Support

Representation ID: 164

Received: 09/03/2024

Respondent: Mrs Marie Jackson

... so long as this beautiful town retains its character.

Object

Representation ID: 332

Received: 18/03/2024

Respondent: Miss Carys Vaughan

Stamford East - flood risk potential (please assess diligently given increased future flooding). Also concern over excess traffic along Ryhall Rd with the Stamford North development. Current congestion levels are high as it is

Object

Representation ID: 867

Received: 15/04/2024

Respondent: Miss Carys Vaughan

Stamford East - flood risk potential (please assess diligently given increased future flooding). Also concern over excess traffic along Ryhall Rd with the Stamford North development. Current congestion levels are high as it is.

Object

Representation ID: 1075

Received: 23/04/2024

Respondent: Dr Ray Butler

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

Object

Representation ID: 1967

Received: 22/04/2024

Respondent: Natural England

For the proposed residential allocations within Stamford we would reiterate the importance of establishing a connected network of high quality green infrastructure at the earliest stage of the planning process.
We also advise that for residential developments surrounding Stamford may require an assessment of recreational pressure if it falls within the Impact Risk Zone (IRZ) for Cambridgeshire SSSIs. This may be relevant to the Barnack Hill & Holes SAC and measures to mitigate any adverse impacts e.g. alternative open space provision may be required.

Object

Representation ID: 2058

Received: 22/04/2024

Respondent: Mrs sandra owens

SKPR 282 Another 320 houses. Why is no one listening to local residents NO MORE HOUSES

Object

Representation ID: 2061

Received: 23/04/2024

Respondent: Mrs Jennifer Hall

Stamford East - Flood risk

Object

Representation ID: 2283

Received: 25/04/2024

Respondent: Stamford Property Company Ltd

Agent: DLP Planning Ltd

Our client strongly objects to the loss of employment land to residential on land identified as Stamford East. Our client formally objected to the Bellway Homes application (LPA Ref: A22/1591) on the basis of poor pedestrian connectivity to the wider area; poor quality design; the dominance of the car in the street scene and the increase in vehicular movement onto Uffington Road with inappropriate mitigation proposed.
These concerns remain and coupled with the loss of employment land, is exacerbating the lack of alternative options to both existing businesses and future occupiers in the market. This conflicts with the strategy for the emerging Plan which sets out that one of its key aims is to provide a choice to the market so that businesses and job growth are not constrained by the lack of suitable available sites.

Support

Representation ID: 2368

Received: 25/04/2024

Respondent: Defence Infrastructure Organisation Safeguarding Team

- Development of, or exceeding, 91.4m 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: 2550

Received: 16/04/2024

Respondent: F.H Gilman & Co in Administration

Agent: Lambert Smith Hampton

Policy STM1.H2 should be amended to remove reference to the requirement of a comprehensive masterplan as this is no longer applicable or justifiable following the grant of planning permission ref: S22/210.