Regulation 18 Draft Local Plan

Object

Representation ID: 2087

Received: 25/04/2024

Respondent: Buckminster

Preferred site allocations, other than the allocations the Council is proposing to carry forward from the adopted Local Plan, will be identified at the next stage of plan preparation which is scheduled for winter 2023. We would comment that this date has of course now passed.

Support

Representation ID: 2088

Received: 25/04/2024

Respondent: Buckminster

It will be a major challenge to deliver the strategic infrastructure that will be needed to deliver the housing and employment growth, such as new Primary Substations and enhanced capacities at sewage treatment works. We very much support the concept of having an Infrastructure Delivery Plan.

Support

Representation ID: 2089

Received: 25/04/2024

Respondent: Buckminster

The emphasis on sustainable growth and diversification of the local economy is wholly supported as is the emphasis on additional growth, diversifying the employment base, stimulating tourism, the vitality of town centres, the need for new residential development to have a mix and range of house types and tenures, the need to move to a low carbon economy, and bio-diversity net gain.

Object

Representation ID: 2090

Received: 25/04/2024

Respondent: Buckminster

The new Employment Growth Location at Gonerby Moor as shown in the Spatial Strategy Diagram in 3.4 is not supported. This distracts from the more sustainable Southern Gateway growth location which is better located to the national road network, train station, the town centre, existing jobs and housing, and the majority of the planned new housing. It would be helpful if a plan could be produced (along the lines of the attached) showing the opened GSRR Phase 1 (Tollemache Rd North), GSRR Phase 2 being the opened new junction with the A1, the part opened GSRR Phase 3 route, and the A52 passing through the town de-trunked.

Object

Representation ID: 2091

Received: 25/04/2024

Respondent: Buckminster

We do not approve of the apparent watering down of the climate change impacts wording, and the new wording does not make grammatical sense. We suggest the wording should be ‘….minimise their impact on climate change….’ We think k. would better read – ‘natural environment and natural store of carbon through green infrastructure.’

Object

Representation ID: 2092

Received: 25/04/2024

Respondent: Buckminster

There is an inherent contradiction between Paragraph a. and e. as there is a presumption in favour of solar panels on grade 3b, 4 and 5 that will have a negative impact on that agricultural land asset in terms of reduced food security for as long as PV panels and their associated semi- industrial associated infrastructure remain.

Support

Representation ID: 2093

Received: 25/04/2024

Respondent: Buckminster

We support the sub-regional growth status of Grantham given its strategic location on the A1 north-south and A52 east-west road axes, and mainline station stop that equally enables N/S/E/W links.

Support

Representation ID: 2094

Received: 25/04/2024

Respondent: Buckminster

The allocation in South Witham for 138 new homes is welcomed and supported, Buckminster being the site owner and promoter of the part comprising 107 homes. We are already in discussion with the agent for the owners of the existing allocation for 37 homes. The comprehensive master plan approach is supported as it means a coherent and more efficient development sharing infrastructure e.g. access and drainage.

Support

Representation ID: 2095

Received: 25/04/2024

Respondent: Buckminster

It is noted in 7.14 that the 2023 Local Housing Needs Assessment identifies a requirement of 27-57% of the overall housing need figure of 701 to be affordable. 27%-57% is a high bar as most local authorities have a policy requirement for schemes to have around 30% to 40% affordable homes, but we appreciate this is yet to be determined in the Whole Plan Study.

Object

Representation ID: 2096

Received: 25/04/2024

Respondent: Buckminster

Indicative mix of homes to be delivered up to 2041: we consider this should instead of 2011 Census data use 2021 Census data, and use more up to date data for household projections than ONS 2018 projections.