Lincolnshire readers write about Quarry Farm on Stamford-Rutland border, roadworks in Grantham, and graffiti in Spalding
Readers have had plenty to say on what’s in the news.
Here we share some of the letters, emails and comments that have come in over the week, including this cartoon from John Elson.
Don’t forget, you can always get in touch by emailing news@lincsonline.co.uk
A cry for help from us all
The recent gripe by Allan Grey is a cry for help from us all. Why cannot simple things be done to help us cross the tracks? When I first lived in Oakham in 1960, there were three level crossings, the third one being South Street. Even then, with about 20% of the modern traffic, there were complaints about the shutting of the crossings and yet none of the housing estates on the west had been built. The by-pass has helped to remove through traffic from the north/south otherwise there would be chaos in Oakham with the rise in the use of cars. Please use your brains and open the South Street crossing! No doubt some fantastic excuses will be given.
John Bagley
Oakham
Residents deserve answers
Responding to the article ‘For the same reasons you want to live here, we want to build houses’.
Mike Walker the land and planning director of Vistry Homes needs to give more answers to very angry Ketton residents.
As a self-employed contractor, I have visited different parts of Ketton on numerous occasions over many years and I have been shown several housing estate properties by customers all of whom had suffered genuine "building subsidence issues" with large cracks in garage walls, both internal and external house walls, not to mention cancer causing radon gas discovered in one such property.
What does Rutland County Council’s planning department now have to say about the potential of future new house build land being built on in Ketton with issues similar to these surfacing years later down the line, and home owners having their expensive structural repair insurance claims turned down?
I believe Rutland County Council has known about this problem for some time in Ketton. Would an NHBC certificate on completion really mean anything now in similar circumstances?
Mr Walker talks up the section 106 monies and his companies developer contributions of £600,000 as something to behold, I personally feel that never ends up benefiting locals.
I recommend that it's all put into a future new build housing structural repair pot instead to protect any new house buyers, and also match funded by RCC instead.
The offer of Section 106 monies puts pressure on all decision making councillors and officers who are all faced with chronic rural government budget underfunding, they will always have to put expensive core services first, like adult social care, hildren's services, and home to school transport long before any new park bench, swings and a slide are given to residents in return.
Name and address supplied
Appalled at decision
Today I along with many other locals are appalled and insulted by the recent decision by Rutland County Council to approve the 650 residential allocation at Quarry Farm as part of their Local Plan process. In a meeting lasting just 45 minutes the cabinet unanimously approved the allocation without even a nod to the issues and objections raised, not just by locals but by the parishes and environmental experts.
The council did, however, spend a significant amount of time discussing the local concerns around the 140 home Brook Road allocation and deciding to remove that from Rutland’s Local Plan. Justifying that decision, the leader of the council, Gale Waller, stated that ‘It is important that when we consult and ask for views that we are taking them into account’ and further added ‘I was moved by some of the responses we got’. Sadly that sentiment didn’t seem to apply to Quarry Farm as it wasn’t even discussed, just silently approved. All this despite the site holding infinitely more biodiversity value than Brook Road and impacting on the local community to a far greater extent. Unless the cabinet is living in an echo chamber of its own making, how can they not apply the same logic regarding local consent to Quarry Farm?
A significant number of people objected to Quarry Farm on the Local Plan (165) with far more people objecting directly to the application itself (over 850) and we have engaged in a long-standing campaign which has included legal challenges and even a book! If that isn’t enough to warrant even a discussion on the issue then there is something seriously wrong with the democratic process at Rutland County Council. The question has to be asked: Are Rutland County Council capable of making an objective decision around Quarry Farm given all the recent double standards?
The truth is the development solves a lot of issues for Rutland and is temptingly convenient. It ticks off nearly 50% of their housing targets for new development; they can claim the council tax from the new residents; they can choose how (and where) they use the developer contributions; they don’t need to deal with the pressures on services and infrastructure (as Stamford will mostly absorb that) and they can avoid building on the far more appropriate site of St George’s Barracks (which also happens to be in the Leader’s very own constituency!).
Sadly, the reality is, there is literally nothing Stamford gains from this allocation but judging by the deathly silence from Rutland’s cabinet I really don’t think they even care. As for SKDC, well I really hope this is a wake-up call and they put aside their own obsession regarding the inadequate East-West ‘link road’ and stick up for their constituents.
For Stamford residents themselves, join us for a community picnic at Quarry Farm ponds on Sunday, September 1, at 1pm to show just how much this site means to the community. You never know….perhaps Rutland County Council might even be ‘moved’ to take us seriously.
Carys Vaughan
Protect Quarry Farm
The decision this week around proposed future development sites by Rutland County Council both saddened and disappointed me in equal measure.
The proposed sites were discussed at a cabinet meeting of Rutland County Council and, in my opinion, due diligence wasn’t carried out in considering the views of the affected residents in a meeting which only took 45 minutes.
The majority of the meeting was taken up discussing a site for 140 homes on Brooke Road, Oakham, for which 277 objections were received. Gale Waller, council leader, said: “It is important that when we consult and ask for views that we are taking them into account. I was moved by some of the responses. It is very important that we listen to what residents are telling us.”
In isolation, this sounds fantastic. So did they give the same due diligence to Quarry Farm? A site which, although being entirely in Rutland, will without doubt stretch the resources and infrastructure of Stamford if it is approved. A development of 650 homes which has, so far received over 850 direct objections on the application plus a further 165 objections on the consultation for the RCC Local Plan earlier in the year.
No, they absolutely didn’t. It wasn’t even given any time in the brief meeting. This was a meeting to shape the housing strategy in Rutland until 2041, to allocate sites for a minimum of 2460 homes in that period. How could RCC not even consider Quarry Farm, which would provide over 25% of their housing needs (and nearly 50% of allocated housing)? That is, in my opinion, disgraceful and neglectful of their responsibilities as officials elected by the residents of Rutland.
And then, to double down on the lack of respect that the Quarry Farm site deserves, RCC has rejected a site for 72 new homes in Oakham, stating that by turning the 3.47- hectare site into a housing estate, it would be ‘an unwarranted intrusion into the countryside’. The last time I looked, Quarry Farm isn’t a brownfield site in the middle of a city!! A brownfield site to which they haven’t even paid lip service in either their recent discussions or in the draft Local Plan is St George’s Barracks in Edith Weston, which ceases to be an active base in 2026. Why haven’t they considered that as a site, when a draft masterplan was created and then revised to create a 2000 home site in 2019? I’ll leave you to draw your own conclusions on this – maybe you could make your own enquiries via Coun Waller.
I would just like to add that I am totally in favour of housebuilding, to fulfil both the local and national needs, a requirement to which the country has massively fallen behind over the recent years. But developments should be sympathetic; in where they are; in how large they are; in what they can provide to the local communities, and to the affect that they will have on the environment, the transport network and the infrastructure of the nearby towns. I don’t believe that Rutland County Council have taken any of these into account when considering Quarry Farm.
I strongly urge my fellow residents to continue to support the fight against the development at Quarry Farm, primarily led by Carys Vaughn and the Protect Quarry Farm community group, which has been so vocal in its opposition.
Barry Devereux
Stamford Town Councillor
I write to alert your readers, once again, to the impending catastrophe which will follow when the Quarry Farm development is built in the north of Stamford. The 650 houses which Rutland County Council have planned for this site will, when added to the 1300 in the Stamford North plan, bring 2000 households, each averaging three residents and two cars. So our town of 20,000 inhabitants will shoot up to 26,000 and there is no secondary education, or medical cover in the plan…just a space for a primary school and a doctors surgery ( but no building or staff)…..no extra parking in town to absorb the extra cars…maybe more ‘out of town’ shopping…which won’t be good for the High Street….and so it goes on. So, if readers think that it is someone else’s problem, please think again.
Those who are trying to preserve the biodiverse site of Quarry Farm ( with its foxes, badgers, newts, frogs, butterflies, orchids and nightingales) will gather for a picnic on September 1 at 1pm, by the ponds at the back of the woods on Quarry Farm…do come and find out how very many of us feel so strongly about this issue.
As I write, Rutland County Council have nodded through the development into their Local Plan, whilst dropping two ‘brownfield’ sites, which are in the constituencies of Rutland councillors.
Len Marshall
Oak Road, Stamford
Sad news about Sandy
Many older Stamfordians may recall Martin Chamber Brown as ‘Sandy’. They may recall ‘Sandy’ emigrated to Australia with his wife Jacqueline and their four young children in the 1960s. Sadly Sandy recently passed away at the ripe old age of 97.
Having been a builder by trader, Sandy built his own house in Easton-on-the-Hill. When the family settled in Boyup Brook in the south of West Australia, Sandy built another much larger family home. He continued in the building trade for the rest of his working life. When he finally returned, his son Gary carried on the business. This gave Sandy the opportunity to carry on his many hobbies, including sand sculpting, old painting and playing many musical instruments.
As a result of his many contributions to the local community, he was recently made a ‘Freeman of Boyup Brook, an award which Sandy was very proud of.
Len Warrington
Stamford
What will happen to regalia?
Now that we are a town council, (22 members including chairman, deputy chairman, ambassador, deputy ambassador), I would like to know what is intended to do with the mayoral regalia. As a town council we are now directly responsible for parks, cemeteries, and street lighting, just like a parish council so the mayoral regalia is no longer in use. Will we have to purchase new regalia for the chairman, deputy chairman, ambassador and deputy ambassador??
Next year's council tax should make interesting reading!!!
Mike Cook
Former mayor and former charter trustee
Roadworks could have been better planned
As soon as Richard Davies knew that the Market Place project would not be finished by August 19 he should have delayed the roadworks at the Wharf Road and Westgate junction. These were originally scheduled for November 2024, so why have they been brought forward to clash with roadworks in Dysart Road and the Market Place? One must also wonder why the Dysart Road closure wasn’t delayed until the much heralded East/West bypass finally opens, which is apparently supposed to help reduce town traffic, but is now several years late in opening
Monday’s traffic chaos and total gridlock of most of Grantham had to be experienced to be believed. How many times will Richard Davies visit Grantham to see the traffic chaos for himself until all these roadworks are finished? Probably not many, despite them taking many months!
Meanwhile, bus timetables and taxi journeys are seriously affected by all these delays as are local delivery services. Emergency services will not be able to cross the town when required. There have already been two tragic road deaths in Grantham in the last two weeks and a serious fire at the old Aldi on South Parade. How will emergency services be able to react when the next emergency happens? How many ambulances will not be able to reach their patients or take them to hospital, when people need urgent treatment?
One must also feel sorry for local businesses who will really suffer in the usually busy run up to Christmas. I hope even more shops are not forced to close due to lack of customers.
No doubt the council employees in charge of this planned chaos will continue to be paid handsomely whilst the rest of us suffer financially through longer journey times and worse. A private company would not stand for such poor planning on a regular basis. I hope Lincolnshire County Council and South Kesteven District Council can make some rapid changes so we are not all forced to suffer these very poorly planned road works until the new year.
Lynda North
Grantham
Timing was down to Government
It was hugely disappointing to see Coun Jeal's inaccurate statement regarding the South Kesteven District Council response to the Mallard Pass Solar Farm in his article 'Summer of discontent' in the Grantham Journal.
Whatever the views of some members of the current administration, who were entitled to make comments during the Public Consultation, planning matters are considered case by case by our cross party planning committee. Each case will have its own material considerations. The committee is not whipped and is independent of party politics. It is 'quasi judicial', with decisions made being with reference to current national and local planning policy, not party line.
The Planning Committee agreed the wording of the South Kesteven District Council formal response to the Mallard Pass proposal, and we raised a number of concerns, in particular relating to the scale of the application, being one of the largest in the country.
Former Governments have taken planning decisions relating to national infrastructure projects out of local council hands, and, such decisions, as in the case of the Mallard Pass Solar Farm, are now made by Ministers.
The timing of the final Ministerial decision regarding the Mallard Pass, left until after the General Election, was in the hands of the former Government.
Charmaine Morgan
South Kesteven District Council and chairperson of SKDC planning committee (Dem Ind)
Vandals don’t deserve publicity
The vandals who have used spray paint to display their political and other views are being given the oxygen of publicity by this newspaper by making their actions front page “news”. Others have had to waste their time removing some of the messages whilst some stay untouched for unlucky passers by to observe. Additionally, the comments are not worthy of the publicity you give them by repetition - “we have no democracy”, is ironic because less than 60% of eligible voters in this constituency bothered to use their vote in the General Election! We hear news daily from countries across the world where people are dying to achieve the right for a meaningful vote. Whilst, “lawyers don’t make leaders”, presumably chooses to ignore the legally trained UK PMs which have included David Lloyd-George and Tony Blair and US Presidents Abraham Lincoln and Barack Obama amongst many others?
Name address supplied
Send your letters for publication to: news@lincsonline.co.uk
