March 17, 2021 11.01 am This story is over 36 months old

South Kesteven council’s development plans delayed after late reports

Plans were withdrawn last minute
How the site would be laid out.

A decision on South Kesteven District Council’s plans for a major new development in Stamford has been delayed after the plans were withdrawn.

The authority’s planning committee were due to be asked to approve the St Martin’s Park proposals for the former Cummins Site – including 190 homes, a retirement village of 150 further homes and a series of business units – on Wednesday.

However, chairman Councillor Bob Adams told the committee it had been withdrawn due to reports on habitat regulations and viability assessments having not been received.

“It will come back at a later stage,” he told members.

SKDC owns the factory site off Barnack Road, which will be demolished, and is working with Burghley Estates, owners of the Greenfield land next door, on the development.

The build will include a convenience store and cafe, as well as public open space and improved cycle and pedestrian access to parkland to the south of the site.

It is hoped around 825 jobs could be created by the development and that more than £2.8 million a year would be brought in by resident expenditure, business rates, council tax and a New Homes Bonus over at least the next four years.

An artist’s impression of the development.

The Cummins diesel generator manufacturing plant closed in 2018 and has been vacant ever since. At the time, between 350-500 jobs were lost as a result.

South Kesteven District Council purchased the site in 2019.

More than 33 objections had been received about the plans, as well as further concerns from the Stamford Bypass Group and the Stukely Court Residents Association.

Although mainly supporting the redevelopment of the factory site, objectors had concerns about developing the field next door and further strain on local infrastructure including an increase in traffic.

Officers’ transport assessments however, concluded that there would be a net reduction in vehicle movements.