Support

Representation ID: 163

Received: 09/03/2024

Respondent: Mrs Marie Jackson

... So long as this beautiful town retains its character - not least because of income generated from it being a location site.

Object

Representation ID: 276

Received: 18/03/2024

Respondent: Miss Carys Vaughan

Stamford North - the original plan was for 1300 houses. The additional 50 appears to be as a result of the removal of the bund. This should not happen as it was not agreed in the previous plan and is unconscionable for the council to consider given the sound and acoustic impact.

Object

Representation ID: 380

Received: 05/04/2024

Respondent: Mrs Laura Upson

Land at Borderville including pitches, car park and the acoustic bund wasn't in the Local plan before and it isn't included in the official boundary now. The number of houses has increased from the 1300 allocation. There appears to be no consideration given to the acoustic damage on human and environmental welfare on removal of the bund. The road should be at the northern extent in line with future expansion plans. Not enough infra to support. Dr, A1, school places at the limit. Claiming biodiversity net gain on existing green land is inaccurate. Not a sustainable development in any way.

Object

Representation ID: 390

Received: 05/04/2024

Respondent: Mr Andy Gillard

The proposed Link Road proposal is in the wrong position. It should be placed at the Northern edge of the development
1. Placing a busy link road through the middle of a huge housing estate is unsafe and unhealthy. on the 9th October 2023 there was a serious road accident on the Ryhall Road at Borderville where a south bound vehicle left the carriageway and careered into the corner side of the end property causing significant damage to both the property, vehicle and occupant. A roundabout at that point would naturally slow traffic and thus avoid serious injury to all

Object

Representation ID: 391

Received: 05/04/2024

Respondent: Mr PHILIP WILLIAMS

The road thru this estate will be a rat run RDC will get the revenue from this development but in reality Stamford will get all the adverse effects this development would bring .

Object

Representation ID: 491

Received: 15/04/2024

Respondent: Miss Carys Vaughan

Stamford North - stick to the original 1300 houses and ensure bund is retained (not replaced with housing)

Object

Representation ID: 540

Received: 16/04/2024

Respondent: Mrs Kate Leeks

Regarding Stamford's 1350 on Stamford North, these houses are being built on green space which will have a detrimental effect on the wellbeing of the community & a major loss of biodiversity. If Stamford has a population of approx 20,000 people, 1350 houses + 650 from Quarry farm, this has got to be an increase of, at least 4,000 people! How is Stamford supposed to cope with that many extra people, when the town is already struggling with traffic, secondary schools,

Object

Representation ID: 556

Received: 16/04/2024

Respondent: Dr John Deag

SKPR-281 (Stamford North) should not be built. The development is unsustainable; see my full comments. The area for the Stamford North development and the proposed link road were included in the previous SKDC Local Plan and approved by the Inspector. But it is now clear that the impact on Stamford was grossly underestimated then. While the meeting with the Inspector in Stamford touched on some of the issues it did not envisage moving the road to the south of Borderville and did not adequately consider the consequences of the large increase in the population of Stamford which is now proposed.

Object

Representation ID: 557

Received: 16/04/2024

Respondent: Dr John Deag

SSKPR-281 Stamford North should not be built; the development is unsustainable. The area for the Stamford North development and the proposed link road were included in the previous SKDC Local Plan and approved by the Inspector. But it is now clear that the impact on the town of the Stamford North Development was grossly underestimated. While the meeting with the Inspector in Stamford touched on some issues it did not envisage moving the road to the south of Borderville and did not adequately consider the consequences of the large increase in the population of Stamford which is now proposed.

Object

Representation ID: 738

Received: 19/04/2024

Respondent: Mr Barry Collins

Stamford North the bund was put in place so that the football ground could get permission for planning to move there , now the same developer wants to remove it. The bund is there for a reason and should be left alone.

Object

Representation ID: 741

Received: 20/04/2024

Respondent: Miss Helen Mulcahy

This development will have a negative effect on Stamford. No infrastructure to support it, traffic chaos and destruction of a green space with a thriving environment full of wildlife.

Object

Representation ID: 753

Received: 20/04/2024

Respondent: Jane Bateman

I note that the number of dwellings has increased to 1350.
The removal of the bund is totally wrong - it was one of the conditions that Borderville sports centre was allowed to be built and so should not be removed.
With a development of this size and the 650 houses proposed on Quarry Farm the infrastructure must be included.
There must be public transport provision due to the increased number of cars / vehicles a development of this size will generate on Stamford's already congested roads.

Support

Representation ID: 820

Received: 22/04/2024

Respondent: Rutland County Council

RCC supports the allocation of Stamford North for 1350 homes as part of a wider Stamford north development including land at Quarry Farm in Rutland, and specifically supports the requirement for “a high level masterplan, supported by a detailed development brief, appropriate full transport assessment and phasing plan, for the entire site (including Quarry Farm in Rutland)”.

RCC request that the policy is amended to include a preference for the site to be considered through a single planning application (whilst recognizing that there are already 2 separate undetermined planning applications submitted for the whole site with each authority).

Object

Representation ID: 870

Received: 22/04/2024

Respondent: Ms Gillian Henry

The number of houses proposed for Stamford North has been increased to 1350 from 1300 with the removal of the bund which will cause acoustic issues. This was not agreed in the plan.
Traffic associated with all building in Stamford locations will lead to issues with gridlocking which is already a problem. There will also be increased sewage which our drainage system is ill equipped to deal with as it is already under pressure.

Object

Representation ID: 876

Received: 22/04/2024

Respondent: Mr Nigel Jolley

I object to SKPR-281 (STM1-H1). The development in Stamford is unsustainablel. The increase from 1300 to 1350 houses should not be allowed. The reuse of the Bund area of the Bordervill development should not be allowed. The water and sewage infrastruture will not cope. There are insufficient health and dental services available in the town.

Object

Representation ID: 885

Received: 22/04/2024

Respondent: Mr Matthew Smith

The current road network cannot cope with existing traffic, an additional 2,000 homes = circa 4,000 more cars. The medical facilities in Stamford are in crisis and are inadequate for existing residents before we consider circa 6,000 more people. The acoustic bund was a stipulated planning condition of the Borderville Sports Ground. The bund mitigates against the impact of Borderville for residents. Further expansion work to Borderville strengthens the need for a bund to be in place. The premise for removing the bund seems to be to relocate the link road for the sole purpose of building more homes

Object

Representation ID: 922

Received: 23/04/2024

Respondent: Mrs Jennifer Hall

Stamford North - stick to the original number of houses proposed. Do not remove the bund, that was put in place to protect residents from light and noise pollution.

Object

Representation ID: 931

Received: 23/04/2024

Respondent: Mrs Alison Lowe

SKPR-281 (STM1-H1)

I object to the removal of the acoustic bund at Borderville as this was an agreed part of the development of Borderville site and its removal will have a detrimental impact on residents and will break trust between residents and the council, planners and developers.

Object

Representation ID: 1074

Received: 23/04/2024

Respondent: Dr Ray Butler

Only acceptable if a true brownfield store, else should not happen

Object

Representation ID: 1224

Received: 24/04/2024

Respondent: Mrs Vanessa Mackinnon

The land between Borderville & the existing properties was not included in the original draft plan. The bund was a planning condition for the development. It was deemed necessary to reduce noise & light pollution. The removal of the bund and the siting of a link road there will increase both plus as well as air pollution. This is an existing wildlife corridor and would mean loss of habitat, there would be no net gain in biodiversity here only loss.

Object

Representation ID: 1245

Received: 24/04/2024

Respondent: Mrs Michelle Goodwin

Stamford North - the original plan was for 1300 houses. The additional 50 appears to be as a result of the removal of the bund. It states in the plan that Biodiversity net gain means leaving the natural environment in a measurably better state than before and is central to delivering nature's recovery. How will removing the bund do this? It will have a terrible impact on the environment and all those residing in that area. Stamford's current infrastructure can't cope with the number of residents now, this all needs rectifying before any further homes are built.

Object

Representation ID: 1300

Received: 25/04/2024

Respondent: Linda Battle

Stamford North: Objection to the removal of the bund to be replaced by housing.

Object

Representation ID: 1306

Received: 25/04/2024

Respondent: Mr Richard Evans

Object to Stamford North. The town's infrastructure cannot cope with an additional 1350 homes (on top of the other large developments). The roads, schools, and healthcare services are already creaking

Object

Representation ID: 1319

Received: 25/04/2024

Respondent: Stamford Town Council

SKPR-281 (STM1-H1) Stamford North


In the adopted Local Plan, there are 1300 properties allocated on this site. The revised application adds 50 houses and also includes the removal of the bund at outline planning stage. The developer has provided the data that they believe proves that by building houses in the space where the bund currently is, this mitigates the potential noise and lights pollution to the existing houses in Armley Grove, Berrybut Close and Turnpole Close. We don't believe that this is the case so would like the application revised to the previous numbers and the bund retained

Object

Representation ID: 1337

Received: 25/04/2024

Respondent: East Mercia Rivers Trust

The impact of Stamford North Development on Quarry Farm (Candidate Local Wildlife Site) due to the need for the proposed link road has not been considered. Stamford has suffered flooding in recent months & sits on the confluence of the Gwash & Welland - neither river can cope with more pollution. The Gwash particularly ecologically important for the Brown Trout. Quarry Farm is waterlogged for 4-6 months of the year. Excess water already runs down Casterton Road following high rainfall events. Flood modelling for the combined developments coupled with evidenced local knowledge should be required.

Object

Representation ID: 1343

Received: 25/04/2024

Respondent: Ms Shelley Simone

I strongly object to the Stamford North proposed development on the grounds of no infrastructure, loss of food, agricultural and green field land, destruction of green space, population density and traffic/pollution.

Object

Representation ID: 1401

Received: 25/04/2024

Respondent: Mr Andrew Jenkins

I object to the proposed additional housing developments at Stamford North. Together with the proposals in the Rutland Local Plan these are completely out of scale with the character of the town and its infrastructure and available amenities.

Object

Representation ID: 1416

Received: 25/04/2024

Respondent: Mrs Rosemary Stimpson

Other towns in SK have bypasses. Stamford North's "east-west" road cannot be considered a bypass, and will not alleviate traffic through and in the town. The through road will adversely affect Little Casterton Road, as traffic will use this route rather than going through to Casterton Road or Ryhall Road. There are insufficient employment opportunities in Stamford for a large increase in population. Infrastructure such as doctors and dentists, improved drainage/sewage needs to be in place before any new homes are built. Existing homes must not be adversely affected - eg. removing the bund at Borderville.

Object

Representation ID: 1451

Received: 25/04/2024

Respondent: Mr Tom Upson

The outline on the map for allocation for Stamford North in the Local Plan does not include the area for Borderville Sports Centre, however the developers are trying to include this area in the proposed development. This is very disconcerting for residents, as this has a significant impact on existing residents from the football ground and the proposed new link road, plus the impact on the facilities of the sports centre itself. This concern has already been raised by Sports England. The area of Borderville Sports Centre and adjacent bund should NOT be part of the proposed development.

Object

Representation ID: 1461

Received: 25/04/2024

Respondent: Ms Nicolette Morphy

The current infrastructure of Stamford (roads, NHS, schools, employment opportunities) can't support this huge development in the North of Stamford especially as, to go ahead, it requires the development of Quarry Farm, a candidate wildlife site - which is a dark green site and shouldn't be developed. Originally this development was 1300 houses - increased to 1350 by the decision to remove the bund (which protects residents from considerable noise pollution from the Sports centre). This means that people living next to the Sports centre will be subject to constant disturbance with potential affects on mental and physical health.