We were fighting to protect your beautiful town

Have your say

Would you kindly allow me to thank all the people of Stamford who have recently written to me regarding the planning Site Allocations and Policies documents that are required for submission to the Secretary of State.

In the past 16 years as a district councillor I cannot recall receiving as much correspondence on any single issue. Due to time constraints I have been unable to reply to them all personally.

As this was a planning issue the Labour group had no group whip on the issue. However it transpired that it was predominantly the Labour members from Grantham who were fighting to support the Stamford residents to protect the vital interests of your wonderful and stunningly beautiful town.

As you will now be aware the full council in their divine wisdom decided to pass the agenda item and submit it through to the next stage of the planning process.

I voted against the agenda item on the grounds that I am not convinced that the people of Stamford have had their voice sufficiently heard on this issue.

Furthermore I proposed a recorded vote but not enough councillors were willing to state their position on this important issue.

Council rules state that 10 councillors need to agree for such a vote to be held. Only four councillors (all Labour) supported my proposal for a recorded vote.

Accountability, responsibility, openness and political leadership is clearly lacking in South Kesteven District Council. A subsequent motion at the meeting put forward by the Labour group to ask cabinet members to answer questions from councillors at full council meetings was also bizarrely rejected by the administration.

Coun Ian Selby

South Kesteven District Council Labour group leader, Princess Drive, Grantham

THIS is a copy of a letter we sent to all South Kesteven District Council members in respect of the proposed development on agricultural land at the top of Tinwell Road/Empingham Road.

As Stamford residents for 38 years, we wish to express our concern over the detrimental effect of the proposal to introduce a major housing development on prime agricultural land on the west side of the town at Empingham Road/Tinwell Road, on the following grounds:

1 It would contradict the established local plan site status as a prominent area for special protection, both on the terms of its visual impact on approaching Stamford from the west, and also converting good agricultural land to building use.

2 It would locate 400 more families, with possibly 600 plus cars, a mile outside of the town centre and at the opposite end to services such as supermarkets, medical practices and the hospital, schools with capacity, and Stamford’s retail park, thus entailing further traffic on an existing and vastly over burdened road system.

3 The town itself currently offers relatively few employment opportunities and it would seem likely that such a development would mean more travel to distant locations, thus damaging the local environment.

4 Stamford’s current infrastructure cannot cope with further large housing developments such as is being proposed.

It is thus our contention that the proposed development would not be sympathetic to the economic, social and environmental well being of this declared conservation town and related countryside.


Tinwell Road, Stamford

Mr Parkinson (Letters, September 2) refers to the field between Tinwell and Empingham roads as barren and in a previous letter to the Mercury as fallow. I have lived in Launde Gardens for nearly 30 years and previously in Lyndon Way for 12 years and cannot remember a year that a crop has not been grown.

Potatoes and cereal this year!

If comments are to be made let’s ensure they are true.

Barrington Hansford

Launde Gardens, Stamford

I cannot let Rog Parkinson’s comments go without reply.

He refers to ‘the barren field’ between Empingham and Tinwell roads.

For the past few days the potato harvest has been happening in the ‘barren field’ producing tons and tons of good quality potatoes.

He, like most of the South Kesteven District Council members who have voted to plant houses in the field, have not bothered to look at the field before pronouncing their ill-informed advice.

With Rog Parkinson it does not matter, but it certainly does when our ill-informed councillors decide to scrap an extremely fertile and productive field just because it looks right on the aerial map.

Or to bring it down to Rog Parkinson’s level, it will be the end of an extremely big cat toilet.

Chris Briance

Lonsdale Road, Stamford