Object

Representation ID: 170

Received: 09/03/2024

Respondent: Mrs Marie Jackson

Should not be building on flood area

Object

Representation ID: 416

Received: 08/04/2024

Respondent: Mr Tom O'Prey

Should not be building on flood plain plus the road network leading to this piece of land is totally unsuitable to be taking all the extra traffic. The road is hardly wide enough to fit 2 cars down.
We already have to contend with people cutting down Meadow Drove and up Mill Drove to avoid town, especially lorries, let alone the extra traffic coming up and down mill drove due to these dwellings. The road at the bottom end of Mill Drove already narrows over the bridge and cannot take anymore traffic, it's already destroyed the road.

Object

Representation ID: 583

Received: 17/04/2024

Respondent: Mr Mark Tupholme

Land is often flooded already without disturbing the land and watercourses. Roads are already severely damaged by large HGVs driving down them like a bypass so traffic and noise considerations to new residences. Roads unsuitable for residential properties - unless being widened and improved as part of the development. Wildlife area - has specific owl habitats nearby and should not be disturbed. Bourne already struggling with sufficient resources (doctors, dentists, school places etc.) so a further increase in population will worsen this situation. Town already dead due to majority commuters residing and shopping elsewhere.

Object

Representation ID: 584

Received: 17/04/2024

Respondent: Mr Paul King

Strongly object , this plan is totally unviable due to road conditions and the infrastructure of Bourne . Not enough schools , doctors , dentist . This plan will congest even further what is the dyke and mill drive rat run , build a proper bypass . To far out of town no bus routes or sensible pedestrian access to town . Will reduce value of current properties , increase unsociable behaviour and destroy the green fields and wild life . Please rethink

Support

Representation ID: 600

Received: 26/03/2024

Respondent: J Key

Number of people: 2

Surprised that only two areas. - which are on the Eastern side - of Bourne, were shown on the draft, so these two areas appear to be satisfactorily placed.

Object

Representation ID: 707

Received: 08/04/2024

Respondent: Mrs Carlie Hennessey

I think this is a bad idea. There's already to much housing here and not enough doctors and dentists to support the people already here. The traffic through bourne is horrendous and adding all these proposed houses would add hundreds more cars on the road. The impact on the environment would be detrimental, there's not enough green spaces for all these extra people. It shouldn't get the go ahead the infrastructure in Bourne is just not there to support this kind of development when elsea park is also being over developed as it is.

Overall I do not support this development or any others with the way Bourne is right now

Object

Representation ID: 783

Received: 21/04/2024

Respondent: Mr Mark Marsden

Housing density too high, not sympathetic with neighbouring properties.
Development should not be built on HIGH RISK FLOOD AREA.
Population will increase by 650 residents (285 dwellings x 2.28 occupancy = 649.8) causing vast increase in traffic, serious road safety issues, noise and disturbance.
Bourne cannot sustain this population growth, resident's health and wellbeing requires an increase in public services doctors, dentists, police and local services. Play parks and open spaces do not help residents waiting for a heart operation, cancer treatment, hip/knee replacement or dentistry.
Significant risk of sea flooding hence ER signs pointing West.

Object

Representation ID: 852

Received: 22/04/2024

Respondent: BDW Cambridgeshire .

Agent: Carter Jonas

It is requested that Site Allocation SKPR-53 is reassessed for consistency with policies in draft SKLP and national policy, particularly in terms of delivery of community facilities, accessibility by sustainable modes of transport, flood risk, and loss of Grade 2 agricultural land.

Object

Representation ID: 1077

Received: 24/04/2024

Respondent: Dr Ray Butler

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

Support

Representation ID: 1393

Received: 25/04/2024

Respondent: Mr Roy McKinney

I support Policy SKPR53 relating to housing development on Mill Drove, Bourne.

Support

Representation ID: 1614

Received: 18/04/2024

Respondent: Pegasus Planning Group

Agent: Pegasus Planning Group

The inclusion of this site as an allocation for residential development is fully supported by our clients, who are the landowners for the northern field parcel adjacent to Mill Drove. The development principles are considered to be appropriately specific and relevant to this site, and have been well-informed by the supporting site assessments. Regarding criterion d - It should be recognised that direct improvements to Carr Dyke may not be possible but appropriate integration as a landscape is a positive development principle. Criterion f is supported but reference to high flood risk should be changed to ‘medium flood risk’ as site falls within Flood Zone 2. Supportive of 285 units as an indicative capacity but notes further masterplanning will confirm appropriate site capacity.

Object

Representation ID: 1727

Received: 25/04/2024

Respondent: Historic England

Potential for archaeology (1388898 evidence of early bronze age settlement) Note bronze age / iron age / roman evidence (field walking / excavation / geophysical survey around Meadow Drain 100m grid ref 510800/321100). There is concern regarding this site. If suitable to be taken forward, revisions to policy SKPR-53 will be required.

Object

Representation ID: 1760

Received: 25/04/2024

Respondent: Cllr Martin Hill

On the proposed additional 457 houses for the Mill Drove area of Bourne, a substantial upgrade of Meadow Drove south of Mill Drove would seem a necessity to help take the resulting extra traffic movement.

Support

Representation ID: 1786

Received: 25/04/2024

Respondent: Bourne Town Council

The Bourne Parish Neighbourhood Plan Steering Group supports the allocation of land to the north-east of the town as this accords with the locational growth strategy recommended to, and agreed by, the Town Council and set out in the Housing Sites Assessment Background Paper (October 2023). However, the Steering Group has several comments regarding the development principles.
- Benefit in preparing a single masterplan for both SKPR-53 and SKPR-83.
- Dwellings should front onto open space proposed alongside dyke
- Part of the site adjacent to Bourne Academy should be reserved to facilitate expansion.
- Considers essential that the development principles highlight the need for strong links across Car dyke for pedestrians and cyclists.
- Site SKPR-53 is not within a Green Infrastructure Area and requires amendment.

Support

Representation ID: 1889

Received: 25/04/2024

Respondent: Lincolnshire County Council Corporate Property

Agent: Savills

Draft Policy H1: Housing Allocations allocates SKPR-53 – Land at Mill Drove for 285 dwellings across the whole site area. LCC own the central parcel of land (SKPR-131 Land to the West of Meadow Drove, Bourne). Our client supports draft allocation SKPR-53 for 285 dwellings. The landowners are in agreement to work together to prepare joint technical work and a comprehensive concept masterplan and it is anticipated that this will be prepared for the Regulation 19 stage of the plan.

Support

Representation ID: 1927

Received: 24/04/2024

Respondent: Bettinson Trust

Agent: Savills

We support draft allocation SKPR-53 for 285 dwellings. The landowners are in agreement to work together to prepare joint technical work and a comprehensive concept masterplan and this will be prepared for the Regulation 19 stage of the plan. Given that the site appears to have relatively few constraints, it is anticipated that the level of housing that could be achieved on the site may be slightly higher than 285 dwellings. We support the site assessment undertaken by Bourne Town Council for the Neighborhood Plan which has estimated a site capacity of 300-350 dwellings to be closer to the likely yield. However, we will seek to clarify this through the undertaking of further technical work and a concept masterplan for the site.

Support

Representation ID: 2179

Received: 23/04/2024

Respondent: Messrs. T & S Bradshaw and Mr. S Jones

Agent: Mike Sibthorpe Planning

Fully supportive of the proposed allocation SKPR-53.
Notes in the Draft Site Assessment Report that the land has been allocated ‘Red’ in respect of ‘Contaminated Land on site. Consider this an error, which should be corrected.

Object

Representation ID: 2486

Received: 08/04/2024

Respondent: Mr j wherry

Agent: Mr John Dickie

Objection to the following proposed allocations - SKPR-53 – Land at Mill Drove and SKPR-83 – Land North of Mill Drove.
Further observations regarding the demonstrable suitability of Bourne site SKPR-111 – land off Beaufort Drive. This site achieves a higher 'score' than both SKPR-53 and SKPR-83 by virtue of ;
Agricultural land grading
Archaeology - the Beaufort Drive site has already been the subject of an extensive archaeological investigation – CGMS Desk Based Assessment.
Utilities - Level 2 Utility Study Utility
Highways clear support for S19/2134 and S19/2111
Short term deliverability

Object

Representation ID: 2488

Received: 08/04/2024

Respondent: Mr John Dickie

The Beaufort Drive site - SKPR-111 – is measurably more appropriate for an Housing Allocation than SKPR-53 – Land at Mill Drove and SKPR-83 – Land North of Mill Drove.
We suggest that the above ‘Red’ assessments for SKPR-111 are not appropriate.
Applying a more rigorous assessment would result in SKPR-111 having a higher/better ‘score’ than SKPR-53 and SKPR-83.
This site is within Flood Zone One whilst SKPR-53 and SKPR-83 have FZ Two and Three constraints. From a sequential test aspect, SKPR-111 represents a far more appropriate site for allocation as it has a lower probability of flooding.