Object

Representation ID: 5028

Received: 02/01/2024

Respondent: Mrs Eileen Sturgess

My objection to the proposed travellers site is based on the disturbance of protected species including wildlife and trees on this site, which is important to our environment. It would have a large impact on our heritage assets in both the landscape and the character of our town. Access onto this already busy road would cause more danger to both pedestrians, cyclists and traffic than we already have, as Seaton Road has through traffic from small villages as well as farm and heavy vehicles, narrowing to a small country road.

Noted.

Object

Representation ID: 5045

Received: 02/01/2024

Respondent: Helen Lewis

The land is unsafe and not suitable due to the slope at the front and the back of the plot. It would not be cost effective to develop. Turning on to and off the narrow, already congested road would be difficult for longer caravan type vehicles. There would be further loss of a valuable wildlife area from Seaton road. There are no pathways on that side of the road or no pedestrian crossings. The site would be overlooked from houses above the site and not provide adequate privacy for the occupants. Flooding would be increased due to the hard standing.

Noted.

Object

Representation ID: 5143

Received: 03/01/2024

Respondent: Ms Sheena Mickleburgh

I object strongly to the proposal to provide gypsy and traveller accommodation accessed from Seaton Road, Uppingham. The site is too close to residential properties and seems to contradict the Council's Environmental policy towards retaining and preserving wildlife habitats and woodland.

Noted.

Object

Representation ID: 5322

Received: 04/01/2024

Respondent: Ms Sheena Stewart

The destruction of yet more woodland on the Seaton Rd and subsequent damage to wildlife is unacceptable and unnecessary. The site would be difficult to prepare as the mature trees would need protecting and the surrounding steep banks strengthened. Please reflect upon what happened to the Toon orchard at the bottom of Seaton Rd.
----Removed by the Council ---- Any benefits, if the proposal goes ahead, should outweigh the harm done and this cannot be demonstrated. Please reconsider this proposal. Thank you.

Noted.

Object

Representation ID: 5389

Received: 04/01/2024

Respondent: Miss C Morrissey

I object to the land being used for this purpose -I live directly behind the proposed site and can vouch for other several comments being made re the array of wildlife that would be disturbed - moles, squirrels, badgers, bats not to mention the amount of trees and forestry that are in situ - along with the uneven surfaces. This would be a complete evasion of privacy for both parties .There is nothing rural or remote about this location ,Im also sure the traveller families would much rather live somewhere more secluded .
The road access is already a hazard

Noted.

Object

Representation ID: 5401

Received: 03/01/2024

Respondent: P.G. Rees

Our objection is to the traveller site on Seaton Road Uppingham H10.3
This is a wholly inappropriate for a number of reasons, Access onto Seaton Rd, close proximity to existing residential housing, too small to be viable considering the cost involved !

Noted.

Object

Representation ID: 5415

Received: 04/01/2024

Respondent: Mrs Joanne Cleaver

My property is adjacent to proposed plan. This will be a danger to Ash Close,Brooke,Cedar ,Hornbeam/Blackthorn as vehicular, pedestrian and cycle access and adequate parking is not sustainable in this area.
.Nature conservation -we have many wildlife naturally in this woodland area,foxes,badgers,nesting birds,bats and many more.
.This site will intrusive toward Uppingham and have a detrimental effect on the area.
.Noise pollution, visual pollution.
.House prices effected.
. Air pollution
---Removed by the Council---

Noted.

Object

Representation ID: 5433

Received: 04/01/2024

Respondent: Mr Ross Mckie

As a resident of blackthorn close I’m object to the plans due to its location
Seaton road is a very busy road now with another junction it will cause chaos further more it would destroy the wildlife and the trees what are already there

Noted.

Object

Representation ID: 5436

Received: 04/01/2024

Respondent: Mrs Barbara Reeves

I object to the site as it’s too small ,
Loss of trees,privacy of neighbours.
Health and welfare of the town
Nature of the town eg.wildlife and disruption of health care facilities
Traffic awareness not suitable
Traffic causing extra worry if accidents .
Worry causing electrical,sewage problems that are already overloaded.

Noted.

Object

Representation ID: 5437

Received: 04/01/2024

Respondent: Miss Faye West

---Removed by the Council---
Childrens safety walking to and from school ---Removed by the Council---
Wildlife conservation, trees, ---Removed by the Council--- My children have special needs eg. Autism, COPD breathing issues, severe asthma, which will be severely effected with pollution ---Removed by the Council---. Traffic is unsuitable going to be increased in an already difficult position. Worried about extra speeding traffic causing danger to children.

Noted.

Object

Representation ID: 5445

Received: 04/01/2024

Respondent: Mrs Joanne Stanton

This proposed site is totally inappropriate. The already narrow dangerous stretch of road does not need another junction in close proximity the the ones already there. It is a long well established wildlife habit which includes roosting bats. It wouldn't have the turning space required for the effective movement of caravans. For the sake of 3 pitches the disruption and cost would not be viable. I'm sure a more suitable level grounded site could be found.

Noted.

Object

Representation ID: 5515

Received: 05/01/2024

Respondent: Mrs Margaret Middleton

I object to a traveller site being developed on Seaton Road.

Noted.

Object

Representation ID: 5570

Received: 03/01/2024

Respondent: Mrs Lesley Rugg

The site near Seaton road is close to existing housing on both sides of the road. Access to these houses is too small and the traffic comes down the road far to quickly. Too small to be viable considering the cost of development.

Noted.

Object

Representation ID: 5604

Received: 05/01/2024

Respondent: Miss Faye West

Conflict of space needed for extra parking and location unsuitable.
Worried about extra cars on the hill
Worried about pollution.
Environmental pollution
Site not being big enough or flat enough to hold vehicles
Wildlife being uprooted and destroyed as.many beautiful animals-birds live in this area
Uppingham heritage bring uprooted.
The protection of the trees.
Noise pollution
Uppingham to stay as a rural beautiful site
Visitors to Uppingham not wanting to come Worried about our ever dwinderling Uppingham local shops.

Noted.

Object

Representation ID: 5610

Received: 05/01/2024

Respondent: Mrs Joanne Cleaver

As a direct stones throw away from the proposed site I would like to object.
This will cause me great distress,from noise pollution,environmental pollution.The effect of clearing the forest to make way for all the vehicles will be damaging to the wonderful wildlife we have always had the pleasure of seeing-birds,foxes,badgers all the nesting birds.I am also concerning about the ever demand on Uppingham local businesses as many people will not want to come to Uppingham to shop and this is a great concern.Also this will increase an ever overloaded traffic on the hill(Seaton hill)

Noted.

Object

Representation ID: 5652

Received: 05/01/2024

Respondent: Mrs Julia Watson

This site on Seaton road is entirely unsuitable on grounds of access and safety, apart from noise and other environmental factors. The minor road already suffers from the dangers of excess parking at the brow of the hill beyond the cricket pavilion apart from three turns into residential sites.

Noted.

Object

Representation ID: 5693

Received: 06/01/2024

Respondent: Mrs Kathleen Fogg

I object to the travellers site on seaton road

Noted.

Object

Representation ID: 5708

Received: 06/01/2024

Respondent: Mrs Gillian Agar

Damage to wildlife and destruction of natural habitat and woodland is unacceptable and unnecessary. The site would be difficult/costly to develop due to its steep incline and the need to protect existing mature trees. Additionally, I feel it could have a negative impact on those of us living in the surrounding roads, from increased traffic on a road which already has traffic that descends the hill at speed, to the value of privately owned residential housing. I feel local residents concerns should take priority over any benefits this site may or may not have for this proposed development.
Object

Noted.

Object

Representation ID: 5751

Received: 06/01/2024

Respondent: Mr Christopher Jerwood

Access to the proposed site off the Seaton Road would be an accident waiting to happen. Traffic past the site is quite quick and the contour of the road is not ideal.
----Removed by the Council----
I presume that facilities such as water, sewage and electricity would also need to be installed at considerable cost and the preparation of the land would also be difficult and costly.

Noted.

Object

Representation ID: 5990

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: Mr David Acton

It is inappropriate because:
- The site is too small for three pitches plus the additional vehicles which are usually large and the additional sheds, or other storage units
- Privacy of both residents and travellers making it unattractive for both parties - the site would likely not be used, wasting investment costs.
- Road safety - increased traffic and large vehicles accessing to/from Seaton Rd increasing safety risk. Risk of unsafe road use.
- Environmental and wildlife issues of the site
- There is a significant risk of upsetting the local residents and the wider Uppingham community

Noted.

Object

Representation ID: 6424

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Mr Ron Simpson

The rationale behind selecting the Seaton Road Site in Uppingham is difficult to comprehend. Studies of successful Travellers' sites across Europe show that they are best located in serviced semi commercial areas and at some distance from domestic properties. Most are also well off main roads to allow safe entrance and exit of lorries and caravans as many sites also act as a trading location and storage area.
The Seaton Road site is on a busy main road, behind protected trees and adjacent to a major heritage youth facility in the town, the cricket pavilion and ground.

Noted.

Object

Representation ID: 6846

Received: 06/01/2024

Respondent: Gene Dunbar

H10.3 sites for the travelling community and the map shows a site near uppingham on seaton road which is not appropriate as:
the site is extremely sloping and wooded, the access to the site would have to be on a curve off Seaton road,
the site backs on to neighboring houses which were built as low cost housing, so it appears to equate to low cost housing.
The site is close to both the cricket practice nets and the sewer treatment plant.

Noted.

Object

Representation ID: 7006

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Uppingham School

Agent: Fisher German LLP

Site Assessment - The site is assessed within the SHELAA (Reference: SHELAA UPP13 -Site ID17 - Site Address: Old sewage works, Seaton Road, Uppingham)There are however a number of issues in relation to the assessment, and it is not clear if the site has been correctly assessed, as the appraisal proforma relative to the site includes reference that access can be achieved from Leicester Road. Further comments include that the site is relatively flat, which is not accurate. The conclusion of the assessment states “this site is considered not suitable for allocation due to the consideration of these specific constraints, when there are less constrained other sites within and adjacent to Uppingham”. Yet it has been included.

Compatibility with policies EN1 and EN3 - Whilst it may be technically possible to achieve a suitable access, the impacts on Arboriculture, Ecology (particularly the need to demonstrate BNG for site’s of this scale from April 2024), character harm and costs mean it is highly unlikely that provision will be viable, nor will the benefits of the allocation, only 3 pitches, outweigh the significant impacts arising.

Land Ownership - Land identified within the Regulation 18 Policies Map differs from that within the SHELAA Site ID17, and actual land ownership. The draft allocation extends west of the SHELAA site, encroaching onto land owned by Uppingham School – the School cricket playing field. This land is not available for development and should be removed from the draft allocation.

Noted.

Object

Representation ID: 7037

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Mr Anthony Streeter

I object to this site as I feel it far more beneficial to build affordable housing for young people/ families from the area, particularly as a site further down Seaton Road was refused permission.

Noted.

Object

Representation ID: 7767

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Mrs Davina Ramm

1. Further traffic on this already extremely busy road will put pedestrians who walk this road to shop in the town, catch buses, walk to the surgery, etc even more at risk. The thought of earth moving equipment and building site access on top of the usual traffic on this road and access to and from Ash Close, Brook Close and Hornbeam Road will be hazardous.
2. Has infrastructure been planned to accommodate the extra population with regards to schools, surgery (which is already full to capacity) water supply, sewage, etc.
3. As we live in a Conservation area, classed as a place of natural beauty why would you want to remove trees, an absolute necessity to our being, and what will happen to the wild life inhabitants of this area of land when it is cleared for the building work to be carried out?
4. This proposed site will also have an effect on our homes that we have invested in to live in this beautiful part of Rutland ---Removed by the Council---.
The safety aspect is a worry as is losing green space, an asset to everyone's mental health.

Noted.