Object

Representation ID: 200

Received: 09/03/2024

Respondent: Mrs Marie Jackson

Insufficient knowledge of the area.

Object

Representation ID: 437

Received: 11/04/2024

Respondent: Mrs Sue Woodman

Description of village inaccurate.
No allocation should be included - village already has 290 new houses.
New shop out of village desperately needed

Object

Representation ID: 580

Received: 17/04/2024

Respondent: Mrs Sally Mardling

I object to the proposed development in Corby Glen. The map in the Local Plan does not show the recent developments by Allison and David Wilson. The new development goes against the Corby Glen Local Plan.

Support

Representation ID: 581

Received: 17/04/2024

Respondent: Mr David Fowler

I support the proposed local area for the village but I will be making comments: type and design, layout etc. if and when full planning is submitted.

Object

Representation ID: 642

Received: 18/04/2024

Respondent: Mr Andrew Lawrence

-Makes a mockery of local democracy - goes against the Local Development Plan agreed in February 2024.
-Fails to take account of 3 current areas of development providing nearly 300 houses.
-Constitutes OVER DEVELOPMENT of what was small village
-Does NOT serve LOCAL POPULATION - houses in the 3 current developments being purchased by retirees from London/South East/property developers to rent out.
-Local facilities can't cope with CURRENT population.
-Concretes over Green Field site & subsequent loss of arable land
-Changes forever rural nature of local area
-Will transform current village into nothing more than a commuter estate

Object

Representation ID: 735

Received: 19/04/2024

Respondent: Mrs C Baker

We have already had three large housing developments recently added to Corby Glen. I didn't object to these, but adding another big housing estate is pushing it, and will put too much pressure on village schools and other local facilities, and negatively impact the natural environment. It will also increase traffic in a rural area with poor public
transport links.

Object

Representation ID: 862

Received: 22/04/2024

Respondent: Mr JOHN ROSS

We have already had 200 properties developing in the village which is changing the village completely. No additional infrastructure has been provided or is planned. The development will back on to my garden which currently has open views. The development will adversely affect my quality of life and my property value. I already have had a taste of what the builders will bring. My house and car have been adversely affected from the Northern development. My protestations have been totally ignored and any promises to ameliorate broken. This situation will be even worse with this proposed build.

Object

Representation ID: 909

Received: 23/04/2024

Respondent: Corby Glen Parish Council

The development is not in accordance with the ratified Neighbourhood Plan in which the community voted to have a community-based planning strategy
The village has already grown by 65% recently; more large scale development would be detrimental to the strong sense of community

Object

Representation ID: 916

Received: 12/04/2024

Respondent: Anne Collins

Number of people: 2

Your Local Plan : with reference to SKPR-247 Corby Glen, why have'nt you included a current map showing the new housing developments opposite. Are you aware that a halt has been called on these through lack of sales. You have already doubled the size of our beloved village without giving it better utilities and services. The A151 is a dangerous road without pavements. When people in this country are going hungry through lack of food how dare you build on land that can grow crops. it's immoral.

Object

Representation ID: 1097

Received: 24/04/2024

Respondent: Corby Glen Parish Council

Corby Glen Parish Council does not believe that this proposal is in line with its recently ratified Local Plan.
Having already experienced an increase of 65% in the housing stock, further development would jeopardise the strong sense of community and put even more strain on the local infrastructure

Object

Representation ID: 1099

Received: 24/04/2024

Respondent: Mr John Ellam

Not a suitable site to develop and against the provisions of Corby Glen local plan

Object

Representation ID: 1105

Received: 24/04/2024

Respondent: Mrs Jane Biggs

Large building developments are already underway in Corby Glen and it is far too soon to consider more.

Object

Representation ID: 1125

Received: 16/04/2024

Respondent: Sam Duncomb

I would like to express my deep objection to an additional 144 properties in Corby Glen. We have already seen 3 developments in the village which increases Corby Glen dwellings by over half. Corby Glen has no infrastructure to manage these properties and families that they attack. There is no public transport route and road connections are already extremely busy and a risk due to the speed people drive through the village.

Object

Representation ID: 1191

Received: 24/04/2024

Respondent: Prof Adrian Eddleston

Re the proposed housing development North of Bourne Road in Corby Glen, this includes the start of a very popular country side walk which must be retained. The Council must ensure that any builders respect this walk and allow easy access to continue. The present access to this walk is from St Johns Drive, and must be retained.

Object

Representation ID: 1240

Received: 24/04/2024

Respondent: Mr Robert Parker

The removal of existing site LV-H5 is not in line with national policy as the development is partly built, therefore
The inclusion of SKPR-247 is completely contrary to the neighbourhood plan and therefore to ignore the results of the recent referendum
The assessments on secondary schooling and transport for SKPR-247 are disingenuous
SKPR-247 is 9.8km from the nearest employment site in the draft plan, a non sustainable solution
The assessment for SKPR-247 states there should be cycleway provision for the site, an impossible aspiration

Object

Representation ID: 1241

Received: 24/04/2024

Respondent: sara parker

I object to the inclusion of Skpr-247 in the Local Plan as it is contrary to the policies of the adopted Corby Glen Neighbourhood Plan, in particular policy CG2.

The three sites currently in development in Corby Glen have been omitted from the Local Plan map. These three sites contain almost 300 new houses, and skpr-247 allocates a further 144 homes, effectively doubling the size of Corby Glen since 2020. It is imperative the current three developments are finished and occupied before any further allocations can be considered, only then will the full impact on services and infrastructure be known.

Support

Representation ID: 1287

Received: 25/04/2024

Respondent: Knightwood Developments Ltd

Agent: Boyer Planning

Future development on this site will be able to connect in a positive and meaningful manner with the existing settlement of Corby Glen and improvements to these connections will ensure integrated communities to aid the delivery of sustainable development in the village.

This site identified in Corby Glen is capable of delivering sustainable development and Knightwood Developments Ltd are committed to bringing this site forward in a timely manner to assist in meeting the District’s housing requirement. The emerging allocation provides confidence that Corby Glen is suitable for additional growth over the plan period.

Within these representations and Vision Document (Appendix 1), we have demonstrated that Corby Glen is a sustainable location and the site, in our view, scores higher than the Council’s Sustainability Appraisal has concluded, which further demonstrates the suitability of the site in being allocated for residential development.

Land north of Bourne Road, Corby Glen is under ownership of one landowner and together working with the Council, can deliver both market and affordable housing early in the plan period. The inclusion of the policy and proposed site allocation is welcomed and is considered to be sound.

Object

Representation ID: 1308

Received: 25/04/2024

Respondent: Cllr Martin Hill

I am the County Councillor for Corby Glen which is currently having 250 houses built under the current plan - increasing the village by 40%. To add a further 140 is unreasonable and not giving sufficient time for smooth assimilation. The new estate will expand the village too much and will have limited connection with the attractive centre.

Object

Representation ID: 1358

Received: 25/04/2024

Respondent: Ms Rosemary Lyon

Corby Glen has not had time to adapt to the unfinished LV-H5 allocation -3 developments - 290 new builds, how can they until completed?
These alone will expand the size and increase the population of Corby Glen.
SKDC-247 the 144 proposed new dwellings - No!

Object

Representation ID: 1446

Received: 25/04/2024

Respondent: sara parker

I object to the inclusion of Skpr-247 in the Local Plan as it is contrary to the policies of the adopted Corby Glen Neighbourhood Plan, in particular policy CG2. The three sites currently in development in Corby Glen have been omitted from the Local Plan map. These three sites contain almost 300 new houses, and skpr-247 allocates a further 144 homes, effectively doubling the size of Corby Glen since 2020. It is imperative the current three developments are finished and occupied before any further allocations can be considered, only then will the full impact on services and infrastructure be known.

Object

Representation ID: 1486

Received: 25/04/2024

Respondent: Mr John Murphy

“Pedestrian links, such as footway and cycleway connections into the centre of village from the site should be incorporated in the development proposal.” These were also required for the recent Swinstead road/Bourne road development of 250 houses but are of poor quality and not adequate given the volume of traffic on the A151. The pedestrian and cycle connectivity provision is poor and instead encouraging car use and increasing car reliance.

The primary school is at capacity and so children would be required to travel outside of the village for primary education, increasing reliance on cars.

Object

Representation ID: 1514

Received: 17/04/2024

Respondent: Miss Dawn Greetham

To build more houses in a already over populated village , where there are to much speeding traffic especially for the old part of the village centre with narrow roads, long waiting times for doctors, sewage and drains, flooding due to building, and the already lost VILLAGE feel seems ridiculous to build more houses but i don't suppose anybody's opinion will be listened too.

Object

Representation ID: 1521

Received: 17/04/2024

Respondent: Tom Cowley

The village of Corby Glen will soon be a town if in addition to the 200 houses already planned another 144 are added. This level of growth is unsustainable and in a few decades will see us overtake the City of Wells in terms of population. Recent developments have only donated £100,000 to the local community which is less than the cost of a single house in the development and nothing to the local schools, translating in a net drain on the community. Services such as doctors and the aforementioned schools will be further stretched reducing property values and making Corby Glen a less desirable place to live

Object

Representation ID: 1524

Received: 17/04/2024

Respondent: Corby Glen Community Primary School

Economic viability reasons the primary school admission number reduced from 140 to 105 pupils, current role is 82. The full effect of existing development are yet to be felt but assumption the school will then be at capacity. An additional 144 dwellings is likely to be over pupil capacity or residents will not be able to secure a place at their local school. Classroom capacity wrongly assumed to be 140 pupils as a mobile classroom is set for demolition and capacity assumptions should be adjusted. Due to this no section 106 funding allocated to the school provision. If 144 dwellings are built funding improved infrastructure for primary school/nursery must be considered. Should assess impact on infrastructure and services of existing developments over time rather than press ahead with a further 144 dwellings.

Object

Representation ID: 1528

Received: 17/04/2024

Respondent: Sam Currall

Current view would be a housing state. Development will increase traffic and risks a rat run. So many houses in a short period, corby glen has grown so much, can schools and doctors cope. Shop is small to support village with no parking. Grass verges not maintains and residents have to cut the grass themselves. Driving through the village looks untidy and will mean more long messy grass for residents to sort as we don’t want to. It’s not our land.

Object

Representation ID: 1529

Received: 17/04/2024

Respondent: Kate Walker

Existing developments will increase the Corby Glen by between a half and three quarters, yet with no additional infrastructure. An additional 144 dwellings is unacceptable and will cause difficulties, such as getting a doctors appointment. Parking is limited and its difficult parking outside the shop. Two cafes are extremely busy and impossible to find a seat or parking spot in the Market Place. Too much development too soon. An additional 144 houses will change nature of the village becoming disjointed, poorly provided for small town, no longer a village. If we hadn’t had three lots of houses built, some not finished, would not be objecting.

Object

Representation ID: 1531

Received: 19/04/2024

Respondent: Steve Cole

I am led to believe there is a proposal for yet more houses in Corby Glen!, The previous development is still very on-going, this has already turned our once lovely village into a far less desirable place to live!. I like most people here I would assume, moved here because of it's charm, South Kesteven seemed determined to destroy it!! If one reads the definition of a village one can soon see your intention to make Corby Glen village a thing of the past. Please use your brains, and finally decide that as far as new developments is concerned, then ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!!!

Object

Representation ID: 1532

Received: 19/04/2024

Respondent: Alison Hinsley

There are already 3 developments under construction which are significantly increasing the size of the village. Many remain unbuilt and unsold. A further development for another 144 houses is obsurd. The facilities we have in our village are not in a position to even cope with the increase in numbers from the first 3 developments that are not yet completed, and as for the increase in traffic with this new development, the road situation in the village and on the A151 would become incredibly dangerous. We have already lost a huge amount of green space in Corby Glen, space that was used by children playing, walkers / dog walkers, as is the space you are proposing for the 144 houses. It is completely unacceptable and not necessary.

Object

Representation ID: 1535

Received: 17/04/2024

Respondent: Jonathan Cook

Corby Glen is under expansion with a number of large-scale housing developments already under construction. The lived experience of raising a family in our village is one of oversubscribed doctors surgery’s, crumbling school infrastructure, poor local amenities and having to come to terms with the high carbon footprint associated with the necessary daily travel to our respective workplaces. I’m also concerned that the constant erosion of our productive farmland, rather than the development of brownfield sites, leaves this country increasingly vulnerable to an inability to produce its own food in an uncertain world. At the same time I'm acutely aware of the need for housing in this country. But I do feel that Corby Glen has done its bit in recent years and as such I raise my concerns without any feeling of guilt or nimbyism.

Object

Representation ID: 1536

Received: 17/04/2024

Respondent: Trevor Kiely

If there is going to be another 144 properties in this the council should buy part of the land,and build some rentable houses ,because the cost of the houses are out of reach of young parents who want to stay in the village.