Object

Representation ID: 5531

Received: 05/01/2024

Respondent: Ms Sarah Jane Nichols

Detrimental Impact on:-
1. bio-diversity
2. transport infrastructure and increase in pollution.
3. Essential services for the local population
4. water, sewage and drainage systems
5. Size of development is disproportionate to the local 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: 5537

Received: 05/01/2024

Respondent: Mr Roger Parker

Object as it will generate too much congestion on Casterton road and significant strain on Lincolnshire's educational and medical 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: 5555

Received: 05/01/2024

Respondent: Mr Alexander Russo

This is a Candidate Wildlife site in a Greenfield area. The social and economic 'benefits' are more Council Tax for Rutland CC whilst burdening more pressure on Stamford's amenities and services. A development totaling over 2000 dwellings means likely that number of vehicles also, if not more, in and around one of the finest stone towns in Britain. The traffic through the town is already horrendous and this will only add to the problem. We do not need to relocate the species of interest since they already have their natural habitat. I strongly object to this development opportunity.

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

Object

Representation ID: 5556

Received: 05/01/2024

Respondent: Yvonne Powell

The increased volume of traffic to and from the site , the impact to Stamford and the safety of pedestrians has not been explained clearly. Rutland residents will not be impacted by this project but Stamford residents and the character of Stamford definitely will. Access to the A1 and Oakham Road for the increased volume and type of vehicles has not been explained. Is it via Aaron Road (residential estate) or Sydney Farm Lane ( totally unsuitable for heavy vehicles or traffic)- the clue is in the name!!!!? The Policy H2 (d) mentions “increasing capacity at the A1/A606 junction. How?

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

Object

Representation ID: 5620

Received: 05/01/2024

Respondent: Mr ian sheppard

This application is not fit for purpose, RCC should build this quota of house in Edith Weston and not create chaos for the local residents of Stamford. No Consideration has be taken for the extra traffic and Stamford is already overloaded with traffic, due to no jobs in the town. Currently we do not have enough parking spaces in the town centre and most supermarkets are unable to cope with the extra volume of traffic and again no room for expansion.

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

Support

Representation ID: 5624

Received: 05/01/2024

Respondent: Julie Gray

I fully support this site as did 82% of Rutland residence,. It complies with the duty to co-operate and enables SKDC to achieve its housing numbers.

Support noted.

Object

Representation ID: 5627

Received: 05/01/2024

Respondent: Ms Debra Asher

Make the RIGHT choice for 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: 5642

Received: 05/01/2024

Respondent: Miss Emily Payne

I am objecting to the quarry farm Stamford development. The “country park” is not an acceptable alternative to such an environmentally important site. There will be more cars, a lot more congestion because there are no “community facilities” in this part of Stamford. More pressure on schools, doctors. More pressure on Stamford. Less on the rest of Rutland, it is clearly unfair for Stamford to suffer the development needs of Rutland.

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

Object

Representation ID: 5648

Received: 05/01/2024

Respondent: Ashwell Parish Council

The building 650 properties on Rutland land, as part of Stamford North, should take a sizeable chunk out of the targetted 2460 houses needed to be built in Rutland over the next 20 years. However it appears that although these houses are being built in Rutland they will be part of the South Kesteven building target. Surely houses built on Rutland land should be part of Rutland's building load - reducing the demand for sites elsewhere in the county?

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

Object

Representation ID: 5655

Received: 05/01/2024

Respondent: Mr Ben Fletcher

The Stamford Quarry should be left as it is, a wild open space good for peoples' mental and physical health. Young people deserve the adventure the place offers. We don't need a man made/ manicured 'country park'. This is just about big companies making easy money, they should have to redevelop gaps in the already built up areas and not destroy green space. The roads in the area are already busy and there isn't the infrastructure to support the proposed 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: 5673

Received: 05/01/2024

Respondent: Mr Tony Fenton

Having been a been a resident in Waverley Gardens for over 40 years and following the closure of the brick works my family have regularly walked through the woodlands observing the wildlife that includes badgers, deer and bats.

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

Object

Representation ID: 5675

Received: 05/01/2024

Respondent: Mz Jo Bull

Unnecessary building in a place of natural biodiversity which will negatively impact the surrounding areas rather than add! Especially when others areas can be chosen over this with less impact in nature and more space!

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

Object

Representation ID: 5687

Received: 06/01/2024

Respondent: Mrs Sally Jordan

How can Rutland County Council even consider building on this area of natural biodiversity and wildlife. It provides one of the few open green areas for families to walk.

Rutland Council Council will benefit financially from this provision, yet Stamford, part of SKDC, will have to cope with all the problems that ensue.
Lakeside, the only doctor's surgery, cannot provide a decent health provision to its current patients. It cannot cope with hundreds more.

Insufficient dental surgeries in Stamford.

The secondary schools cannot cope with a large influx of students.

No supermarkets in the North of 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: 5704

Received: 06/01/2024

Respondent: Mr Chris Evans

Strongly object to this development. No benefit to Rutland. Lots of other locations should be considered closer to the centre of Rutland so that RCC can provide the services rather than an already stretched Stamford SKDC area. Road network will it support this. Huge loss of the valuable biodiverse green space to the community, especially the young. In summary ejections based on: Insufficient supporting infrastructure: highways, water supply and sewer capacity. Insufficient local services: schools, medical, transport, retail on north side of town.
Loss of green space: wellbeing of residents, biodiversity.
Carbon impact: construction carbon, operational carbon, loss of balance.

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

Object

Representation ID: 5723

Received: 06/01/2024

Respondent: Miss Joanna Winterbourne

This development which sits in open countryside will kill the biodiversity which according to Rutland is an important environmental asset. The scale of this development will impact not just on Rutland villages but also Stamford, it will increase traffic congestion to unacceptable levels and will impact service provision especially healthcare. In lite of the recent flooding it will also now remove another sponge to help with the exacerbation of flooding in the future. More housing built on an area that already is an integral part of the biodiversity of the area will be devastating.

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

Object

Representation ID: 5727

Received: 06/01/2024

Respondent: Mrs Catherine Leeks

These homes would put pressure on existing traffic congestion and air quality and local infrastructure such as doctors surgeries and schools.With households potentially having one or two cars or more each, it could equate to a significantly higher number of cars in the area. This would impact on traffic congestion and air quality. The loss of green space would be detrimental to the area and the development of 650 +1350 (SKDC) would put huge strain on Stamford's infrastructure.

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

Object

Representation ID: 5731

Received: 06/01/2024

Respondent: Mrs ALISON SQUIRES

Summary:
The development sits in open countryside and will destroy biodiversity on what is an important environmental asset for Rutland and Stamford The development will have a negative impact on surrounding Rutland villages and Stamford itself with an unacceptable levels of traffic congestion and insufficient infrastructure
for healthcare and education

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

Object

Representation ID: 5734

Received: 06/01/2024

Respondent: Mrs Elizabeth McLay

I strongly object the Quarry Bank Farm being used for housing develepment as Stamford's infrastructure has already been compromised by additional housing. More houses will further exaserbate this issue.

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

Object

Representation ID: 5742

Received: 06/01/2024

Respondent: Ms Rachel Butler

Quarry Farm is a Candidate Local Wildlife Site with calcareous grassland & Category A Woodland. Ecological records prove site has high biodiversity, clear evidence the seedbank remains, therefore it has the potential to be restored. Translocation of notable species is highly dubious. There is a Scheduled Monument and an SSSI opposite the proposed development. This site should be given full protected status in light of Biodiversity Net Gain & the need to shelter Stamford & downstream communities from further flooding as the site is seasonally waterlogged. Repeated attempts by the developer to downplay the ecology prove they cannot be trusted.

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

Object

Representation ID: 5775

Received: 06/01/2024

Respondent: Mrs Julie Beech

This is more in Stamford than in Rutland. Two very large housing estates have been built with no more infrastructure being provided, not even a shop. The roads, schools are already full, as the the doctors it’s s joke. We don’t need more hosing added we need services for the extra houses that are there already.

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

Object

Representation ID: 5778

Received: 06/01/2024

Respondent: Mrs Amanda Wheeler

The proposed development is set in open countryside and next to a SSSI on the Great North Road and there are more appropriate sites for a development of this size in Rutland - eg St Georges Barracks. The development will put upon Stamford unacceptable levels of traffic and the town will not have sufficient infrastructure (healthcare, schooling, to cope with this proposal, if taken in conjunction with the Stamford North Development on 1350 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: 5782

Received: 06/01/2024

Respondent: Miss Susan Watson

Building on Quarry Farm means the loss of an important and unique habitat .
Stamford North will concrete over valuable arable land
Neither development will benefit the area or Stamford.
It is irresponsible to build 2000 new homes and not provide the infrastructure.
Stamford is supposed to be Conservation town but already has been developed beyond its optimum size resulting in congestion, lack of parking, inadequate health and dental services, lack of secondary school and sixth form places.
Stamford and the villages will be impacted negatively and receive no benefits from this short sighted plan.

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

Object

Representation ID: 5793

Received: 06/01/2024

Respondent: Mr Jeremy Storey

This is an area of growing biodiversity and an excellent green space away from the busy roads. The recent new builds on between Tinwell and Empingham Roads were promised additional facilities but have never materialised, but have created considerably more traffic across to Casterton Road. Adding 650+ more residences off Casterton Road will create major congestion. Facilities are already limited in Stamford - dentists, surgeries, schools & leisure, not to mention any supermarkets at the north end of town.
For Rutland County Council to cynically select this location for their new house build effectively within Stamford is outrageous.

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

Object

Representation ID: 5810

Received: 06/01/2024

Respondent: Mr Max Sawyer

The propsed development is set in open countryside and next to a SSSI on the Great North Road and there are more appropriate sites for a development of this size in Rutland - eg St Georges Barracks. The development will put upon Stamford unacceptable levels of traffic and the town will not have sufficient infrastructure (healthcare, schooling, to cope with this proposal, if taken in conjunction with the Stamford North Development on 1350 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: 5814

Received: 06/01/2024

Respondent: Mr Jonathan Waples

The propsed development is set in open countryside and next to a SSSI on the Great North Road and there are more appropriate sites for a development of this size in Rutland - eg St Georges Barracks. The development will put upon Stamford unacceptable levels of traffic and the town will not have sufficient infrastructure (healthcare, schooling, to cope with this proposal, if taken in conjunction with the Stamford North Development on 1350 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: 5818

Received: 06/01/2024

Respondent: Mrs Yvette Diaz-Munoz

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.

It also over-relies on service and infrastructure provision in the neighbouring town of 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: 5851

Received: 06/01/2024

Respondent: Ketton Parish Council

Agent: 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.

Object

Representation ID: 5905

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: Mrs Laura Upson

Stamford cannot accommodate this large development without significant infrastructure changes. Medical, traffic and educational services are insufficient. The loss of grade 2 and 3 agricultural land as well as the candidate wildlife site at the quarry is not acceptable. We have to prioritise greenfield sites for food production and to take the pressure of surface water drainage. Just look at the flooding. St George's Barracks is perfect for development. We don't want to leave a legacy of ecological and arable destruction for future generations. This development with mass greenfield destruction sets a dangerous precedent for future applications.

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

Object

Representation ID: 5906

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: Mr Robin Morrison

The proposed development is set in open countryside and next to a SSSI on the Great North Road. There are more appropriate sites for a development of this size in Rutland - eg St Georges Barracks. The development will put upon Stamford unacceptable levels of traffic and the town will not have suffficient infrastructure (healthcare, schooling) to cope with this proposal, if taken in conjunction with the Stamford North Development on 1350 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: 5937

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: Miss Victoria Young

The development sits in open countryside and will destroy biodiversity on what is an important environmental asset for Rutland. The scale of the development will impact negatively on surrounding Rutland villages and Stamford itself with an unacceptable levels of traffic congestion and insufficient service provision, particularly healthcare. It conflicts with Rutland’s vision for sustainable communities.

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