(Quarry Farm/Monarch Park)

Object

Representation ID: 4531

Received: 30/11/2023

Respondent: Mr PHILIP WILLIAMS

Scale much two big... you need to look at other brownfield sites ..cottesmore kendrew barracks.... a site of this size should be enclosed nearer to Oakham not on the fringe of Stamford
Stamford will not benefit from this development...so no thank you

Object

Representation ID: 4532

Received: 30/11/2023

Respondent: Mrs Chloe Surer

I object to see what little country side we have left, be destroyed.

Object

Representation ID: 4545

Received: 01/12/2023

Respondent: Mr Stephen Cook

The Scale of this proposal is much too big... you need to look at other brownfield sites we all ready have enough housing in Stamford with no support services you would be ruining a nature area to gain nothing only greed for the housing contractors so I say No thanks

Object

Representation ID: 4546

Received: 01/12/2023

Respondent: Mr Kieran Wade

Anyone at Rutland County Council who cares one bit about the environment or other people should be against this proposal.

Object

Representation ID: 4560

Received: 01/12/2023

Respondent: Mr Kevin Corby

No Development should be permitted on the Candidate Local Wildlife Site. There is no essential need, and the area should be protected as per LLR Biodiversity action Plan, and further enhanced as per Local Nature Recovery Strategy. Allowing development on this land would amount to a total contradiction of RCC's stated Environmental / Biodiversity Strategies (nos 1 & 8). RCC stated that this development would not be considered otherwise, therefore any permitted development should be conditional on the cLWS being fully protected.

Object

Representation ID: 4570

Received: 02/12/2023

Respondent: Miss Carys Vaughan

This is a candidate local wildlife site that sits in open countryside. Rutland should not be using it to meet a vast portion of their housing target when they have other much more appropriate options (St George’s). It goes against all Rutland’s stated environmental aims and policies, particularly in relation to biodiversity, ecosystem integrity & tree protection & enhancement

Object

Representation ID: 4572

Received: 02/12/2023

Respondent: Mr Liam Batkin

this is a fantastic area for important wildlife. Building houses on this area will impact on a vital area for biodiversity. It goes against everything said in other parts of the local plan. Local infrastructure cannot handle the extra pressure. Look at other sites like St. Georges barracks which does not have these issues attached to it.

Object

Representation ID: 4575

Received: 02/12/2023

Respondent: Mr Steve Twine

Lack of infrastructure (supermarkets, doctors) and loss of environment. Also, extra traffic without any improvement to A1 traffic links (Most residents will be commuting as rhere are few work opportunities in Stamford)

Object

Representation ID: 4579

Received: 02/12/2023

Respondent: Mrs Bridget Queiros

This huge development will have a major negative effect on a local area of natural beauty. It is a Local Wildlife site and developing here conflicts with Rutland’s Nature Recovery Strategy (EN2), Biodiversity Action Plan and previous CS4 policy commitment to not build in open countryside. Very limited resources are being provided by Rutland, which will depend on future residents using services and infrastructure in Stamford. Outside of Rutland, Stamford will not receive any council tax to fund services used by these residents. As a resident of the adjacent existing housing estate in Stamford these seems a cynical choice.

Object

Representation ID: 4583

Received: 02/12/2023

Respondent: Mr Kevin Rippin

We don't need this Development in our lovely town , our local services cannot cope now . You local councillors need to come into the real word and see the daily traffic and parking problems in Stamford ( None more so than when traffic is diverted off the A1 through town ) its an absolute nightmare .
When are you Councillors going to listen to what the residents of Stamford are saying , all our concerns are falling on deaf ears , wake up before its too late !!!! Use some common sense this town will not cope !!!!!

Object

Representation ID: 4586

Received: 02/12/2023

Respondent: Mr Leonard Marshall

Stamford's medical facilities, secondary educational establishments,and road and parking facilities will be vastly over subscribed. the latter particularly in the school and commute hours. All this at the loss of a precious natural beauty wildlife area. No benefit to Stamford and great cost to nature and the inhabitants quality of life

Object

Representation ID: 4589

Received: 02/12/2023

Respondent: Mr N igel Callow

This is a valuable natural wildlife habitat and much loved local walking area. The planned development will destroy this precious peive of our countryside.

Object

Representation ID: 4597

Received: 04/12/2023

Respondent: Mrs Amanda Hoskins

To build here is going to destroy a beautiful wildlife area despite Rutland’s policy not to build on open countryside.

Furthermore this development is going to burden Stamford with more traffic and need for services. Rutland won’t be affected at all!

Object

Representation ID: 4620

Received: 04/12/2023

Respondent: Mrs Catherine Leeks

Traffic on roads would increase, people would need to commute to work therefore more congestion on the A1 and surrounding roads. Supermarkets on other side of town, increasing the traffic in the town.
Greater pressure on local services, our failing GP surgery, dentists, sewerage and water supply.
These houses lead on to a further 1350 houses the town would struggle to sustain.
Construction traffic would use the residential Arran Road or Great Casterton. These routes are used for Malcolm Sargent School & Casterton College.
Revenue from the council tax goes to Rutland all the impact would be on our town!!

Object

Representation ID: 4621

Received: 04/12/2023

Respondent: Mrs Catherine Leeks

We are retired nature loving, regular walkers of this site, having recorded 53 species of birds, several on the RED list and some on the Amber list. Winterwatch, Jan2022, warned of a huge decline across Europe of Skylarks & Yellowhammers. These two species number several pairs at the site during breeding season. Along with birds, we have recorded 23 species of butterflies, including the rare Pale Clouded Yellow.
Developers promise to provide a nature reserve-it is already a thriving reserve-and any disturbance would seriously affect the breeding of wildlife, with no guarantee of them returning.

Object

Representation ID: 4627

Received: 04/12/2023

Respondent: Mrs Debbie Tuisavura

This will hardly impact on Rutland but this will have a major impact on Stamford. Stamford is struggling at the moment with lack of Drs surgery and the traffic situation which will only be impacted further by the building of these houses . The site is teeming with wildlife which is enjoyed by local people as well as a regular safe place for walking dogs and horses.

Object

Representation ID: 4632

Received: 04/12/2023

Respondent: Mr James Owens

I feel building on a candidate local wildlife site would be wrong. We should protect our biodiverse green spaces to help mitigate the climate emergency. Rutland has better options for development like St. George’s Barracks.

Object

Representation ID: 4642

Received: 06/12/2023

Respondent: Mrs Alison Lowe

I object to this proposed development on the following grounds
- loss of green habitat
- unsustainable cannot be supported by local services
- poor road network in and around the site

Object

Representation ID: 4646

Received: 06/12/2023

Respondent: Mr Philip Lowe

I object to this development of a candidate wildlife site. There is insufficient infrastructure to support the development

Object

Representation ID: 4650

Received: 06/12/2023

Respondent: Mrs Jane Vaughan

Inadequate infrastructure
Traffic congestion
Loss of candidate wildlife site

Object

Representation ID: 4653

Received: 07/12/2023

Respondent: Mr Duncan Farrell

Loss of Biodiversity for may animals devastating specific species.
Loss of a recreational site in an area that needs it.
Massive increase in congestion.
Pollution increase and the environmental effects of this.

Object

Representation ID: 4655

Received: 07/12/2023

Respondent: Kayleigh Nicolaou

This is an unsustainable development which will have drastic impacts on the local fauna and flora. This is a candidate wildlife site and to build on it will cause untold damage to the local environment. Alongside this it will cause undue burden on the already struggling local services and infrastructure. This is an unsuitable location for a development of this size.

Object

Representation ID: 4680

Received: 09/12/2023

Respondent: Mr Barry Collins

Quarry Farm is a unique piece of land which I have enjoyed for decades it helps peoples well being and mental health. It should be left alone for future generation’s to enjoy. Building on it only benefits three parties Rutland, the developers and developers of Stamford North. Everyone else will suffer including Toll Bar, Little Casterton and all of the surrounding neighbourhoods. By letting this happen you go against your own and SKDC plans on protecting nature as a priority . We need nature to survive.

Object

Representation ID: 4686

Received: 09/12/2023

Respondent: Ms Jill Norfolk

Quarry Farm is on the border of Stamford. Rutland would gain 50% of their housing allocation plus the council tax from the extra houses yet Stamford facilities would be used with it being the nearest town. Quarry Farm/Monarch Park would take more than it would give. Leave this beautiful green space alone. We do not need more people, cars, congestion, pollution and lack of parking facilities to spoil our beautiful conservation town which cannot cope with the population that we have now.

Object

Representation ID: 4696

Received: 10/12/2023

Respondent: Ms Jo Richardson

I object to this proposal

Object

Representation ID: 4699

Received: 10/12/2023

Respondent: Ms Helen Anes

The quarry is a sanctuary for our town where we can go to feel removed from the hurry in life. It brings our community together and preserves a natural beauty and is a place that our family enjoys daily. Instead of development for housing, it should be preserved for recreation, and a place for all to enjoy. We do not have the infrastructure to support a housing development. The roads, schools and town would suffer with an overflow of more people, more cars and more demand for limited resources.

Object

Representation ID: 4702

Received: 10/12/2023

Respondent: Mr Allan Childerley

I feel the development of this scale would be detrimental to Stamford considering the large increase in traffic congestion and no availability for parking in the town which is already a serious problem. There is also a lack of medical facilities of both GP and dental practices in the town. The proposal to use Little Casterton road as the access route for the development and the town is woefully inadequate. Further development of over 2000 houses will be detrimental to the already lacking infrastructure of Stamford. We do need houses but not on this scale.

Object

Representation ID: 4710

Received: 11/12/2023

Respondent: Mr Chris Wright

Stamford simply can't take any more houses, as the road network is already a nightmare during the day, and the healthcare and schools just do not have the capacity. Stamford is slowly losing its charm which is very sad to see. Please see sense and make plans for building a new town / suburb on brown sites along the A1.

Object

Representation ID: 4723

Received: 11/12/2023

Respondent: Mr James Skinner

This site is plainly part of Stamford and will adversely affect the lives of Stamford residents leading to greater congestion, further strain on existing public services and greater traffic congestion. This will lead to to unsafe roads for our children in the schools in the area.

Object

Representation ID: 4725

Received: 12/12/2023

Respondent: Mrs Amanda Fitchie

The quarry is an area of natural beauty that is being 'cut back' to allow for unnecessary housing. Stamford is already being developed beyond it's capabilities, with the infrastructure of roads buckling under pressure, schools and doctors at bursting point. I have yet to see a practical plan of how these problems will be tackled with an increased population and cars on the road.