Support

Representation ID: 154

Received: 09/03/2024

Respondent: Mrs Marie Jackson

Whilst I support the proposal, I question why the word 'should' is used rather that 'will' or 'must'.

Object

Representation ID: 1069

Received: 23/04/2024

Respondent: Dr Ray Butler

Would be better to leave it as green space.

Object

Representation ID: 1340

Received: 25/04/2024

Respondent: Mr Nigel Percy

Development of the eastern section of the Barracks will remove 150 hectares of trees which represents 3 and half years of trees planted by LCC. Where will the land be found to replant this vast area of 67,0000 trees? Part of the land by the Driving Test Centre is contaminated with Asbestos and possibly other unknown compounds. Who will be responsible for cleaning this land and how safe will the local residents be in the future? The dangerous junction on High Dike A52 and B6403 will see increased traffic including a footpath access over the junction, a recipe for disaster.

Object

Representation ID: 1350

Received: 25/04/2024

Respondent: Mr Nigel Percy

This development must be scaled back to preserve the woodland and open spaces up to Somerby Hill roundabout and northwards towards Turnor Road. Development should be restricted to the extent of the barrack buildings and immediate area. The Salters Way, an ancient/Roman Road, runs across this site between Horbling Fen and Six Hills in Leicestershire and on to Droitwich. How does the destruction of 150ha of woodland contribute towards carbon net zero? This should be a natural open space resource for people to enjoy, an escape from Grantham in Grantham. The development of SKPR-278 (GR3-H1) Spitalgate Heath and SKPR-65 (GR3-H4) PWG Barracks, total 7,700 units, will have a severe impact of the infrastructure at Bridge End Road, London Road and Springfield Road. These are already congested with local traffic accessing Aldi, Sainsburys as well as the fast food facilities located at the intersection of A52 and B1174 even with the GSRR in operation.

Object

Representation ID: 1415

Received: 25/04/2024

Respondent: The Woodland Trust

The Woodland Trust does not object to the principle of development on this site. We object to the scale of development envisaged in this policy, of up to 3,500 – 4,000 dwellings requiring loss of 45.5ha of woodland on site, some 60% of the total woodland and 80-100% of the new planting undertaken by the Trust.

We ask that the policy be amended to require a revised master plan with stronger focus on tree retention, a site-wide canopy cover target of 30% and compensation for any woodland loss through woodland creation to buffer and link nearby fragments of ancient woodland.

Object

Representation ID: 1518

Received: 17/04/2024

Respondent: National Trust

Whilst comments are offered on some areas of allocation policy wording. The National Trust is currently neither for nor against these specific proposed allocations in principle. It is acknowledged It is noted that this strategic mixed-use allocation will come forward through a comprehensive, masterplanned approach. A range of supporting criteria is detailed in policy wording. Northern areas of this proposed allocation may relate to the setting of Belton.Therefore, in the supporting evidence criteria (i-vi) we request that wording is included, perhaps in relation to criteria iv, to the effect of: ‘Response to the locality’s historic environment and external heritage assets (including Belton House and Registered Park and Garden), incorporating an integrated assessment of their significance and related setting.’ Also, words the effect of:
‘The development proposal must take into account the Belton House Park Setting Study in Policy GR1’. This aligns with proposed allocation SKPR-57 and allows for full consideration of Belton’s setting at the masterplanning stage. We would also welcome refence to the avoidance of tall buildings, appropriate massing, and the use of landscape buffers (including to the north of the site)/green infrastructure to help break up potential development bulk.

Object

Representation ID: 1636

Received: 24/04/2024

Respondent: Sports England

This site contains sports facilities which would either need to be retained or replaced as part of any redevelopment proposal. The retention of the sports facility may impact on the number of dwellings that could be constructed at the site.

g) - There is a need for the development to provide new sports facilities and playing fields within the site which should be informed by the production of a Sports Feasibility Report. This report will establish the level and nature of on-site and off-site provision required. This report would be informed by the Playing Pitch Strategy.

As South Kesteven District will soon have an up-to-date Playing Pitch Strategy the Council can also use Sport England’s Playing Pitch Calculator and Sport England’s Sports Facility Calculator to calculate off-site contributions into sport and recreation because of the additional population generated by this proposed site.

Support

Representation ID: 1720

Received: 25/04/2024

Respondent: Historic England

criteria iv) is welcomed.

Object

Representation ID: 1802

Received: 25/04/2024

Respondent: Lincolnshire Wildlife Trust

Proposed Mixed-Use Allocation SKPR65 is adjacent to Cold Harbour Road Verges, Cold Harbour Road Verges East and Blue Harbour Road Verges. The site is also near to Ropsley Rise Wood, Old Somerby to Ropsley Rise Wood Road Verges.
We wish to see any associated applications provide measures to reduce any potential impacts on this sensitive site, as well as opportunities to integrate them into the recovery of the local environment by securing management for the LWSs if presently not under positive management and through building nature corridors within development between such sites - SKPR-278, SKPR-65, and SKPR-262.

Object

Representation ID: 1962

Received: 22/04/2024

Respondent: Natural England

We would reiterate the importance of establishing a connected network of high quality green infrastructure at the earliest stage of the planning process.

Support

Representation ID: 2054

Received: 22/04/2024

Respondent: Defence Infrastructure Organisation

Agent: Fisher German

The DIO fully supports the continued identification of its land interests at Prince William of Gloucester Barracks, Grantham, as a suitable site for strategic development.
The proposed amendment to the Policy to incorporate the employment generating uses and reflect the mixed-use nature of the site is supported.

Requested policy amendments
• Indicative Unit Numbers of 3,000 dwellings (approx. 1,745 anticipated to be constructed by 2041) including employment generating uses of 2.5 hectares.
And:
• New employment generating uses of approximately 2.5 hectares to be located within the sustainable community and to ensure compatibility with surrounding residential areas.
And:
• The updated requirement to include a Minerals Assessment is noted. However, due to the proximity of existing residential development this would restrict significantly where on the site mineral extraction could take place reducing the scale of any extraction to that which is not commercially viable.
And:
• Delete criteria vi.

Object

Representation ID: 2111

Received: 25/04/2024

Respondent: Buckminster

Suggests changes to the wording of the proposed policy.

Object

Representation ID: 2141

Received: 24/04/2024

Respondent: Greater Lincolnshire Nature Partnership, Natural England and Lincolnshire Wildlife Trust

It has been noted that this development allocations has the potential to adversely impact Local Wildlife Sites. This site is adjacent to Cold Harbour Road Verges (& East) LWS and Blue Harbour Road Verges LWS any development must be designed in a way which avoids adverse impacts on these sites.

Object

Representation ID: 2309

Received: 23/04/2024

Respondent: Department for Education

The site allocation Prince William of Gloucester Barracks (SKPR -65 (GR3 -H1)), and/or associated safeguarding policies should also seek to clarify requirements for the delivery of new education infrastructure, including when it should be delivered to support housing growth, the minimum site area required, any preferred site characteristics, and any requirements for safeguarding additional land for future expansion where need and demand indicates this might be necessary. Establishing these requirements within the plan is particularly important for securing sites at an appropriate value when additional land or standalone sites for schools need to be purchased, as DfE ‘Basic Need’ funding allocations do not factor in the costs of site acquisition.

Support

Representation ID: 2329

Received: 23/04/2024

Respondent: National Highways

Policy GR3-H4 sets out the requirements for the Prince William of Gloucester Barracks mixed use site which is expected to deliver 3,500 – 4,000 homes (approx. 1,745 homes and 8 hectares of employment across this Plan period).
In respect of this policy, we would welcome the inclusion of a policy point similar to point a. of GR3-H1 (Spitalgate Heath) which sets out that incremental full applications will not be accepted and that an Outline or Hybrid application will be necessary for the whole site. National Highways considers this will be necessary to identify the cumulative traffic and transport implications of the site and the highways infrastructure necessary to accommodate it. We welcome point b. of this policy which acknowledges that mitigation to the SRN may be required.

Support

Representation ID: 2362

Received: 25/04/2024

Respondent: Defence Infrastructure Organisation Safeguarding Team

- Eastern WAM Network safeguarding criteria trigger
-Any development or change of use will trigger statutory consultation requirement
- Development of, or exceeding, 45.7m in height above ground level will trigger statutory consultation requirement,
- Development that might result in the creation of attractant environments for large and flocking bird species hazardous to aviation, including the potential for an environment attractive to hazardous bird species to be formed temporarily

Object

Representation ID: 2433

Received: 25/04/2024

Respondent: The Thompson Trust and The Beddows Trust

Agent: Edmond Harcourt Limited

Notes that two of the housing allocations – SKPR-278 (Spittlegate Heath) and SKPR-65 (Prince William of Gloucester Barracks) seek to deliver 1,350 and 1,735 homes respectively by 2041. These are large sustainable urban extensions and evidence of the delivery of such developments suggests that it takes 8-10 years from allocation to first completion. There is therefore a degree of unfounded optimism that these two sites will deliver 3,095 dwellings by 2041.

Object

Representation ID: 2478

Received: 25/04/2024

Respondent: Cllr Charmaine Morgan

The Barracks hosts thousands of military personnel as they train every year. These are supported by a team of MOD specialists at the Prince William Duke of Gloucester Barracks.
SKDC should oppose the development of this site which has historic and current military importance and an important source of employment and visitors to Grantham and surrounding area.