Object

Representation ID: 4727

Received: 12/12/2023

Respondent: Mrs Muriel Collins

“Stay awhile amid its ancient charm “ Stamford is at capacity with homes, traffic and congestion on a near daily basis. Do Rutland residents of Gt Casterton, Little Casterton, Ryhall, Toll-bar wish to become part of Stamford, if all these homes are built they will surely feel the impact as well as Stamfordians. Problems with GPs, schools, supermarkets and infrastructure, this development will only increase these problems. Quarry farm deserves wildlife status, councils seem to be contradicting themselves in wanting to build here. Wildlife will not survive if moved as suggested. Many are helped with mental health enjoying this area

All site appraisals have been reviewed in the light of comments and further evidence received to determine their suitability for allocation.

Object

Representation ID: 4731

Received: 12/12/2023

Respondent: Mrs Jenny Hall

Building on Local Candidate Wildlife site is conflicts with the stated biodiversity aims of Rutland's environmental strategy, especially its Nature Recovery Strategy (EN2), Biodiversity Action Plan and previous CS4 policy commitment not to build in open countryside. The size of the development and the environmental destruction it will cause is entirely inconsistent with Rutland environmental Policy. The proposal does not fulfil the criteria for a sustainable community, due to its heavy reliance on services provided by the neighbouring council (SKDC), which are already under severe strain and not meeting community needs.

All site appraisals have been reviewed in the light of comments and further evidence received to determine their suitability for allocation.

Object

Representation ID: 4739

Received: 12/12/2023

Respondent: Miss Serena Solanki

Proposed development 100% within Mineral Safeguarding area. It will be in close proximity to a planned monument. On the Stamford border which will further stress local resources and contribute to local traffic. Local roads are not designed for new loading and volume of traffic. Lincolnshire County Council needs to be contacted as they manage the roads in Stamford.
Why aren't brownfield site delveopment priority? Woolfox and St George's barracks? The Barracks will be decommissioned in 2026.
All options for growth proposal have NEGATIVE affects as per Aecom SA report page 3.and section 9.11 page 51 adverse affects on SSSI

All site appraisals have been reviewed in the light of comments and further evidence received to determine their suitability for allocation.

Object

Representation ID: 4785

Received: 18/12/2023

Respondent: Mr Patrick Broadhurst

I live on Casterton Road and I can tell you the town cannot cope with more traffic, its absolute chaos. Stamford services cannot cope with these extra houses, Lakeside medical has been voted top 4 worse medical centers in the Country. Rutland council will get all the benefits whilst Stamford residents suffer. This must be stopped until services and infrastructure are better. The quarry is on a greenfield site and important environmentally, how can can councils even consider building houses on it?

All site appraisals have been reviewed in the light of comments and further evidence received to determine their suitability for allocation.

Object

Representation ID: 4797

Received: 19/12/2023

Respondent: Mr Gareth Vaughan

The proposed junction on Little Casterton Rd connecting Stamford North and Quarry Farm is badly thought through -it will result in huge congestion and bottlenecks that end of town especially with the proposed primary school. The Quarry Farm development is a disaster in waiting -destroying an important green space to facilitate Stamford North is not acceptable and the proposal will cause more harm than good. Please reconsider.

All site appraisals have been reviewed in the light of comments and further evidence received to determine their suitability for allocation.

Object

Representation ID: 4811

Received: 19/12/2023

Respondent: Mr Ian Dobson

This proposal does not fulfill the Rutland CC Objectives. It does not sit close to Oakham or Uppingham and does not enhance Rutland. It enables Lincolnshire to achieve their Housing figures and is on a Green Site not Brown. Stamford has several Brown sites available which should be developed before this one.
The Medical and Education facilities in the area are already full. The road infrastructure and drainage network are both barely adequate currently and this development will create overcapacity leading to high cost solutions.
The A1 currently has queues back onto the main highway every weekday evening.

All site appraisals have been reviewed in the light of comments and further evidence received to determine their suitability for allocation.

Object

Representation ID: 4837

Received: 20/12/2023

Respondent: Miss helen gillies

It will make Stamford overcrowded and put pressure on already full public services like GPs

All site appraisals have been reviewed in the light of comments and further evidence received to determine their suitability for allocation.

Object

Representation ID: 4854

Received: 21/12/2023

Respondent: Mrs hayley taylor

I strongly object to the proposal for 650 properties to be built on the quarry off Little Casterton Road
This could equate to an extra 1,300 vehicles on the roads in and around the town . Getting into town at certain times, is already gridlocked let alone the increase in traffic on Little casterton road
The Riverside surgery is so badly overrun with an extra 1,300 PLUS people it will only get worse.
The quarry site is already a nice walk, full of natural beauty and wildlife.

The only winners in this project will be the developers and Council

All site appraisals have been reviewed in the light of comments and further evidence received to determine their suitability for allocation.

Object

Representation ID: 4882

Received: 22/12/2023

Respondent: Mrs Allison Duggins

It is a Local Candidate Wildlife site and it’s inclusion is in conflict with Rutland’s environmental strategy, especially its Nature Recovery Strategy (EN2), Biodiversity Action Plan and previous CS4 policy commitment to not build in open countryside. Neither does it fulfil the criteria for a sustainable community, partly because of the spatial strategy, but also because of its over-reliance on service and infrastructure provision in the neighbouring town of Stamford (within SKDC) and they do not deliver as it is.

All site appraisals have been reviewed in the light of comments and further evidence received to determine their suitability for allocation.

Object

Representation ID: 4886

Received: 24/12/2023

Respondent: Ms Sue Milsom

The local infrastructure cannot cope with 650 additional homes in this part of Stamford, it is Stamford that will bear the brunt not Rutland which will only benefit. No supermarkets, Doctors or dentists in this part of Stamford will increase the amount of traffic crossing Stamford, the recent water outage shows the town’s road can’t cope with any more traffic than there already is. The Sidney farm lane junction which already has poor visibility considering it is national speed limit will be a death trap, the A1 slip roads too. The A606 exit already tails back onto the A1.

All site appraisals have been reviewed in the light of comments and further evidence received to determine their suitability for allocation.

Object

Representation ID: 4890

Received: 24/12/2023

Respondent: Mrs Justine McGarrity

This proposal has not taken into account the current network of roads which are already so busy especially at rush hours. Rutland CC can barely maintain their current network of roads into Stamford as seen on the A606 at the A1 junction which has been in a terrible state for nigh on a year! To add another 650 homes and potentially another 1200 vehicles is madness. To decimate the area which is so very abundant with wildlife and green space is a terrible thing to do.

All site appraisals have been reviewed in the light of comments and further evidence received to determine their suitability for allocation.

Object

Representation ID: 4900

Received: 27/12/2023

Respondent: Mr David Flynn

I object to the inclusion of Quarry Farm in RCC's revised local plan. The open fields are vital to Skylarks and other ground nesting birds and numerous species of wildlife. What happened to Rutland's previous policy of protecting the environment? Stamford already has planned housing developments that will overstretch its resources and infrastructure, without a further 650 houses planned by Rutland. Surely, St Georges barracks, which will stand idle in 2026, would be a better alternative!

All site appraisals have been reviewed in the light of comments and further evidence received to determine their suitability for allocation.

Object

Representation ID: 4925

Received: 29/12/2023

Respondent: Mrs Susan Marsh

Quarry Farm must be retained at all costs. Vital protection of the habitat of dwindling wildlife which once disturbed will never return. Open space for community wellbeing. Traffic issues already and then compounded by homes and creating a woodland park having destroyed existing woodland attracting more traffic and pollution. Who exactly are these properties being built for? Years of noise and disruption having to be endurded locally? Issues in Stamford are very well documented and known by all so let's hope common sense prevails and Rutland builds homes needed on their own land. Stamford simply cannot cope with more developments.

All site appraisals have been reviewed in the light of comments and further evidence received to determine their suitability for allocation.

Object

Representation ID: 4927

Received: 29/12/2023

Respondent: Mr Jonathan Lott

Firstly, it is totally undemocratic and unreasonable for Rutland to essentially tackle its housing obligation by building in a town that is not even part of the county, it in fact in Lincolnshire.
Furthermore:
1. Quarry Fam is an area of environmental importance
2. It is also a much valued recreational asset for Stamford
3 Stamford already has a shortage of school places and doctors and this plan would put further extreme pressure on Stamford.
4. The construction would also lead to heavy vehicle traffic along local residential roads including Arran Road.

This must not go ahead.

All site appraisals have been reviewed in the light of comments and further evidence received to determine their suitability for allocation.

Object

Representation ID: 4942

Received: 31/12/2023

Respondent: Mr Neal Ince

This is an environmentally important site with woodlands and important wildlife and plant life. It's open countryside and completely inappropriate for development. It provides recreational opportunities for the people of Stamford. Available brownfield sites (eg St. Georges Barracks, which is twice the size), should be used instead.
Rutland CC should be ashamed of itself allocating half of its house building target to Stamford.

All site appraisals have been reviewed in the light of comments and further evidence received to determine their suitability for allocation.

Object

Representation ID: 4950

Received: 31/12/2023

Respondent: Mrs Jane Ince

I have huge concerns about the environmental impact of this development. The quarry supports wildlife and plantlife that could not be supported elsewhere. It is not appropriate for development

We do not have the infrastructure to support a further 650 homes. Lakeside Healthcare already struggles to provide adequate care for its existing population. Empingham medical centre is at capacity. Both surgeries have had huge problems recruiting. Even if a new surgery is built how is it going to be staffed? There are the same issues in dental care and a lack of secondary school places.

All site appraisals have been reviewed in the light of comments and further evidence received to determine their suitability for allocation.

Object

Representation ID: 4966

Received: 01/01/2024

Respondent: Protect Quarry Farm

I object on the basis that:
there are more favourable sites within Rutland such as St Georges ;
the development runs counter to the underlying environmental biodiversity aims set out in the plan;
the development is not sustainable i.e. there is no or under -provision within the plan for key services
the plan lacks a thorough traffic impact survey and nothing has been offered in term of mitigation within the plan as to how traffic leaving from / returning to Monarch Park or using the link road will affect traffic flows on the surrounding network esp. the A1

All site appraisals have been reviewed in the light of comments and further evidence received to determine their suitability for allocation.

Object

Representation ID: 4969

Received: 01/01/2024

Respondent: Mr Alex Smith

I object to the proposal for the following reasons -

1. Harm to environmental site, biodiversity and wildlife habitat damage. The proposed country park will not mitigate this harm.
2. Strain on local infrastructure and resources. The proposed minor road changes will not mitigate this.

All site appraisals have been reviewed in the light of comments and further evidence received to determine their suitability for allocation.

Object

Representation ID: 5061

Received: 02/01/2024

Respondent: Mr Frank Trott

Let me be honest, your plan is stupid benefitting Developers and Rutland County Council, there is no benefit in your proposal for the people of Stamford who will have their lives blighted. Not one extra real job, not one extra link to the A1, not one extra piece of proposed infrastructure, in fact you will be placing a burden on Stamford which you will not be paying for, your site will be paid for by the council tax payers of Stamford and not Rutland. Your development will be a parasitic attachment freely taking services, giving nothing in return.

All site appraisals have been reviewed in the light of comments and further evidence received to determine their suitability for allocation.

Object

Representation ID: 5062

Received: 02/01/2024

Respondent: Miss Helen Mulcahy

This development will have a significant impact on Stamford and its surrounding villages. Stamford does not have the infrastructure to support this development. The town is already struggling with traffic flow and an increase of cars exiting onto casterton road with have an adverse effect. Quarry farm is abundant with wildlife and the effect this with have on the environment is a disgrace. The site is used by many local people and is incredibly important for mental wellbeing.

All site appraisals have been reviewed in the light of comments and further evidence received to determine their suitability for allocation.

Object

Representation ID: 5070

Received: 02/01/2024

Respondent: Ms Anna Russo

How can it be fair for Rutland County Council to achieve 50% of their housing target and collect the Council Tax while SKDC funds the costs and collects nothing?
Rutland County Council state they are for environment preservation yet are proposing the destruction of an important and unique natural green environment.
This development can only excacerbate the congestion, lack of services and quality of life in Stamford.
Can Rutland County Council tell us why brownfield sites in Rutland cannot be used before encroaching on Lincolshire green space?
We strongly oppose this development which has nothing positive in it.

All site appraisals have been reviewed in the light of comments and further evidence received to determine their suitability for allocation.

Object

Representation ID: 5252

Received: 03/01/2024

Respondent: Mrs Ginny Matthew

The building planned will destroy valuable habitat that qualifies as a candidate wildlife site when there are other brownfield sites in Rutland not yet used - not enough emphasis has been placed on the environmental impact
it is unfair that Stamford town council and South Kesteven will provide services to residents who will pay council tax to Rutland.
Stamford has recently seen a massive increase in housing developments and the pressures on existing roads and services is unsustainable.

All site appraisals have been reviewed in the light of comments and further evidence received to determine their suitability for allocation.

Object

Representation ID: 5253

Received: 03/01/2024

Respondent: Mary Cade

The development of Quarry Farm will only be supported as part of the planning application for the whole Stamford North proposed development. If the Stamford North development is not approved then Rutland will lose 650 homes that it is relying on to maintain its 5 year housing land supply. This will result in a return to 'presumption in favour of (sustainable) development', which allowed Ketton to be saddled with 75 (and another possible 41) houses on top of the 86 which were on allocated sites. Surely safer to rely on sites that do not rely on approval by another LA.

All site appraisals have been reviewed in the light of comments and further evidence received to determine their suitability for allocation.

Support

Representation ID: 5351

Received: 04/01/2024

Respondent: South Kesteven District Council

To ensure the delivery of Stamford North, through the provision of a link road and associated infrastructure, a proportion of the allocation must be delivered within Rutland County. The Council therefore welcomes the inclusion of Quarry Farm/Monarch Park within Policy H1 as a site proposed for 650 dwellings to be provided as part of a comprehensive Sustainable Urban Extension to Stamford. The Council agrees that not allocating Quarry Farm would adversely impact South Kesteven’s five-year housing land supply and stifle the growth of South Kesteven’s second town.

Support noted.

Object

Representation ID: 5374

Received: 04/01/2024

Respondent: Mr Bob Blakeborough

Housing developments located in the countryside are not only adding to congestion and carbon emissions, but are trapping communities into car-dependence.

The 650 Stamford North dwellings will be so far from Stamford town centre that essential services such as shops, schools and GP surgeries will be almost impossible to reach on foot, adding thousands of extra car journeys to the town’s roads.

This is contrary to the Local Plan vision and objectives of creating ‘healthy, sustainable, mixed communities with easy access to services and facilities by cycling, walking, public transport as well as by private vehicle’.

All site appraisals have been reviewed in the light of comments and further evidence received to determine their suitability for allocation.

Object

Representation ID: 5384

Received: 04/01/2024

Respondent: Mr Stuart Stevenson

There is not enough infrastructure in Stamford. One doctors that is inadequate and will not cope with the extra demand. Only one secondary school in Stamford, with places at a premium. Increase in traffic in the town and coming off the A1. The site is a fantastic green space for walking and exercising. It is home to various wildlife, flowers , fauna and ancient woodlands. The site sits on an area that is constantly flooded. I moved to Stamford for its charm and now it is becoming an overgrown housing development, with dwellings overpriced and not what the community needs.

All site appraisals have been reviewed in the light of comments and further evidence received to determine their suitability for allocation.

Object

Representation ID: 5391

Received: 04/01/2024

Respondent: Mrs Dee Downham

Houses should not be built here - the area should be kept as an area of natural beauty. Stamford can not cope with any more housing for such a small town centre and areas such as these are needed to stop urban sprawl. This will connect Stamford to Casterton. Also increased risk of flooding. Green spaces needed.

All site appraisals have been reviewed in the light of comments and further evidence received to determine their suitability for allocation.

Object

Representation ID: 5420

Received: 04/01/2024

Respondent: Mr Barry Collins

Quarry Farm amongst other things is a natural wetland and after seeing the problems Barleythorpe has experienced recently with flooding and also the Welland overflowing and flooding parts of Stamford. Which could be down to overdevelopment around these areas because watercourses such as rivers are natural drain’s. By building on Quarry Farm the water that it now soak’s up could head towards the nearest watercourse which is the Gwash which could cause flooding in the Casterton’s , Ryhall etc .

All site appraisals have been reviewed in the light of comments and further evidence received to determine their suitability for allocation.

Object

Representation ID: 5465

Received: 04/01/2024

Respondent: Mr Kevin shell

Stamford is full. We don't need any more pressure on our services. We lack doctors, schools and our roads are overcrowded.

All site appraisals have been reviewed in the light of comments and further evidence received to determine their suitability for allocation.

Object

Representation ID: 5467

Received: 05/01/2024

Respondent: Mr Mark Durrant

Both Quarry farm and the Stamford North developments are intrinsically linked and will result in an overpopulation of the town which already has an over stretched infrastructure and resources available or proposed, as part of these developments. There are clear and obvious objections raised by those organisations required to give approval. These include, National Highways re: impact on the SRM and access to the A1. P'boro Council: Exceeding Transport Assessment Criteria. Wildlife Trust. Sport England re: loss of facilities and excessive noise pollution caused by the removal of the STFC Football club bund. Therefore I strongly object to this development.

All site appraisals have been reviewed in the light of comments and further evidence received to determine their suitability for allocation.