservation Area, SKDC.

May I suggest the following wording

“The views leading up to the village deserve protection as do the views from the village looking out over the adjacent pleasant countryside. All these must be included as separate valued views.
The paths and bridle paths connecting the village with the countryside provide character and a sense of place as do the fields adjoining them, so need to be retained.”

3. Preserving separation from adjoining urban encroachment.
Keeping a definite separation from anywhere else is essential to keep Barrowby’s village identity.

May I suggest the following wording.

“Continuity with Grantham in particular must be avoided by keeping a clearly defined area of open countryside around the village.”

Comment

Representation ID: 4764

Received: 13/03/2026

Respondent: Moira Clark

I wish to submit comments regarding the Barrowby Neighbourhood Plan.
The evidence within the Plan indicates that Barrowby has already met its housing requirement through existing allocations. Given this, it would be appropriate for the Plan to include stronger wording resisting further greenfield development unless it clearly meets a demonstrated local need.
Policy 3 currently allows housing on land immediately adjacent to the developed footprint. This wording could leave the village vulnerable to speculative edge-of-settlement development. I would encourage the council to clarify this policy to ensure that development outside the defined village boundary is strictly limited.
In addition, the rural setting of Barrowby should be protected on all sides of the village. The open countryside and public footpaths around the northern and north-eastern edges are important features that contribute to the village’s character and should be protected in the same way as other sensitive landscapes.

[See attached for further comments]

Comment

Representation ID: 4765

Received: 13/03/2026

Respondent: Betty Whittle-Baxter

I would like to comment on the Barrowby Neighbourhood Plan.
While the document contains valuable evidence, I believe some policies need clearer wording to properly protect the countryside around the village.
The evidence indicates that Barrowby’s housing needs have already been met by developments currently planned or underway. For this reason, further housing on greenfield sites should only be supported where a clear local need can be demonstrated.
Policy wording that allows development adjacent to the village footprint should be tightened so that it cannot be used to justify large speculative housing estates.
It is also important that the Plan protects the rural setting of Barrowby equally around the entire village, including the northern and north-eastern edges which contain open countryside and well-used public footpaths.

Comment

Representation ID: 4766

Received: 13/03/2026

Respondent: Mrs Lyndsay Sadler

I welcome the opportunity to comment on the Draft Neighbourhood Plan.
I note that I did not submit comments during the earlier public consultation stage prior to the Plan’s submission to South Kesteven District Council. This was largely because I did not fully appreciate at that time the significance of the Neighbourhood Plan and the important role it plays in shaping planning decisions affecting the village.
Since becoming more engaged with local planning matters through my involvement with Barrowby Action Group, and in particular through the recent planning application at Grange Paddock, the importance of the Neighbourhood Plan has become much clearer to me. Through this engagement, I have also become aware of what I consider to be a significant omission within the current draft Plan, which I believe should be addressed as part of this consultation.
In particular, the absence of clear recognition within the draft Neighbourhood Plan of the greenfield space on the western edge of Barrowby, has recently been cited by a developer in support of the argument that the land is not of particular importance to the village because it is not specifically identified or protected within the Plan.
In my view, this interpretation does not reflect the reality of the site’s amenity value to the community or its contribution to the character, landscape setting and recreational use of the surrounding area. It is therefore important that the Neighbourhood Plan more clearly identifies and recognises the significance of this land so that its importance to the village is properly reflected in the policy framework.
While the plan has clearly taken many years of work by volunteers and I commend them for their efforts, I believe several policies require strengthening to ensure the long-term protection of Barrowby’s character, landscape setting and village identity.
Therefore, I fully endorse the totality of points made in the report commissioned by BAG for this consultation.
In particular, I would like to draw your attention to the following four points:
1. Housing Growth – The Need for Clearer Limits
Evidence prepared for the plan, including the AECOM Housing Needs Assessment, indicates that Barrowby has already met its housing requirement through to 2041.
Concern:
The current wording within the draft plan is too broad and could allow further speculative development on greenfield land.
Suggested improvement:
The plan should include clearer policy wording that restricts additional housing development on greenfield sites unless there is clear evidence of a specific and demonstrable local housing need. This would ensure the Neighbourhood Plan aligns with the evidence base and provides certainty for the community.
2. Protection of the Western Landscape Setting
The western edge of Barrowby forms a key part of the landscape known as the Harlaxton–Denton Bowl. This elevated land is highly visible and contributes significantly to the village’s rural setting and identity.
Footpaths in this area, including sections of the Gingerbread Way leading towards Pancake Hill, provide valued access to the countryside and important views towards Harlaxton Manor and the surrounding landscape.
Concern:
The current policy wording allows development “adjacent to the existing village footprint”, which may unintentionally enable development extending westwards into this sensitive landscape.
Suggested improvement:
The plan should include clear wording that protects the western edge of the village from further housing development in order to safeguard the landscape setting, rural character, and important views.
3. Protection of Important Views and Public Rights of Way
Barrowby’s network of footpaths and the views they provide are central to the character of the village and its relationship with the surrounding countryside. This is acknowledged in the survey data collected for the NP but never linked to policy making.
Concern:
The draft plan currently identifies only a small number of specific viewpoints rather than recognising the wider landscape setting and skyline that contribute to the village’s character. Notably, no important views are identified looking out towards the Harlaxton–Denton Bowl, despite its significance. The only outward view currently recognised is towards Lincoln across the A52, looking North East.
Suggested improvement:
The plan should identify and protect a wider range of important views, including:
• Views from the village towards the surrounding countryside
• Views towards Barrowby from surrounding footpaths and approaches
• The broader skyline and landscape setting of the village
In addition, stronger protection should be given to rural public rights of way so that new development does not erode their character or reduce them to enclosed passages between housing.
4. Maintaining Barrowby’s Identity as a Distinct Village
Barrowby currently benefits from a clear separation from Grantham, with surrounding countryside forming an important buffer.
Concern:
Continued development on greenfield land risks gradually eroding this separation and could lead to the village becoming physically and visually merged with the expanding edge of Grantham.
Suggested improvement:
The Neighbourhood Plan should definine a green buffer or strategic landscape gap around Barrowby to protect the village boundary and maintain its distinct identity.
Summary
Overall, while the Draft Neighbourhood Plan contains positive intentions, stronger and clearer policy wording is required to ensure that:
• Housing growth reflects the evidence base
• The western landscape setting is protected
• Important views and public rights of way are safeguarded
• Barrowby remains a distinct village separate from Grantham
Strengthening these policies will help ensure the Neighbourhood Plan provides meaningful protection for the village and its landscape setting over the plan period.

Comment

Representation ID: 4767

Received: 13/03/2026

Respondent: Carolyn Baxter

I am raising comments on some of the points in the Neighbourhood plan for Barrowby that require more detail to ensure that the information provided in not open to incorrect interpretation and gives clarity for the village’s future.

The draft neighbourhood plan is to represent what the current and future residents of Barrowby need into the next 20 years.
The vision statement clearly says “….twenty years, Barrowby will be a thriving, eco-friendly village that balances growth with its cherished rural character, ensuring a high quality of life for residents of all ages”

With respect to maintaining rural character the housing (major developments) that has already been built on Low Road and further new major development currently under construction, are unfortunately in no way maintaining rural character. So far it is faceless, “me-too” housing that is actually detracting from the rural character of the village and eating up the green boundary that prevents Barrowby blurring into Grantham. These types of developments can be seen anywhere in towns across the UK and don’t add anything to the village character. The plan needs to be more robust in protecting the character and “Balancing Growth with maintaining character” the plan needs to ensure there is balance. Currently two speculative planning applications for more major housing developments are involving the village. One for housing off Grange Paddock and another for housing off Rectory Lane. These would similarly have a detrimental effect on the character of Barrowby and erode green boundaries on other sides of the village.
I am sure you are aware, residents of Barrowby parish have clearly voted on this matter saying we do not want any further major developments. Barrowby has met the housing targets and the neighbourhood plan needs to recognise this and clearly reject any more major development applications.

With regards to section 7 of the neighbourhood plan: Footpaths and green spaces and preserving and maintaining the existing network of footpaths and green open spaces. I would like to comment that this is what is required but more views need identifying and protecting in the plan.
High quality of life in a village setting to me means a safe environment; good quality housing with privacy; nice views; beautiful, safe, clean, peaceful surrounds with no air pollution. Residents and visitors alike enjoy coming to the Barrowby for the walks, the views and the tranquility that goes with this currently. The plan therefore needs to include protection of all the current open-views from public foot-paths so not only the view north from the Church across to Lincoln, but also other views need to be added, such as out to the West towards Harlaxton/Denton.

It is important that more details on these points are included into the plan.

Comment

Representation ID: 4768

Received: 18/03/2026

Respondent: Mrs Sarah Caunt

As a resident of Barrowby I wanted to write and tell you my views on the latest Neighborhood Plan that has been submitted. I have spent nearly half of my 48 years of life in Barrowby and I have seen more building the last two or three years than at the previous whole time I have lived here. I love this village because it is a village and not a busy town and when I am out on walks I feel I can say hello to most people and I recognise or know many of them. We have already had a big influx to the village and more on the way, in terms of housing. Anymore will significantly change the nature and culture of our village. The plan is too vague in terms of housing and needs to say a clear no, unless there is a very specific local need.
The current wording of the plan also does not specifically protect the Western Edge of the village, with views of the historic Harlaxton Manor, which gives our village it's rural nature. The current wording of the plan gives permission to build next to existing village footprints, which developers may exploit. I live on this rural edge of the village and we chose this location because of it's beautiful views and easy access to the countryside. It has been invaluable in times of difficulty for my own mental health and those within my household, particularly my daughter who struggles with social interactions and enjoys the quiet walks along the field footpaths. I would appreciate specific wording to protect this area, for the sake of the village, but also for the sake of the many species of wildlife that exist in this area and the historic nature of the view over Harlaxton manor.
Our footpaths and views are what make Barrowby special and why I have enjoyed living here over the decades. However there is no protection specified in the plan for these, except for a few limited spots. Not a single important view is identified in the plan over the Harlaxton and Denton Bowl. We need important views identified in Barrowby not only for us, but for those looking towards Barrowby, such as Harlaxton Manor. We also need greater protection of our rural public rights of way, so we are able to still access the countryside in the way many have enjoyed in decades gone by.
Many of us have chosen to live in Barrowby because it is a separate village and not a suburb of Grantham. However, it feels like we a being pushed closer and closer together as the edges of both are being eroded by development. As a village we need a defined green buffer around the village to protect our village boundary and surrounding countryside.
Thank you for your consideration and for reading my comments.

Object

Representation ID: 4769

Received: 12/03/2026

Respondent: Ms Karen Jessop

I have previously objected to the planning proposal for Barrowby on the Drift road towards Harlaxton. Now I understand that there is another proposal for 91 houses on Rectory Lane.
Most of the things I mention in my previous objection, also apply here.
Barrowby is a village and does not have the size of roads to cope with more houses/ cars. The sewers do not have any further capacity and the power infrastructure is already showing signs of strain.
Over 200 houses are already being built in the village, the impact of these houses is not known. There could be around 400 additional cars on the road going down into Grantham and in the village. It is impossible to accurately model the impact of the extra traffic. Any decision for more houses should wait until the houses are completed and occupied. Then the impact on the sewers, roads and power will be understood.
Barrowby looks out on the Vale of Belvoir and the approach from the Vale is of a lovely village on a hill. Any building on Rectory Lane will negatively impact this view, just as building on The Drift, will impact the views to Harlaxton.
I say 'no' to more houses and want my objection noted. I repeat that Barrowby is a village and needs to remain one in order to keep the character that the people who live here have paid to have. Please do not ruin our village.

Comment

Representation ID: 4771

Received: 13/03/2026

Respondent: Derick Hill

Having lived in Barrowby Village for 11 years, I am writing to state why Barrowby Village needs protecting for the now, and for future. generations. Barrowby Village has forefilled its quota up to 2041, for new houses to be built in the village. Any more proposed building plans should be shelved instantly. It is well known the infrastructure, main facilities, community services etc are not able to cope with such a demand. The pressure of the new houses already being built are going to put on the roads out of the village will be at a dangerous level. Dysart Rd, Drift, Low rd, Casthorpe, Rectory lane and the lethal slip rd A1/A52 are extremely dangerous, as not designed for such traffic. To ensure the village keeps it identity a green buffer needs to be created around the it. Barrowby Village should not become a sleeping suburb of Grantham with no amenities. If such a thing was to happen the future generations would have lost all the incredible views of rolling hills woodland plus the numerous historic and interesting walks. Not to mention the wildlife and natural habitats. Not everyone is equipped mentally or physically to live in high density areas. Let Barrowby Village be one of those areas that future generations can choose, as a possible option not to live in such a high density town/ city area. Once we loose all the amazing nature that surrounds Barrowby Village, it would be gone for ever. Please note it would be a very big catastrophic decision as future generations would be denied such an amazing heritage. Scientists are constantly stating.... nature, well being and mental health are all very closely linked and need fostering. In todays climate with increases in such areas, I advise you to take this important aspect into consideration and ensure Barrowby village remains a village with a green buffer around it. Please take time to consider the future generations and their future needs plus forward planning over senseless, mindless, greedy profiteers. Such people know they should be considering other options if they care about the environment and had done their homework relating to whether the village was able to support extra housing.

Object

Representation ID: 4772

Received: 13/03/2026

Respondent: Oliver Keeling

The neighbourhood plan is inadequate.

We as a village and also personally have had enough of the attack on our village. Every green space, field you want to build on… it has to stop . The official report n(AECOM) says that our village of Barrowby has already met the housing targets imposed on us. So there should be NO MORe The plan must show a definite NO to more housing in the village

The plan must use explicit wording to clarify the plan, and demand that there is no more housing in Barrowby. We must keep our identity and not be attached with Harlaxton , also the manor views needs to be protected. This Western edge cannot have houses built, the road and the infrastructure is not good enough. Maybe try driving to Harlaxton from Barrowby and seeing how two cars pass one another !

Barrowby was a beautiful village but all these new houses are impacting on the quiet enjoyment we should be allowed. This is supposed to be a village, not an suburb of Grantham, we need the green space to protect our village identity.

Please update the plan clearly to address the defects within it.

Comment

Representation ID: 4774

Received: 30/01/2026

Respondent: Greater Lincolnshire Nature Partnership

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Barrowby Neighbourhood Plan. The GLNP feel that it is important for all stakeholders to be involved in the planning process, as such we are keen to work closely with Local Authorities and communities to prepare local policy which achieves mutual benefits for nature and society while meeting the multiple objectives required by national policy and legislation.
The GLNP supports the Plan’s commitment to the natural environment and requirements for development to protect biodiversity. It also feels that the inclusion of Policy 7: Green Infrastructure, Local Green Spaces and Biodiversity is positive. The GLNP also welcomes the Plan’s reference to the emerging LNRS.
That being said the GLNP has two concerns relating to the Plan. Firstly, the Plan fails to reference Barrowby Grassland Local Wildlife Site. Local Wildlife Sites are locally designated sites which consist of some of the best areas for biodiversity within Greater Lincolnshire and they must be considered within the planning process.
Therefore, the GLNP feels that Barrowby Grassland should be included in the “Our Natural Environment” section Paragraphs 2.17 to 2.20. Equally, reference to Local Wildlife Sites should be included in Paragraph 6.56 and within policy 7.
Secondly, while the GLNP welcomes the reference to biodiversity net gain throughout the Plan, it feels that the distinction between the general requirement within the NPPF for all development to seek net gains in biodiversity and the statutory biodiversity net gain condition placed on development which are not exempt should be made clear. This could potentially be through a rewording of Paragraph 6.57.

Comment

Representation ID: 4775

Received: 09/03/2026

Respondent: Rosie Sleaford

I wish the following comments to be noted and acted upon by updating the DRAFT Barrowby Neighbourhood Plan.

1. Enough is Enough on Housing!
AECOM shows that Barrowby has reached the required housing targets up to 2041.

The Plan should also read:
Now that Barrowby has reached the required housing targets NO MORE HOUSING MUST BE BUILT ON GREENFIELD SITES.

2. Protect our Western Edge!
There has been no reference at all to saving the western side of our village, this MUST be addressed immediately.

The Plan should also read:
To protect the western side of Barrowby, there must be no building on any site outside the current village boundary. Our village is elevated and this area of beauty must be saved against any development now or in the future.

3. Save our views and walks!
Currently the Plan only includes views to the north of the village across the A52 towards Newark & Lincoln.

The Plan should show:
Views showing our important countryside from Barrowby to Harlaxton Manor/Denton Bowl AND in reverse. This will show the importance of the amazing landscape from our footpaths, views and walk ways, these must be protected and not seen through streets between houses on building estates!
We are NOT 3 dots on a map, we are proud of our existing landscape with wonderful views that should be shown and protected.

4. Keep Barrowby a village!
Barrowby is getting built ever closer to our neighbouring town, Grantham.

The Plan should provide:
Sufficient space between our village and Grantham to allow Barrowby to still be ‘recognised as a rural historic village’. There must be a Green Belt to mark the division of our village and town, also the village, A1 and A52.


5. Barrowby Action Group (BAG)
I wish to add that there will be an Update Report written by a Planning Consultant on behalf of Barrowby Action Group. I fully support all comments that will be covered by this document.

Object

Representation ID: 4776

Received: 11/03/2026

Respondent: Kyle Deakin

Objection to Greenfield Development within Barrowby Parish
I am writing to register a formal objection to any proposed greenfield development within Barrowby Parish. This objection is based entirely on the evidence, objectives, and policy framework set out in the Barrowby Neighbourhood Plan (Submission Version, August 2025), which has been prepared in accordance with the Localism Act 2011 and reflects extensive community consultation.
1. Housing Need Is Already Fully Met
The Neighbourhood Plan’s Housing Needs Assessment (HNA) provides clear and compelling evidence that no additional housing land is required. It states that:
“the current Local Plan allocation alone far exceeds the HNF of 167, meaning that there is little or no residual need for new housing beyond that already in the pipeline.”
This means:
• The Local Plan already allocates more housing than Barrowby requires.
• There is no justification for releasing further greenfield land.
• Any additional development would exceed the scale appropriate for a rural village.
Greenfield expansion in these circumstances would be unnecessary, unjustified, and contrary to the evidence base.
2. Protection of Rural Character and Settlement Identity
The Neighbourhood Plan’s Vision and Objectives make the protection of Barrowby’s rural setting a central priority. Objective 8 states:
“Protect our rural parish’s countryside, and the clear distinction between Barrowby village and the neighbouring town of Grantham.”
Greenfield development would:
• Erode the open countryside that defines the parish.
• Reduce the physical and visual separation from Grantham.
• Undermine the community’s stated desire to avoid being subsumed into “Greater Grantham.”
The Steering Group itself emphasises the importance of preventing unplanned coalescence and preserving the village’s identity.
3. Harm to Landscape, Views, and Green Infrastructure
The Neighbourhood Plan contains several policies that directly conflict with greenfield development:
• Policy 6 (Important Views) prohibits development that would “interrupt, obscure, or significantly detract” from key rural vistas.
• Policy 7 (Green Infrastructure and Biodiversity) requires development to protect and enhance natural habitats and ecological corridors.
Greenfield sites around Barrowby form part of the parish’s valued landscape and ecological network. Development on these sites would:
• Damage protected views.
• Fragment wildlife habitats.
• Reduce biodiversity rather than delivering the required net gain.
Such impacts would be contrary to the environmental objectives of the Plan.
4. Sustainability and Climate Resilience Concerns
Policy 1 of the Neighbourhood Plan supports development only where it contributes to sustainable development, including:
• Minimising resource use.
• Increasing biodiversity.
• Encouraging active travel.
• Supporting climate resilience.
Greenfield development typically:
• Increases car dependency.
• Requires new infrastructure with high carbon cost.
• Reduces natural drainage and increases flood risk.
• Consumes undeveloped land rather than reusing existing sites.
These outcomes conflict with both the Neighbourhood Plan and national policy.
5. Community Consultation Shows Clear Opposition
The Neighbourhood Plan was shaped by:
• The 2019 Visioning Event
• The 2019 Survey
• The 2024 Community Survey
Across all consultations, residents consistently expressed:
• A desire to protect green spaces.
• Concern about overdevelopment.
• A preference for infill and brownfield development over greenfield expansion.
Greenfield development would therefore be contrary to the democratically expressed wishes of the community.
6. Conflict with the Neighbourhood Plan’s Strategic Intent
The Neighbourhood Plan is explicit that Barrowby must grow in a way that:
• Respects its rural character.
• Avoids coalescence with Grantham.
• Prioritises sustainable, small scale, well designed development.
Greenfield development is incompatible with these principles and would undermine the integrity of the Plan.
Conclusion
For the reasons set out above, greenfield development within Barrowby Parish should be rejected. It is unnecessary, unsustainable, and inconsistent with the Neighbourhood Plan’s evidence base, policies, and community vision. I respectfully request that the Local Planning Authority give full weight to the Neighbourhood Plan and refuse any proposals for greenfield development.

Comment

Representation ID: 4777

Received: 11/03/2026

Respondent: Mrs Claire Rodgers

I’m contacting you to submit my comments regarding the Draft Barrowby Neighbourhood Plan. Some of the plan has good points but mostly the policies are weak which will enable further developments in and around Barrowby. This will, once again, change the character of Barrowby and not for the better.

Like many residents who have moved to Barrowby, I was drawn to the community feel and the abundance of rural walks on our doorstep. I observe many villagers walking daily in the surrounding fields and footpaths which is beneficial for our mental and physical health. However, the current policies in this draft plan are too narrow. I am worried that Policy 6 only protects certain ‘mapped viewpoints’, it doesn't go far enough to protect the views such as Harlaxton Manor or the overall impression the landscape gives. Policy 7 doesn't do enough to protect the walking of our local footpaths. I ask for stronger protection for our
undeveloped skylines and panoramic views, a defined "Green Buffer" to the west of the village to stop it from being built on and better protection for the rural character of our public footpaths, ensuring they don't just become alleys between housing estates.

Barrowby is situated on a hill and is visible for miles. The Plan employs vague phrases such as ‘immediately adjacent to the Developed Footprint’ which is too lenient. This would allow developers to extend the village boundary westward, damaging the countryside and scenic views. I request unambiguous wording that restricts new housing to the west of the village, except in exceptional circumstances.
The evidence in the AECOM Housing Needs Assessment shows that Barrowby has surpassed its housing targets up to 2041. It worries me that Policies 1 & 3 are currently too flexible; they don't clearly stop new housing developments on greenfield sites or at the edge of the village. I demand the plan should state clearly that there is a presumption against any more housing unless there is evidence to show more is needed.

The evidence demonstrates that Barrowby has contributed to the housing provision. The Neighbourhood Plan should now utilise this evidence to substantiate its policies. Please strengthen Policies 1, 3, 6, and 7 to ensure our rural character and western landscape are protected for the future.

Comment

Representation ID: 4778

Received: 13/03/2026

Respondent: Jan Hill

I moved to Barrowby 11 years ago, being attracted by the pleasant countryside surrounding the friendly village, with so many stunning views. When taking the numerous walks it is a pleasure to observe the wild life, wild flowers, the beautiful sunrises and sunsets, plus the views back across the fields towards and away from the village. Views such as Harlaxton Manor, different villages Grantham, rolling hills, fields and woodland. This rich landscape can be explored using the footpaths and local walks like Butts Lane, the Gingerbread Way, Pancake Hill, the bridal way from the Red Bridge on the canal up through the Jurassic escarpment around towards Harlaxton and the Denton reservoir to name just a few. It is our duty to preserved all these gems for future generations to enjoy. We have a friendly close knit village which has accepted our quota til 2041 of new builds. Like other villagers l understand new residential homes are needed but must NOT be at the cost of our natural inheritance. Once it is lost, it has gone forever. Please don't allow this to happen, as all that will be left is a high density slum as there are no jobs, prospects, infrastructures or facilities etc in the local area to accommodate all these houses. We are all aware what tragic problems such areas create so please avoid such crisis management, off the cuff irresponsible, greedy, thoughtless proposals and think of future generations and what their needs are. We are not just fighting to save the essence for our village but for the generations to come. Change we can accept, as we have done. DESTRUCTION of the environment is a different matter and needs very careful consideration.

Comment

Representation ID: 4779

Received: 13/03/2026

Respondent: Lincolnshire County Council

Thank you for consulting us on the submission version of the Barrowby Neighbourhood Plan.

We have reviewed the draft, and wish to confirm that with the exception of our comment relating to the position of the flood risk map within the document, our comments made at the previous stage remain.

Overall, the plan is clearly well considered and is in general conformity with the South Kesteven Local Plan and the Local Transport Plan.

We do, however, have some comments to make in relation to the Neighbourhood Plan:

Objective 3: Celebration of Barrowby's history and character.
Consider amending the final sentence to include "setting" alongside "character" and "appearance." This would align with well‑established planning language and better reflect the importance of heritage assets in their landscape context. Suggested revision:
“… ensuring that new developments contribute positively to its character, appearance, and setting."

Objective 7 and policies.
There seems to be an omission regarding the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) policies for public rights of way, which seek to enhance and protect the rights of way network. The plan should seek to create connections between paths to create a wider off‑road network and of possible align to the draft public rights of way improvement plan that is currently out for public consultation.

Section 2: Our Heritage
To strengthen the plan's emphasis on local distinctiveness and the character of the neighbourhood area, it is recommended that a schedule of non‑designated heritage assets be included, where appropriate. This would support consistency in how heritage assets are referenced across the plan and align with national guidance on the historic environment.

Paragraph 2.51.
While the final sentence of this paragraph is true, we have some reservations regarding its inclusion as it may receive pushback from some parties.

Paragraph 2.52.
Minor correction, amend to read “There is only one scheme of specialist …”

Paragraph 2.53.
Again, a minor correction, amend to read “is 158”

Paragraph 2.54.
Both figures provided are over 50%, is this correct?

Policies 1 and 2: Sustainable Development and Good Design.
The plan promotes sustainability and good design but currently lacks reference to the role of existing and historic buildings in achieving these aims – particularly through retrofitting. To align with national guidance and strengthen the plan's relevance to the existing building stock, consider including a short clause encouraging the sensitive retrofitting (or sensitive reuse, where applicable) of traditional and historic buildings to improve energy performance while conserving architectural character. This could be included in either Policy 1 (Sustainable Development), Policy 2 (Good Design), or within the accompanying Design Codes and Guidance.

Policy 5: Conserving Our Historic Environment.
Policy 5 takes a predominantly protective stance focused on resisting loss or unsympathetic change. While this is important, it could be strengthened by also encouraging positive, heritage‑led development. The following enhancements are suggested:

Add a clause to support development that sustains or enhances heritage assets and their settings.
Reference the importance of adaptive reuse where loss is proposed.
Encourage proposals to demonstrate how they respond to the asset’s setting, key views, and contribution to local character, and sense of place.

Consider explicitly referencing “sense of place” within either the green box policy wording or the justification text at paragraph 6.29. This would reinforce the value of the historic environment in shaping community identity and align with national policy language.

Policy 6: Important Views.
The map and accompanying descriptive schedule of views (1–11) are excellent, but most of the views seem to be weighted towards internal green spaces within the village. Additional outward‑facing views – especially those towards Barrowby from footpaths, rural roads, and the wider landscape – could further reinforce the rural identity of the village and its separation from Grantham, Sedgebrook, and Harlaxton.

Views involving listed buildings, such as Casthorpe Farmhouse or Barrowby Lodge, could be considered to highlight intervisibility and setting (if applicable).
A wider acknowledgment of kinetic views – where the experience of a view changes as people move through the landscape – would better reflect how character is perceived in real life.

Suggested addition to supporting text (following 6.34):
In addition to fixed viewpoints, some views are experienced sequentially as people move through the landscape. These kinetic or unfolding views contribute to Barrowby's rural character, reinforce its setting, and maintain a sense of separation from surrounding settlements.

Views, Ref1.
Is this not “from the north west to the village”?

Additional Comments
NSIPs and Strategic Infrastructure.
The plan currently makes no reference to Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects (NSIPs) or other large‑scale proposals that may impact the area. Although such development lies beyond the direct remit of neighbourhood planning, a short statement setting out community expectations for managing such proposals would be helpful and has been suggested for other NPs in the region. Suggested addition (e.g., in Section 6 or Community Aspirations):
Any major development proposals or NSIPs affecting the Neighbourhood Area should demonstrate how they have considered the character, landscape setting, and heritage assets of Barrowby. This includes protecting the visual and physical separation of the village from Grantham and other neighbouring settlements, and avoiding the introduction of urbanising effects into the surrounding countryside.

Grantham SUEs.
We would note that boundary of the Parish means that large parts of the Rectory Farm development, which is east of the A1, is located in Barrowby Parish — but for purposes of design, planning, neighbourhood facilities, ped & cycle connections we have been considering integration and connection of this development with the main part of Grantham — as it is in effect a SUE for Grantham and not part of Barrowby.

Finally, this is more of a formatting matter but maps 5 and 6 are currently under incorrect subheadings.

Comment

Representation ID: 4780

Received: 12/03/2026

Respondent: Mrs Fiona Barney

I wish to comment on the Draft Neighbourhood Plan for Barrowby Village, currently out for consultation.

While I support the principle of a neighbourhood plan and the aim of protecting the character of Barrowby village, I have concerns that the scale and pace of development affecting the village; particularly the conservation area, where the inevitable increase in traffic is not being adequately controlled. The village Main Street, at the heart of the conservation area, will be subject to a huge increase in through traffic unless some type of traffic restrictions are implemented, like an alternative route via Hedgefield Road and Reedings Road; especially for larger vehicles.

The residents value Barrowby as a distinct rural village, with a clear separation from Grantham. Large scale housing developments on the edge of the village risk turning the village into a suburban extension of Grantham. The Neighbourhood plan must place a stronger emphasis on maintaining a meaningful green buffer, so protecting the rural setting, and limiting the size of any new developments, perhaps to 10’s of houses, rather than the 100’s. This would also serve to mitigate damage to the Conservation areas narrow streets from increased traffic.

The existing infrastructure, particularly the ageing utilities, struggle to cope now. All the main utilities should be upgraded before any further development is permitted; water, electricity, gas and drainage.
There is no healthcare facility within the Parish, and the school is oversubscribed. Development should only proceed when there is clear evidence that infrastructure improvements will be delivered in advance (or alongside) new housing.
There needs to be a strong requirement for high quality design, reflecting the traditional character of Barrowby. All new developments must integrate with the surrounding built landscape and not threaten existing open spaces, within and surrounding the village.

The plan needs to protect the green spaces, wildlife habitats and countryside access, all of which contribute to the resident’s quality of life. All are currently being incrementally eroded by poorly planned developments, where the overall effect has not been adequately considered. The Plan needs to address this piecemeal method of development. Which, if allowed to continue, will result in our rural public rights of way, becoming alleys between houses with none of the countryside views so valued in this rural village.
The AECOM recommends 167 Housing Need Figure for Barrowby up to 2041. This has already been exceeded with the planning already granted.

A neighbourhood plan should give the residents confidence that growth will be carefully managed and that the unique character of Barrowby will be preserved for future generations.
Please take the comments above into account when examining the Draft Neighbourhood Plan for Barrowby.

Comment

Representation ID: 4781

Received: 09/03/2026

Respondent: National Gas

We write to you with regards to the current consultations as detailed above in respect of our client, National Gas Transmission

Please find attached our letter of representation.

Proposed sites crossed or in close proximity to National Gas Transmission assets:
An assessment has been carried out with respect to National Gas Transmission’s assets which
include high-pressure gas pipelines and other infrastructure.
National Gas Transmission has identified that no assets are currently affected by proposed
allocations within the Neighbourhood Plan area.
National Gas Transmission provides information in relation to its assets at the website below.
• https://www.nationalgas.com/land-and-assets/network-route-maps

Comment

Representation ID: 4782

Received: 06/03/2026

Respondent: Fisher German

National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) has appointed Fisher German LLP to review and respond to local planning authority Development Plan Document consultations on its behalf. We are instructed by our client to submit the attached representation with regard to the current consultation on the above document.

NGET assets within the Plan area
Following a review of the above Neighbourhood Plan, we have identified one or more NGET assets
within the Plan area. Details of NGET assets are provided below.
Asset Description
4VK ROUTE (TWR 001 - 001B): 400Kv Overhead Transmission Line route: COTTAM - EATON SOCON - WYMONDLEY 2

A plan showing details of NGET assets is attached to this letter. Please note that this plan is illustrative
only. NGET also provides information in relation to its assets at the website below.
https://www.nationalgrid.com/electricity-transmission/network-and-infrastructure/network-route
maps
NGET Electricity Network Infrastructure
The security and reliability of the UK’s current and future energy supply is highly dependent on having
an electricity network which will enable the existing and new electricity generation, storage, and
interconnection infrastructure that the country needs to meet the rapid increase in electricity demand
required to transition to net zero, while maintaining energy security.
In general, NGET does not own the land crossed by its overhead lines but has responsibility for
maintaining the equipment and safe supply of electricity. The increasing pressure for development is
leading to more development sites being brought forward through the planning process on land that is
crossed by NGET assets.
Despite this NGET is not a statutory consultee in the plan-making process but it is recommended that
NGET are consulted at the earliest possible opportunity in order that advice and guidance can be taken
into account on development near overhead lines, or wider policies that may affect the existing or future
supply of electricity.
With the above context in mind, the Neighbourhood Plan qualifying body and Council should ensure
that development proposals located near transmission assets demonstrate that they will not
compromise safety, operability, maintenance access, asset replacement or future network expansion.
The Neighbourhood Plan qualifying body and Council should safeguard existing and potential access
routes required for the delivery and removal of Abnormal Indivisible Loads (AILs) associated with the
construction, replacement and maintenance of transmission-scale equipment, including large
transformers at strategic substations and resist development or highway alterations that would
prejudice, constrain or render impractical AIL access unless suitable mitigation or alternative agreed
routes can be secured.
New Infrastructure
Currently there are no known new infrastructure interactions within the area, however demand for
electricity is expected to rise significantly as the way we power homes, businesses and transport
evolves. As the UK transitions towards net zero, fossil fuels will be replaced by increasing volumes of
low-carbon electricity, including from offshore wind and other renewable sources.
The UK Government has committed to achieving net zero emissions by 2050, requiring a balanced
approach to greenhouse gas emissions and removals. Decarbonising the energy system is central to
meeting this national objective.
National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) is delivering a range of infrastructure projects across
England and Wales to support this energy transition and ensure that the transmission network can
accommodate the rapid growth in low-carbon generation.
The way NGET generates electricity in the UK is changing rapidly, and NGET are transitioning to
cheaper, cleaner and more secure forms of renewable energy. NGET need to make changes to the
network of overhead lines, pylons, cables and other infrastructure that transports electricity around the
country, so that everyone has access to clean electricity from these new renewable sources. These
changes include a need to increase the capability of the electricity transmission system between
the North and the Midlands, and between the Midlands and the South. It is also needed to facilitate the
connection of proposed new offshore wind, and subsea connections between England and Scotland,
and between the UK and other countries across the North Sea. Taking this context into account, In
planning for the area the Neighbourhood Plan qualifying body and Council should:
• Safeguard all existing NGET transmission assets, including overhead lines, underground cables
and substations.
• Support future reinforcement and expansion, including works required for the Great Grid
Upgrade and other strategic national infrastructure projects.
• Ensure development proposals located near transmission assets demonstrate that they will not
compromise safety, operability, maintenance access, asset replacement, or future network
expansion.
• Safeguard existing and potential access routes required for the delivery and removal of
Abnormal Indivisible Loads (AILs) associated with the construction, replacement and
maintenance of transmission-scale equipment, including large transformers at strategic
substations.
• Resist development or highway alterations that would prejudice, constrain or render
impracticable AIL access, unless suitable mitigation or alternative agreed routes can be
secured.
• Encourage early engagement with NGET to identify and resolve any potential impacts at the
earliest possible stage of the planning process.
Protecting existing assets and enabling future network development will ensure that the
Neighbourhood Plan contributes effectively to national decarbonisation targets while supporting local
growth, resilience and energy security.

Comment

Representation ID: 4783

Received: 05/03/2026

Respondent: Environment Agency

Please find attached a copy of the Environment Agency's response to the Barrowby Neighbourhood Plan Regulation 16 Consultation.

A key principle of the planning system is to promote sustainable development. Sustainable development meets our needs for housing, employment and recreation while protecting the environment. It ensures that the right development, is built in the
right place at the right time.
To assist in the preparation of any document towards achieving sustainable development we have identified the key environmental issues within our remit that are relevant to this area and have provided guidance on any actions you need to undertake.
We aim to reduce flood risk, while protecting and enhancing the water environment. Our comments on this matter are therefore made solely from these points of view.
Environmental Constraints
Flood risk
We encourage all proposed development to be outside of Flood Zone 2 and Flood Zone 3. However, if development must take place within the flood zones, then it should be in line with the National Planning Policy Framework to ensure there is no increase in flood risk to development and to others as a result of the development. The Plan should state the importance of mitigation measures and flood resilience and resistance measures for new development, including an allowance for climate change. If Essential Infrastructure is necessary within Flood Zone 3 then the application must be referred to the Environment Agency together with a supporting Flood Risk Assessment, which demonstrates that the proposal will remain operational during a 0.1% event (2115 scenario) and that appropriate mitigation measures/flood resilient construction techniques have been incorporated into the development. The Neighbourhood Plan should also consider all sources of flooding. Within the section titled ‘Water and Flood Risk’, the Plan currently shows no consideration of risk from surface water flooding. Similar to fluvial risk, the site is largely at low risk from surface water flooding, however, there are small regions within the designated Neighbourhood Plan area which are susceptible to this type of flooding. Therefore, we advise the Plan incorporates a specific policy addressing development in areas vulnerable to surface water flooding

We would like to highlight that the Environment Agency is not the only consultee on flood risk and other Risk Management Authorities (RMAs) are also consulted to respond to planning applications, therefore the Plan should also note other RMAs. These include the Lead Local Flood Authority, Lincolnshire County Council who lead on surface water, ground water and ordinary watercourses and the Internal Drainage Board, which is Upper Witham IDB.
We note a main river runs through part of the Plan area, therefore under the Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2016 a permit or exemption must be obtained for any activities which will take place:
• on or within 8 metres of a main river (16 metres if tidal)
• on or within 8 metres of a flood defence structure or culverted main river (16
metres if tidal)
• on or within 16 metres of a sea defence
• involving quarrying or excavation within 16 metres of any main river, flood
defence (including a remote defence) or culvert
• in the floodplain of a main river if the activity could affect flood flow or storage and potential impacts are not controlled by a planning permission

Green infrastructure and biodiversity
We support the inclusion of Policy 7: Green Infrastructure, Local Green Spaces, and Biodiversity Sustainable development (Policy 1) We note criterion 2(D) of Policy 1 refers to the need of infrastructure to meet the community’s need for sanitation.
The Water Recycling Centre (WRC) for the Plan area is Marston. The evidence available to us demonstrates that the Marston WRC is near its permitted limits. Additional flows from new developments could lead to the works causing pollution of the receiving watercourse. Anglian Water Services (AWS) is legally obliged to operate within permit limits and the Environment Agency will take all necessary action to ensure that the receiving watercourse is protected. We also wish to highlight that the Plan does not seem to include a foul drainage strategy. The lack of a foul drainage strategy can lead to degradation of any surrounding Water Framework Directive waterbodies and as such we recommend that one is designed to best service the neighbourhood needs to deal with foul waters.
We therefore encourage the Council to consult with AWS about this as part of the Neighbourhood Planning process.

Comment

Representation ID: 4784

Received: 11/03/2026

Respondent: Canal and River Trust

Please find attached the response of the Canal & River Trust to the above plan.

We are the charity who look after and bring to life 2000 miles of canals & rivers. Our waterways contribute to the health and wellbeing of local communities and economies, creating attractive and connected places to live, work, volunteer and spend leisure time. These historic, natural and cultural assets form part of the strategic and local green-blue infrastructure network, linking urban and rural communities as well as habitats. By caring for our waterways and promoting their use we believe we can improve the wellbeing of our nation. The Canal & River Trust (the Trust) is a statutory consultee in the Development Management process, and as such we welcome the opportunity to input into planning policy related matters to ensure that our waterways are protected, safeguarded and enhanced within an appropriate policy framework.

Our waterways should be acknowledged within the policy document, as significant blue/green infrastructure, which can serve as a catalyst for regeneration; a sustainable travel resource for commuting and leisure; a natural health service acting as blue gyms and supporting physical and healthy outdoor activity; an ecological and biodiversity resource; a tourism, cultural, sport, leisure and recreation resource; a heritage landscape; a contributor to water supply and transfer, drainage and flood management. The waterway network forms part of the historic environment, the character, cultural and social focus of the plan area. The plan area is bounded to the southeast by approximately 1.75km of the Grantham Canal.
Based on the documents and information available the Trust has the following general advice, and the Trust considers that the Grantham Canal could make a greater contribution to achieving the objectives of the plan if the plan were amended as suggested below.

We hope that the comments provided are clear and helpful and that your next revision will address these points.

We are willing to continue to work with you, to meet and discuss these points for clarity and to seek to work together towards a high-quality plan area that relates positively with the waterway network.

Whilst we appreciate that the canal does not pass through the village it does contribute to the history and character of the area whilst also providing publicly accessible green/blue space that is enjoyed by the local community. By including reference to the canal within your plan, as you do on your website Parish Walks page, the history and future opportunities presented by the canal will be more visible to achieving your plan objectives.
The above comments do not prejudice any further matters that might be raised at a later stage as the plan/document emerges.

Object

Representation ID: 4785

Received: 12/03/2026

Respondent: Lynne Eizzard

The neighbourhood plan is inadequate.

We as a village and also personally have had enough of the attack on our village. Every green space, field you want to build on… it has to stop . The official report n(AECOM) says that our village of Barrowby has already met the housing targets imposed on us. So there should be NO MORe The plan must show a definite NO to more housing in the village

The plan must use explicit wording to clarify the plan, and demand that there is no more housing in Barrowby. We must keep our identity and not be attached with Harlaxton , also the manor views needs to be protected. This Western edge cannot have houses built, the road and the infrastructure is not good enough. Maybe try driving to Harlaxton from Barrowby and seeing how two cars pass one another !

Barrowby was a beautiful village but all these new houses are impacting on the quiet enjoyment we should be allowed. This is supposed to be a village, not an suburb of Grantham, we need the green space to protect our village identity.

Please update the plan clearly to address the defects within it.

Comment

Representation ID: 4786

Received: 02/02/2026

Respondent: Historic England

Thank you for consulting us on the Regulation 16 Consultation of the Barrowby Neighbourhood Plan.

We have no further comments to make in addition to those we made at Regulation 14 stage - a copy of which I have attached for your information.

Comment

Representation ID: 4787

Received: 19/02/2026

Respondent: National Highways

Thank you for providing National Highways with the opportunity to consult on the draft pre-submission version of the Neighbourhood Plan for Barrowby Parish Council. National Highways (formerly Highways England) has been appointed by the Secretary of State for Transport as a strategic highway company under the provisions of the Infrastructure Act 2015 and is the highway authority, traffic authority and street authority for the Strategic Road Network (SRN). It is our role to maintain the safe and efficient operation of the SRN whilst acting as a delivery partner to national economic growth.

In responding to development plan consultations, we have regard to DfT Circular 01/2022: The Strategic Road Network and the Delivery of Sustainable Development (‘the Circular’). This sets out how interactions with the Strategic Road Network should be considered in the making of plans and development management considerations. In addition to the Circular, the response set out below is also in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and other relevant policies. The SRN closest to the Neighbourhood Development Plan (NDP) area comprises the A1 and A52 trunk roads. The A1 runs north/south to the east of the plan area, while the A52 runs west/east intersecting the plan area.

Having reviewed the Neighbourhood Plan and its supporting documents, we note that the Plan focuses on sustainable, local growth to meet the needs of residents while protecting the village’s rural character, heritage and environment. It sets out clear policies for housing, design, community facilities, green infrastructure, transport, employment and climate resilience, in accordance with the adopted South Kesteven District Council Local Plan (2011-2036) and the NPPF (December 2024). The Plan is shaped by community engagement, highlighting aspiration for improved public transport, walking and cycling facilities. National Highways welcomes this approach as it helps reduce the need to single-person trips for short journeys on the SRN. Once adopted, the Neighbourhood Plan will become a material consideration in the determination of planning applications. Where relevant, National Highways will remain a statutory consultee on future planning applications within the area and will assess each proposal's potential impact on the SRN accordingly.

As the plan does not introduce any new development sites or transport-related policies likely to impact our network, we consider that its contents are for local determination. On this basis, we have no further comments to make and trust the above is useful in the progression of the Barrowby Neighbourhood Plan.

Comment

Representation ID: 4788

Received: 24/02/2026

Respondent: West Lindsey District Council

Thank you for your consultation regarding the Regulation 16 Barrowby Neighbourhood Plan.

I can confirm that West Lindsey District Council have no comments to make.

Comment

Representation ID: 4789

Received: 03/03/2026

Respondent: Witham Third Internal Drainage Board

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the draft Barrowby Neighbourhood Plan. Part of the area is within the Upper Witham IDB area and the Board maintained watercourses Foston Beck (29700) and Barrowby Drain (9701) area within the area. See extract below, maps and shape files are available on request.

[See attached]

The Board supports South Kesteven District Council Planning Policies.

Below are general Board comments for Neighbourhood Plans.

• It is suggested that the Neighbourhood Plan should support the idea of sustainable drainage and that any proposed development should be in accordance with Local, National and Regional Flood Risk assessments and Management plans. It is noted this is included.

• No new development should be allowed to be built within flood plain. The ‘Flood Maps’ on the Environment Agency website provides information on areas at risk. Also risk from surface water flooding should also be considered, information can also be found on the Environment Agency website. It is noted a plan has been included.
• In addition to Environment Agency ‘Flood Maps’ , the ‘Surface Water Flood Maps’ should be included and taken into account for the Plan and future development.

• Within the Upper Witham IDB area under the terms of the Land Drainage Act. 1991 and the Board's Byelaws (works within 9m), the prior written consent of the Board is required for any proposed works or structures within any watercourse within the District. This is independent of the Planning Process.

• Outside the Upper Witham IDB area under the provisions of the Flood and Water Management Act 2010, and the Land Drainage Act. 1991, the prior written consent of the Lead Local Flood Authority (Lincolnshire County Council) is required for any proposed works or structures in any watercourse outside those designated main rivers and Internal Drainage Districts. At this location this Board acts as Agents for the Lead Local Flood Authority and as such any works, permanent or temporary, in any ditch, dyke or other such watercourse will require consent from the Board.

Through the planning process the Board will continue to comment on the individual planning applications which affect the Board’s district, as and when they are submitted.

Comment

Representation ID: 4790

Received: 12/03/2026

Respondent: Natural England

Thank you for your consultation on the above dated 29 January 2026.

Natural England is a non-departmental public body. Our statutory purpose is to ensure that the natural environment is conserved, enhanced, and managed for the benefit of present and future generations, thereby contributing to sustainable development.

Natural England is a statutory consultee in neighbourhood planning and must be consulted on draft neighbourhood development plans by the Parish/Town Councils or Neighbourhood Forums where they consider our interests would be affected by the proposals made.

Natural England does not have any specific comments on this draft neighbourhood plan.

However, we refer you to the attached annex which covers the issues and opportunities that should be considered when preparing a Neighbourhood Plan and to the following information.

Natural England does not hold information on the location of significant populations of protected species, so is unable to advise whether this plan is likely to affect protected species to such an extent as to require a Strategic Environmental Assessment. Further information on protected species and development is included in Natural England's Standing Advice on protected species. Furthermore, Natural England does not routinely maintain locally specific data on all environmental assets. The plan may have environmental impacts on priority species and/or habitats, local wildlife sites, soils and best and most versatile agricultural land, or on local landscape character that may be sufficient to warrant a Strategic Environmental Assessment. Information on ancient woodland, ancient and veteran trees is set out in Natural England/Forestry Commission standing advice.
We therefore recommend that advice is sought from your ecological, landscape and soils advisers, local record centre, recording society or wildlife body on the local soils, best and most versatile agricultural land, landscape, geodiversity and biodiversity receptors that may be affected by the plan before determining whether a Strategic Environmental Assessment is necessary.

Natural England reserves the right to provide further advice on the environmental assessment of the plan. This includes any third party appeal against any screening decision you may make. If an Strategic Environmental Assessment is required, Natural England must be consulted at the scoping and environmental report stages.

Object

Representation ID: 4791

Received: 13/03/2026

Respondent: Katherine Kinnear

Please find my response to the Barrowby Neighbourhood Plan attached. I have also attached the Facilities and Travel assessment that were recently compiled as part of a planning application response. I believe they are very relevant to the plan and are detailed in my response document.

Introduction
I am writing to formally express my profound disappointment and significant concerns regarding the current draft of the Barrowby Neighbourhood Plan. While a Neighbourhood Plan should serve as a protective shield for a community's unique identity, this document, in its current form, is fundamentally flawed. It fails to accurately represent the rural character, heritage assets, and infrastructure realities of our village. By omitting critical geographical data, ignoring clear community mandates, and failing to address the cumulative impact of recent large-scale developments, the Plan—as written—is not only misleading but potentially damaging to the long-term future and sustainability of Barrowby Parish. It does not reflect the village I recognise, nor does it address the very real constraints we face daily.

Failure to Recognise Cross-Village Visual Heritage
My primary disappointment with the Neighbourhood Plan is that while the Harlaxton-Denton Bowl is given special attention, its specific relationship to Barrowby has been entirely overlooked. The western side of Barrowby sits directly within this bowl, offering iconic views of Harlaxton Manor and Harlaxton Village. These views are best experienced from the Gingerbread Way, a heritage footpath identified in the community questionnaire as a facility of 'utmost importance.'

Furthermore, the document fails to recognize the 'twin spire' relationship between our villages. The ability to see one church spire from the next is a defining heritage feature of Lincolnshire. This visual link, where Harlaxton views Barrowby and vice-versa,is not just a
geographical fact; it is a vital part of the resident experience that has been omitted from the 'Views' section.

While this landscape is mentioned in paragraph 2.21, it is inexplicably missing from the policy protections. I strongly request that the views of Harlaxton Village and Manor—visible from public footpaths and the sports fields and views from the footpaths back to Barrowby showing the church—be formally included (photographs from both directions taken from the public footpaths are shown attached). Without acknowledging this relationship, the Plan fails to accurately represent the character and heritage of Barrowby as we know it.

Infrastructure Constraints and Transport Realities
The Neighbourhood Plan fails to acknowledge that Barrowby’s historic character creates specific, modern-day design challenges. Our heritage layout results in narrow footways along all main roads, which directly impacts pedestrian safety. Furthermore, the Plan overlooks the practical realities of living in heritage properties; a lack of off-street parking makes on-street parking a necessity, creating significant 'pinch points' that are difficult for through-traffic to navigate. These constraints must be formally recognised to ensure future planning is realistic and preserves the village's functional character.

Beyond the village core, the Plan is notably silent on the impact of the A52 and A1. These major routes traverse the parish, acting as both a physical barrier to Grantham and a preventative measure against urban spread. However, they also present significant dangers. The A52 is considered so hazardous that local children receive free bus passes to school specifically to discourage them from attempting to cross it. This section of the Plan should be reinforced with crash data from the last 10 years to accurately reflect the risks faced by drivers, cyclists, and pedestrians alike (I have included a screen shot taken from
crashmap.com in attached).

To address these omissions, I have included a detailed analysis of Barrowby’s road and footpath infrastructure, completed as part of a recent planning application. I am prepared to reconfigure this data so it can be included as a formal appendix to the Neighbourhood Plan. This will ensure that our village’s genuine constraints are documented with evidence, rather than being glossed over as they are in the current draft.

Barrowby remains heavily reliant on car use due to a lack of local facilities, a fact mirrored in paragraph 2.42 of the Neighbourhood Plan, which notes that most residents commute to work. When combined with the dramatic cumulative increase in housing across the area, this has led to a record volume of traffic and car ownership within the village. This fact is overlooked by the plan. I have included an appendix from an official report included in a recent planning application objection which clearly outlines the lack of facilities in the village and the distance that is required to locate them.

Significant Omissions in Countryside Access and Heritage
Barrowby boasts an extensive network of footpaths, yet the most significant—the Gingerbread Way—is inexplicably omitted from the Neighbourhood Plan. Given that it is clearly signposted from the A52, this is a major oversight.

Community feedback confirms that residents view access to the countryside via these footpaths as their most valued local asset. To overlook our most important heritage trail is a significant gap in the document. I have included evidence from a leading walking website that highlights the high value placed on the Gingerbread Way, and I strongly urge its formal inclusion in the Plan.

Definition and Mapping of Rural Character
I am concerned that the village’s rural character has not been sufficiently defined or supported by mapping. While the mission statement identifies Barrowby as a rural village, it lacks the evidence to explain why.
Barrowby’s rural identity is defined by its immediate proximity to the countryside and the network of footpaths that provide access to it. Most homes are situated near active agricultural land or paddocks, and the regular presence of tractors and horses—supported by local farms and livery yards—is central to daily life. I recommend including a map of these farms and yards to properly illustrate and reinforce the village’s rural context.

Preservation of Village Identity: The Requirement for a Defined Buffer
A central aspiration for Barrowby is the continued resistance to 'urban creep' and the risk of becoming a suburb of Grantham. To protect our identity, the Plan should formally establish a physical buffer zone, supported by a clear map. Despite being a critical concern for residents, this issue is currently omitted from the report. I request that the document be updated to include further details on this matter, specifically referencing the local referendum held on this very subject, which clearly demonstrated the community’s mandate to remain a distinct and separate village.

Hydrological Significance and Headwater Management
While the report discusses climate change and flood risk, it fails to identify Barrowby’s critical role as a headwater. The Barrowby Stream originates here and feeds both the Mow Beck and Old Beck; therefore, drainage and development in our parish have a direct, cascading impact on flooding in the surrounding areas. This hydrological connection must be formally recognised.

Failure to Address Scale of Development and the 2025 Village Poll
The Plan fails to account for the significant scale of development approved within the parish over the last three years, including 1,500 homes at Rectory Farm, 290 on Low Road, and a further 227 on Dysart Road. This cumulative growth makes the omission of the October 2025 Village Poll where 98% of voters asked for the the Parish Council to Oppose all new development in the parish, particularly striking; that vote provided a clear community mandate for the Parish Council to oppose further development. By ignoring both the recent surge in housing and the direct results of the poll, the report fails to reflect the current reality and the expressed will of the residents.

Critique of Ambiguous Planning Terminology and Settlement Boundaries
The term 'land immediately adjacent to the developed footprint' is dangerously ambiguous and lacks the precision required to prevent misinterpretation or manipulation.

Barrowby lacks a defined central core; instead, its limited facilities—a pub and a village shop—are situated at opposite ends of Low Road. Suggesting that proximity to the existing footprint offers inherent benefits is inaccurate. In reality, the opposite is true: further
development creates unsustainable pressure on an already strained road network. This exacerbates accessibility issues for the entire village, leading to significant concerns regarding road safety and increased pollution from idling or congested traffic. This statement is misleading as it establishes a 'rolling' settlement boundary that facilitates encroachment into the countryside. Such an approach directly conflicts with the primary objectives of the Neighbourhood Plan, which seeks to protect the village’s rural setting, landscape character, and distinct identity.

I strongly recommend the implementation of a definitive settlement boundary for Barrowby. This would align with the clear consensus of the community, provide long-term planning certainty, and effectively prevent incremental expansion/urban creep.

Conclusion
In summary, the omissions and inaccuracies identified throughout this response demonstrate that the Neighbourhood Plan requires urgent and substantial revision to be fit for purpose. For this document to have any legitimacy, it must reflect the lived reality of Barrowby residents and the strategic environmental challenges of the parish.

I strongly demand that the Plan be updated to include the following as formal appendices:
● The independent analysis of the road and footpath network to provide an accurate baseline of our infrastructure constraints.
● The official report outlining the lack of local facilities and the resulting distances required for basic services.
● Comprehensive mapping of the village’s rural assets (farms/yards) and the critical hydrological headwater connections.

Without these essential evidence bases and the inclusion of the community’s mandate regarding settlement boundaries and development, this Plan will fail to protect Barrowby from 'urban creep' and will instead facilitate the erosion of our village's distinct identity.

Comment

Representation ID: 4792

Received: 13/03/2026

Respondent: Barrowby Action Group

I am writing on behalf of Barrowby Action Group, to provide their comments and representations to the Regulation 16 Consultation in respect of the Draft Barrowby Neighbourhood Plan.

[See attached]

Comment

Representation ID: 4806

Received: 12/03/2026

Respondent: South Kesteven District Council

Please see attached for SKDC Planning Policy's response to Barrowby Draft Neighbourhood Plan