Support

Representation ID: 98

Received: 09/03/2024

Respondent: Mrs Marie Jackson

No further comment

Object

Representation ID: 1038

Received: 23/04/2024

Respondent: Dr Ray Butler

The only appropriate proposal is to leave it as countryside.

Support

Representation ID: 1325

Received: 25/04/2024

Respondent: Caddick Developments

Agent: Boyer Planning

The site has not been delivering as per the previous policy.

The ELS (2023) states in relation to the site, that 51.2 Ha should be partially released from the original employment allocation due to consent being granted for housing and a retail park on the site (ELS, footnote 83, p. 126). On this basis, in accordance with the evidence presented within the ELS we consider that there is not a realistic prospect of 51.2 Ha delivering B2/B8 uses and this area should be removed from the employment allocation. The proposed summary of changes within the Draft Local Plan states how Policy E1 has been amended in line with the ELS, however this has not been the case as the 52.1 Ha has not been deallocated or released in line with this recommendation. We also consider this exemplifies the logical allocation of our Client’s site at Gonerby Moor (SKPR-100) as helps to offset the employment land lost in the Grantham Sub Regional Centre from the Southern Gateway.

Object

Representation ID: 1397

Received: 25/04/2024

Respondent: Amatrix Grantham Prop Co Limited (Part of Brookfield Group)

Agent: Freeths

Additional land to the east of Spittlegate Level (as identified by Amatrix Grantham Prop Co Limited) should be allocated in order to support the Southern Gateway Employment Opportunity over the extended plan period to 2041.

Object

Representation ID: 2102

Received: 25/04/2024

Respondent: Buckminster

We object to paragraph d as it singles out this development area from all others by requiring ‘attractive landscape edges’. These will naturally be proposed as part of a landscaping plan. In particular we would not want such on the western boundary which has a line of powerlines along it, and as we are supporting Hanbury Property’s separate representation that the field to the west should be allocated to make the A1 West allocation a unique site due to quantum for the East Midlands Region, supporting the case for a transformation of Grantham’s economy over time. We object to the wording in j. as to building heights respecting the sensitivities of the surrounding landscape: modern B2/B8 buildings are high and bulky by nature, and some people will maintain can never respect the landscape. The 440KV powerlines and the raised lit new A1 junction have reduced the sensitivities of this area, but landscaping will help mitigate the setting of the inevitably large buildings in prospect to meet the nature of the demand for such space. We cannot have an implicit building height restriction lower for example than for the consented B2/B8 scheme (ex CartarRE and now Brookfield) immediately to the south-east and east of the A1 as part of the same Southern Gateway allocation. If the Hanbury area is added they are offering substantial landscaping to soften the western, south and northern edges. The whole northern boundary with Gorse Lane along the existing allocation does need tree belt treatment given the few residential receptors there

Object

Representation ID: 2162

Received: 23/04/2024

Respondent: National Grid UK

Agent: Avison Young

Site crosses or in close proximity to NGET assets. Without appropriate acknowledgement of the NGET assets present within the site, these policies should not be considered effective as they cannot be delivered as proposed; unencumbered by the constraints posed by the presence of NGET infrastructure.

Proposes modifications to the above site allocations and/or policies to include wording to the following effect:
Policy E1 – Grantham Southern Gateway Employment Opportunity
“2. The development will be developed with the following site-specific criteria
j. a strategy for responding to the NGET overhead transmission lines present within the site which demonstrates how the NGET Design Guide and Principles have been applied at the masterplanning stage and how the impact of the assets has been reduced through good design.”

Object

Representation ID: 2237

Received: 25/04/2024

Respondent: Brown & Co

Proposes land at Stornoway to be included within the SKPR-286 employment allocation so that all the land to the south of Gorse Lane be considered as one.

Object

Representation ID: 2298

Received: 23/04/2024

Respondent: Central Lincolnshire Local Plan team

E1, is there an extra word in the first sentence, “…of for…”?

Support

Representation ID: 2322

Received: 23/04/2024

Respondent: National Highways

Policy E1 of the draft Local Plan allocates 118.19 hectares for a strategic employment site referred to as Grantham Southern Gateway (Ref SKPR 286). The allocation straddles the A1 trunk road at the Spittlegate interchange which opened to traffic in December 2022. Although the dumbbell junction itself is the responsibility of Lincolnshire County Council, the slip roads and A1 mainline are the responsibility of National Highways. As such, whilst we have no objection in principle to this allocation, the Strategic Transport Assessment supporting this Local Plan should identify the cumulative traffic impacts of Plan growth on the Spittlegate junction. Consideration may need to be given to how this allocation might affect the longer-term ability to deliver future highways improvements given that the site abuts the junction.

Policy E1 sets out the requirements for the Grantham Southern Gateway development which is expected to deliver 118.19 hectares of employment land.
In respect of this policy, we would welcome the inclusion of a policy point similar to point a. of GR3-H1 (Spitalgate Heath) which sets out that incremental full applications will not be accepted and that an Outline or Hybrid application will be necessary for the whole site. National Highways considers this will be necessary to identify the cumulative traffic and transport implications of the site and the highways infrastructure necessary to accommodate it. We welcome point f. of this policy which acknowledges that mitigation to the SRN may be required.

Support

Representation ID: 2408

Received: 25/04/2024

Respondent: Vistry Group

Agent: Boyer Planning

We consider that the land allocated at Gonerby Moor for employment use provides an exciting opportunity to provide new jobs and investment, offsets the loss of land from the Grantham Southern Gateway, and is therefore supported.

Growth at Gonerby Moor would be considered to align with growth on Land West of Grantham and provides a synergy in terms of the delivery of jobs and homes.

Object

Representation ID: 2553

Received: 24/04/2024

Respondent: Hanbury Properties Ltd

Agent: Freeths

The solution is to maintain the overall economic ambition but through a re-distribution of proposed employment land to the south of Grantham. An expansion of the existing allocation (GR-SE1) through the land to the immediate west (reference SKPR-234) would represent a more sustainable focus for employment development, given future growth established by existing SUE/Garden Village allocations and the Grantham Southern Gateway. The expansion of the existing Grantham Southern Gateway allocation to include the SKPR-234 land enjoys full support and endorsement from Buckminster, the landowner of the majority of the Grantham Southern Gateway. SKPR-234 benefits from existing infrastructure and in combination with GR-SE1 would enhance the opportunity to attract major large-scale operators both regionally and nationally.