Object

Representation ID: 194

Received: 09/03/2024

Respondent: Mrs Marie Jackson

Insufficient knowledge of the area.

Object

Representation ID: 1344

Received: 25/04/2024

Respondent: Mrs B Woodhead

I consider the proposed development of 140 new dwellings to be inappropriate. Our antiquated infrastructure just can’t cope with this many new properties. 140 could equate to 560 new residents, which is about a third of our current number of residents and could possibly add 560 more vehicles. This is without infill builds. One assumes whoever drew up this plan is aware of this and has had discussion with AW etc and secured the finances to update our roads, drainage system, transport links, parking availability, school etc? If not it is an implausible proposition.

Object

Representation ID: 1733

Received: 25/04/2024

Respondent: Historic England

Assessment required due to size / potential for cumulative impact (including upon western and southern entrance gateways to the village) on historic core of Billingborough and its Conservation Area.

Object

Representation ID: 1759

Received: 25/04/2024

Respondent: Cllr Martin Hill

In Billingborough, there is the question as how an additional 140 dwelling would put even further strain on a currently overloaded draining system which currently overcharges raw sewage onto village street in sustained wet weather. What mi􀆟ga􀆟on would be put in place to deal with this additional capacity issue?

Support

Representation ID: 2080

Received: 23/04/2024

Respondent: The Crown Estate

Agent: Savills

TCE supports the allocation of Site SKPR-61 and SKPR-103 for residential development.

Object

Representation ID: 2228

Received: 19/04/2024

Respondent: Lincolnshire County Council

Agent: Robert Doughty Consultancy

We Support the allocation of SKPR-61 but Object to the detailed comments set out above until and unless they can be properly justified and consulted on publicly.

Unless there is evidence of an absolute need for a joint development, Principle A should be deleted or amended to allow a more flexible approach to development.

Principle C requires connections to the allotments to the north of the site (they are actually to the south – this should be corrected). Principle C should confirm the allotments, including the access from Birthorpe Road, were provided under the outline consent for the redevelopment of SKPR- 61.

Please provide clarity on the term “good use” and confirm SKPR-61 is only dependent on access to Birthorpe Road.

Principle F should be amended to confirm the hedgerows do not impact on SKPR-61.

Principle G should be removed as it is redundant after the Biodiversity Net Gain Regulations came into force in February 2024.

The map of Green Infrastructure Areas has not been justified. Principle H should be deleted or confirmation given that it does not apply to the allocation SKPR-61.