Object

Representation ID: 206

Received: 09/03/2024

Respondent: Mrs Marie Jackson

Insufficient knowledge of the area.

Object

Representation ID: 256

Received: 11/03/2024

Respondent: Mr Darran Marsden

I back on to this proposed site, we have lovely views and that’s why the house was brought. I don’t want to see a new development instead of my current view. The village has grown enough as it is and we don’t have the infrastructure to take any more. It’s unnecessary to build here.

Object

Representation ID: 260

Received: 12/03/2024

Respondent: Mr Mark Andrew

Objection To SKPR-71
The proposal would mean a huge amount of traffic passing through Dickens Close with it being the single point of exit/entrance.

Object

Representation ID: 263

Received: 13/03/2024

Respondent: Mr Peter Alcindor

I’m objecting to proposed access via Dickens Close to the SKPR-71 site (Langtoft, north of Dickens Close). The existing Dickens Close road is narrow and and totally unsuitable for heavy construction vehicles. Also the noise, disruption to residents and mess associated with construction posses a threat to inhabitants. The strip of land to the west of 56 Stowe Road is far more suitable, having been used for many years by heavy farm vehicles to access the proposed site. Using the alternative access will minimise disruption to the neighborhood.

Object

Representation ID: 265

Received: 13/03/2024

Respondent: Ms Anna Welch

SKP-71 unsuitable because: highest grade agricultural land. 41 new homes just built 50 yards away - missing from the plan maps - most still unsold. IRZ for SSSI very close. Green, conservation issues. Dickens Close totally unsuitable and dangerous as access road. Stowe Road / King St at full capacity and of poor quality. No services that end of a 1+ mile long village. A15 junction already lethal. Flood risk level must be reassessed after 2023/24 severe flooding all around site. Quarries all around affecting water table and surface water. SPA Pipeline adjacent causing long term floods with no drainage.

Object

Representation ID: 266

Received: 14/03/2024

Respondent: Mr Chris Pennock

I object to proposed development SKPR-71 (Dickens Close, Langtoft). Amongst many reason to object the major is the crumbing infrastructure that surrounds this area. Stowe Road is narrow and has crumbling verges, King Street is beyond capacity for further traffic, the junction at Stowe Road/ King Street is extremely dangerous. Dickens Close itself a cul-de-sac was not built as an access road and would be unsafe for current residents if additional through traffic was planned. Notably the plan does not show or account for the 41 new homes already built this year opposite Dickens Close which exceeded current village capacity.

Object

Representation ID: 287

Received: 19/03/2024

Respondent: Mr Duncan Ford

SKPR-71 Should not be allowed to go ahead. The land is unsuitable as housing as it is a floodplain

Object

Representation ID: 428

Received: 09/04/2024

Respondent: Miss Sofia Welch

100% of site SKPR-71 is highest-graded agricultural land. Other sites are less valuable land.
SKPR-71 is under 50 metres from 41 new homes (Teal Way), which are omitted from the Plan Revision, but contribute towards the new-housing-requirement numbers. They strain inadequate roads, services, facilities. The adjacent lake-habitat, (SSSI), has been severely damaged and Dickens Close (unsuitable access) has been penalised for years by their construction and ongoing works to the newbuilds and the SPA Pipeline. It is totally inappropriate to allocate for additional homes at the same end of a linear village, over 1 mile from all services and facilities.

Object

Representation ID: 560

Received: 09/03/2024

Respondent: Ms Julia Watson

Newly developed houses cannot be sold, why the additional requirement in the village. Concerns on increase of traffic, existing road safety issues and road conditions. Concerned about access to doctors and dentists and the capacity of schools. Advised site was a designated flood plain and recently field soddened with standing water. Already developments in Deepings and Bourne. Struggles to see benefit to existing residents and loss of green areas, wildlife, environmental impact, depreciation of existing homes, increasing dangerous road safety, lacking road infrastructure and safety. Zero consideration to current residences.

Object

Representation ID: 574

Received: 16/04/2024

Respondent: Mrs Suzanne Taylor

Re SKPR71 - This proposed development of land by Dickens Close is totally unacceptable. The village is extremely busy and under pressure as it is. Traffic is already an issue with the number of houses already built.Exiting the village via the busy crossroads can already add 10 minutes on to your journey. The Doctor surgery cannot cope with existing patients and village school at capacity.

Object

Representation ID: 575

Received: 16/04/2024

Respondent: Mr Jason Taylor

SKPR71 Dickens close. Any consideration to a possible build on this area is a disaster. The village is already struggling with amount of traffic, local doctors cant cope and local school full. To try and exit the village via east end is an absolute joke you can be sat there for 10minutes at peak times and some people take their life in their own hands. 100% DISAGREE

Object

Representation ID: 576

Received: 16/04/2024

Respondent: Miss Charlotte Taylor

Plann App SKPR71 - Dickens Close. Totally against this consideration. Village at capacity with amount of traffic already/not able to get to see doctors therefore more strain on resources and risk to life at times when trying to exit village. Also spoil village feel building more house. Totally Object

Object

Representation ID: 673

Received: 18/03/2024

Respondent: Michele Rowlands

Comments regarding the existing housing and need in Langtoft, infrastructure capacity, site being Grade 2 agricultural land, site previously allocated as a flood zone, land used by migrating birds and badgers, proximity to services and facilities, limited employment opportunities, suitability for accessible/adaptable/social housing, increased traffic compromising highway safety, and concerns regarding the entrance through Dickens Close.

Object

Representation ID: 689

Received: 27/03/2024

Respondent: Trevor Grigg

Comments regarding the existing housing and need in Langtoft, infrastructure capacity, developing on agricultural land, migrating birds, suitable habitats being diminished, site as a gateway and development which would erode open countryside approach, impact on privacy and outlook for existing residents, proximity to services and facilities, limited employment opportunities, increased traffic and safety, flooding, and environmental assets with no mitigation.

Entrance as the access to the development has been managed but not by the landowner since 2005, high probability of challenge for the land to be acquired under the doctrine of adverse possession.

Object

Representation ID: 772

Received: 21/04/2024

Respondent: Miss Germaine Stribling

SKPR-71 Concerns of; Proximity to boundaries on the north of Dickens Close to new development, affecting right to light and open space.
Construction traffic viability through Dickens Close, not suitable for HGVs at 5m width.
Future traffic through Dickens Close potentially 220 vehicle movements per day within meters of existing dwellings.

Object

Representation ID: 906

Received: 23/04/2024

Respondent: Mrs Pauline Lighton

I object to the site, SKPR-71 Land north of Dickens Close, Stowe Road, Langtoft, being proposed for allocation. SKDC have declared a 'climate emergency' . It has an ambition to reduce its carbon footprint and the significant contribution that transport emissions from cars make to the climate emergency. One of the best things that can be done is to locate new development in places that enables residents to access local services by foot, cycle and public transport. This site does not. As such, a more sustainable site that is closer to the local amenities in Langtoft should be considered instead.

Object

Representation ID: 1737

Received: 25/04/2024

Respondent: Historic England

Archaeology assessment required.

Object

Representation ID: 2249

Received: 24/04/2024

Respondent: Langtoft Parish Council

The proposed site is Grade 2 (the highest graded) agricultural land.
Flooding risks need to be reviewed following recent flooding.
Impacts on local wildlife, habitats, and natural features.
Inaccuracies regarding the site in the SA technical annex.
The proposed access between Dickens Close is far too narrow and is totally inappropriate for both construction traffic and for vehicles associated with 55 new houses.
The proposed development would produce very significant amounts of traffic.
A15/Langtoft junction requires improvement before adding future pressure.
There are no services at the Dickens Close end of the village. There are better suited sites at the A15 end of the village.
Infrastructure inadequacies serving Langtoft should also be also factors in this decision.

Support

Representation ID: 2382

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: 2499

Received: 09/04/2024

Respondent: Miss Sofia Welch

The proposed site SKPR-71 is not suitable for further development in the current Plan period for the following reasons: 100% of the site is highest graded agricultural land, Unsuitable village location, Conservation and sustainability, Anglian Water issues, Residents’ rights, Quarries, Unsuitable roads, Unsuitable access, All types of flooding.

Object

Representation ID: 2510

Received: 16/03/2024

Respondent: Anthony Upward

- Site is Grade 2 agricultural land, representing the pinnacle of quality and versatility for farming purposes.
- The site encompasses a Green Infrastructure Area, yet recent policy enhancements and amendments have not been transparently communicated.
- Natural England/DEFRA has categorised the area as falling within an Impact Risk Zone due to its proximity to sensitive natural sites.
- The proposed development is flagged as incompatible with residential expansion, especially of the scale proposed, due to potential detrimental impacts on local biodiversity, including protected species.
- After breaking from the existing plan and approving Teal Way there is a clear and justifiable overallocation concern
- inaccuracies in the current technical documentation overlook key environmental features such as nearby deciduous woodlands and habitats critical for local wildlife, which have already suffered partial destruction.
- Flooding concerns, site needs to be reassessed, especially following recent flooding events
- the proposed site serves as a vital habitat, boasting intricate pathways, watercourses, and a neighbouring equestrian centre.
- Quarry impacts and Geological concerns
- Consequential loss
- Social considerations and housing dynamics
- respect for existing residents
- proposal raises concerns regarding infrastructure and services
- concerns regarding traffic and transport

Object

Representation ID: 2516

Received: 26/03/2024

Respondent: Antony Swindell

- Site is Grade 2 agricultural land, representing the pinnacle of quality and versatility for farming purposes.
- The site encompasses a Green Infrastructure Area, yet recent policy enhancements and amendments have not been transparently communicated.
- Natural England/DEFRA has categorised the area as falling within an Impact Risk Zone due to its proximity to sensitive natural sites.
- The proposed development is flagged as incompatible with residential expansion, especially of the scale proposed, due to potential detrimental impacts on local biodiversity, including protected species.
- After breaking from the existing plan and approving Teal Way there is a clear and justifiable overallocation concern
- inaccuracies in the current technical documentation overlook key environmental features such as nearby deciduous woodlands and habitats critical for local wildlife, which have already suffered partial destruction.
- Flooding concerns, site needs to be reassessed, especially following recent flooding events
- the proposed site serves as a vital habitat, boasting intricate pathways, watercourses, and a neighbouring equestrian centre.
- Quarry impacts and Geological concerns
- Consequential loss
- Social considerations and housing dynamics
- respect for existing residents
- proposal raises concerns regarding infrastructure and services
- concerns regarding traffic and transport