Object

Representation ID: 5918

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: Ms Nicolette Morphy

Quarry Farm is a Candidate local wildlife site, full of protected species, kingfishers and great crested newts. Creation of a country park is proposed, which won’t be any substitute for loss of natural countryside.
There is no infrastructure to support proposed new housing, (GP surgery, School provision). The proposed road from Ryhall to Casterton Road will be jammed with cars heading to shopping centres, all on the east of the town.
It seems unjust that Rutland County Council would be achieving 50% of its housing targets with Quarry Farm, and claim Council Tax from these residents, without providing any services.

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

Object

Representation ID: 5929

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: Miss Victoria Young

Summary:
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)

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

Object

Representation ID: 5930

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: Mr Daniel Hussey

Rutland is not part of south Kesteven so we should not be burdened by their needs. We limited doctors and dentists as it is and the infrastructure for roads is insufficient as it is now. The flooding we have recently been hit with will become worse as climate worsens, we need green space and fields to support our drainage. I object on all accounts above.

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

Object

Representation ID: 5938

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: Mrs Linda Battle

If this development is approved it will be failing the people of Stamford and beyond, it will ignore not only the numerous objections over the past few years, but also the wellbeing of a community. It will put enormous strain on our infrastructure and local services. It will damage the precious environment that we all cherish. It will destroy the habitats of our wildlife that has survived and increased over many years.

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

Object

Representation ID: 5940

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: Mrs Hayley Erskine

Quarry Farm and the area of Stamford North is not an appropriate site for development. It a site of great biodiversity and Stamford infrastructure is already at breaking point. Where I live on Ryhall Road, the congestion is overwhelming with people trying to get to supermarkets and the doctors/schools.

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

Object

Representation ID: 5952

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: Amanda Bull

Doctors and schools in Stamford are already under capacity. More housing would place further strain. Quarry farm is an area of rich biodiversity providing habitats for wild plants/animals. Housing would destroy 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: 5956

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: Mrs Nicola Howson

The development will have a major impact on the current town infrastructure, facilities and traffic situation within the town of Stamford. Impact will be here and not in Rutland, consideration to this fact should be given.
Plans are in complete contradiction to the Rutland environmental strategy.

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

Object

Representation ID: 5958

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: Mrs Leah Jennings

Reason's for objection include a lack of confidence in the proposed infrastructure being able to support the development and a lack of confidence that promised additional facilities to support the increasing population won't suffice - Stamford already struggles with provision here (e.g. Drs surgeries). I also have reservations around the environmental impact. I will sue Rutland council if this goes ahead and we are negatively impacted despite the objections.

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

Object

Representation ID: 5965

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: Miss Catherine Young

I object to this for the following reasons.
1, Impact of traffic congestion, parking, access and infrastructure to the town
2, Impact of damage to Stamfords green spaces and biodiversity
3, Rutland CC, housing being built in stamford, that uses Lincolnshire services with no benefits to Lincolnshire residents or housing figures.

3,

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

Object

Representation ID: 5969

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: Miss Catherine Young

Impact of traffic to the local area, loss of green space to the local area.

Stress on GPs schools and other local facilities that are already struggling.

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

Object

Representation ID: 5972

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: Mr Nick Wright

Despite the proposed development being in Rutland, the residents of these 650 houses will be dependent on and users of Stamford's already stretched infrastructure. Transport, health/medical facilities and education provision will be not be able to cope with the additional burden placed upon them, leading to increased stress and inconvenience for all residents, both existing and new.

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

Object

Representation ID: 5978

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: Mr David Popple

The existing site has successfully changed from a working quarry to a habit of biodiversity. With our ever decreasing wildlife, surely we need to be preserving these sites rather than building on them. There are plenty of sites with no wildlife considerations such as Ashwell prison and St George’s Barracks that can be built in.

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

Object

Representation ID: 5992

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: Mrs Tina Goor

These homes are not required as there is no infrastructure to support this application, it would also destroy an area of natural beauty with it being a Local 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.It will also over-reliance on services and infrastructure provision in the neighbouring town of Stamford which is already struggling to accommodate the population of said town.

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

Object

Representation ID: 6004

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: Ms Donna Brown

Infrasture for town not capable of supporting extra traffic, utilities and lack of NHS services .

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

Object

Representation ID: 6013

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: Mrs Michelle Goodwin

The proposed development is set in open countryside a space used by a large number of locals. It provides the perfect environment for wildlife including badgers, bats and deer. The Covid pandemic showed green free accessible open spaces are vital for people's wellbeing and mental health. This development will only add to Stamford's insufficient infrastructure, no NHS dental spaces, failing doctors surgery, most secondary school children are bused elsewhere, a failing road system around the local villages and town. The workers traffic sits on the A1 at A606 junction this will get worse as there is no work in 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: 6017

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: Ms Sarah Jane Nichols

Developing here conflicts with Rutland’s Nature Recovery Strategy (EN2), Biodiversity Action Plan and previous CS4 policy.
There is not the infrastructure in place to support a development of this size and there will be no benefit o the town of Stamford.
the destruction of the bio-diversly of the area is not warranted and will result in further strain on species that are already endanged.

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

Object

Representation ID: 6023

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: Mrs Charlotte Waldock

I object to this proposed development based on the following grounds:
- loss of candidate wildlife site
- insufficient infrastructure to support development
- traffic congestion

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

Object

Representation ID: 6032

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: Mrs Wendy Shelbourn

This proposal would contribute to the destruction of the character and nature of Stamford, considered a jewel. The lives of anyone living nearby and in villages abutting the site would be forever plagued by the traffic, noise, light and air pollution delivered by this brutal plan. It is astonishing that with all the environmental damage already done that anyone with an eye to the future would ever consider it a good idea to destroy a unique parcel of land on which local people may experience that rare sense of nature and communal freedom.

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

Object

Representation ID: 6063

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: Miss Tracey Miles

Object to this development as Stamford is already over developed and infrastructure including schools, roads, doctors etc are struggling to cope with the increase of houses already built.

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

Object

Representation ID: 6082

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: Mr Alastair McMillan

There are more appropriate alternatives within the local plan area
The development does not achieve the environmental objectives set out in the plan
No, or limited, provision within the plan for key services
Insufficient transport mitigation strategy, particularly considering the present lack of public transport alternatives

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

Object

Representation ID: 6106

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: Mrs Gemma Holbird

Quarry farm is a local wildlife site with category a woodlands and diverse plant species and protected wildlife species.
This community development is not sustainable and would place unprecedented pressure on education and health care services.
The significant increase in traffic would make Stamford roads congested and dangerous - especially given that all amenities are the other side of town.
RCC have previously have had a policy against building in open countryside and there is no reason why Quarry farm should be the exception.

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

Object

Representation ID: 6113

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: Ms Elmi Kettle

As a Stamford resident, I object to the loss of sites of natural beauty. I also object to Rutland developing in Stamford - our infrastructure cannot support such vast development.

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

Object

Representation ID: 6119

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: Ms Elmi Kettle

Stamford infrastructure cannot accommodate such a large development. Stamford residents will be worse off with loss of the green areas. Use brownfield sites closer to Oakham.

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

Object

Representation ID: 6139

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: Miss Judy Lindsay-Timmins

Building on flood plain not practical especially in view of recent increased flood damage across the county/country. SSI site should not be destroyed. Local services already oversubscribed & struggling is doctor, dentist, school, college. Unable to safely access construction site.

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

Object

Representation ID: 6164

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: Mrs Emma Stafford

My objections are as follow: * Increased congestion * Strain on already stretched resources and infrastructure of Stamford * Lack of employment opportunities locally (especially those who don't drive) * Environment impact of the development on the site and wildlife * Money going to Rutland, when the impact will be felt by Stamford, * Hollow promises - relief road needed first, but this will probably be the last thing on the builders agenda and will never materialise. Also say they will build 50 less houses and still building 650 in a smaller area and crammed in (still same impact).

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

Object

Representation ID: 6176

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: Mrs Sue Holloway

Stamford is already highly congested and adding 650 dwellings will bring it to a grinding halt. Building Stamford North will effectively almost join up the village of Ryhall with Stamford eating into the important greefield areas. There is not the infrastructure re. schools, healthcare, roads, town parking etc to accommodate so many houses.

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

Object

Representation ID: 6189

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: Mrs Karen Reid

This would be detrimental to the local area, both environmentally and because the local infrastructure would not be able to accommodate such a development. We do not have sufficient resources locally. We do not want to list the valuable resource we do have: Quarry Farm.

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

Object

Representation ID: 6191

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: Mr Daniel Ledger

Development will permanently damage an important wildlife and recreational area that is used and loved by many local residents. What will be left will be readily accessible to new residents ant the expense of existing. Road infrastructure is insufficient to support this many properties without substantial improvents not detailed in these plans or sufficient details to show how existing spine roads such as litle Casterton and Casterton will not be impacted. Other development such as St George's barracks does not have the same adverse impact.

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

Object

Representation ID: 6193

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: Mr Michael O'Connell

Very much against the proposal. The traffic situation in Stamford is already beyond ridiculous. Living behind Borderville the noise levels are already an issue, taking the mound away will have an unacceptable impact. Medical services are already overrun. You can't advertise Stamford as a quintessential market town whilst concurrently filling green space with cheap new builds.

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

Object

Representation ID: 6196

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: Kerry Thomson

Loss of popular green space, increased traffic, more pollution and parking problems. Greater pressure on local services. Inreased strain on infrastructure.

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