Vision

Support

Representation ID: 5049

Received: 02/01/2024

Respondent: Mary Cade

This vision needs to be tempered with the facts that Rutland has a higher than average % of retired persons, requiring appropriate housing and access to public transport; and a higher than average educational attainment as a result of the high % of pupils at private schools.

Object

Representation ID: 5086

Received: 03/01/2024

Respondent: Natural England

In the list of bullet points we would like to see stronger reference to the Nature Recovery Network which is one of the specific aims of the Environment Act 2021 and will underpin the approach to the enhancement of nature. We suggest the wording could include the following addition:
“protection and preservation of heritage assets and natural environment including the enhancement and recovery of biodiversity contributing to the nature recovery network.”
We also suggest an additional bullet point including the provision of green Infrastructure:
“Provision of high quality accessible green infrastructure for the benefit of people and nature.”

Object

Representation ID: 5146

Received: 03/01/2024

Respondent: Mr Frank Brett

While I support the Vision and Objectives for Rutland in general, I feel that the positioning of the Local Plan as the vehicle for delivering that vision is a misrepresentation. Fundamentally, the Local Plan lays out how the Council will respond to Planning Applications received and is therefore reactive in reality (in fact, not really a plan at all). This introduction to this chapter needs to be clear that the Local Plan is only a part of what is needed to deliver the vision and that only with other policies and strategies will the full vision be realised.

Object

Representation ID: 5372

Received: 30/12/2023

Respondent: Mr John Deag

Post-16 education. While planning for schools is mainly undertaken elsewhere, there does seem to be an important gap which the Local Plan could address. This is the provision for post-16 education (A-levels). There is no provision in the south of Rutland, in spite of it having the excellent Casterton College Rutland school. This is astonishing! It impacts on the quality of life as many children have to travel elsewhere (Bourne, Oakham, Peterborough). This is relevant to Rutland's Vison (as set out in Chapter 3, page 14), and to the Infrastructure Priorities (see page 258) where it is relevant to Priorities 2 (Sustainable Lives) and 4 (A county for everyone). See also to the NPPF policy on the importance of "accessible services"

Object

Representation ID: 5489

Received: 05/01/2024

Respondent: Francis Jackson Homes Ltd

We question why the vision sets out a target/objective of only meeting the County's "minimum" housing need. This is, to our eyes, neither a vision nor inspiring to those of all ages, sectors and demographics who may wish or need to live in Rutland. As a vision statement, saying "we are going to the minimum needed" may be appealing for political reasons, but does not seek to actively grasp or engage with the wider housing need issue of the young, or others not already settled in Rutland. Surely as a "vision" the Council can do better?

Support

Representation ID: 5491

Received: 05/01/2024

Respondent: Francis Jackson Homes Ltd

We support the element of the vision that confirms development will come forward in the Larger Villages and smaller settlements.

Object

Representation ID: 5522

Received: 05/01/2024

Respondent: Tim Allen

The sixth bullet point under the heading “The Local Plan will have supported the delivery of:” should be re-worded as follows:

Protection and preservation of heritage assets, including enhancement and securing new uses for the future, and natural environment

Object

Representation ID: 5660

Received: 05/01/2024

Respondent: Ashwell Parish Council

We acknowledge the work that has gone into this draft Local Plan and are positive about much of the stated vision. However we were disappointed to see how many written commitments are then diluted by a list of conditions and exceptions. As a parish council, we feel that we will have less of a say in what happens in our County and more subjective decisions will be made within the County Council. If this Local Plan is to have credence then there needs to be more robust statements about enforcement and compliance - something that appears to be lacking currently.

Support

Representation ID: 5741

Received: 06/01/2024

Respondent: Braunston-in-Rutland Parish Council

Infrastructure is totally inadequate to cater for the existing population, health care shows no sign of increasing capacity, we have a increasing population and a shrinking service, this cannot be allowed to continue, the communities we are creating in and around Oakham are not sustainable there is no work and no healthcare provision, this means that the new residents will commute to work which in a rural area is not environmentally friendly.

Object

Representation ID: 6018

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: Mr Richard Bonser

Local Plan will support the infrastructure including road and community facilities, but there is nothing in the Plan whereby RCC are to start a network of cycle routes? The cycle path around Rutland Water is on private land and does not link any Towns. Many villages have fast 60 MPH village lanes that have to accommodate cyclist and motorist and are dangerous twisting routes for cyclist. For example the Manton to Edith Weston Road where it is has recently been demonstrated (Speed Awareness Community scheme) motorists traveling through Edith Weston over 60 MPH in a 30 MPH limit.

Object

Representation ID: 6362

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Mr Roderick Morgan

Vision Statement contains statements that are too vague, low ambition and not quantified. There give the impression of a 'laissez-faire' approach to change in Rutland by stating modest generalities rather than stating challenging, concrete, quantified objectives up front, which will clearly then require specific policy and plans to achieve them. The tone of the vision is to 'avoid life in Rutland becoming worse where possible' rather than 'make life in Rutland concretely better and better over time, in specific ways'. There are fundamental problems with the 'large village' concept even at this high level.

Support

Representation ID: 6377

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Mr Chris Read

1) Ensure that the Plan, when agreed is achievable, and not liable to be scrapped when further information comes to light. Clearly we do not want to be left vulnerable and without a Plan ever again.
2) Ensure that the plan has broad support across the County's councillors so is not likely to be scrapped for political reasons.
3) Try to observe the principles, policies and objectives agreed. We are living with recent development which have been approved in direct conflict with the majority of principles in this draft plan.

Support

Representation ID: 6378

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Bill Deayton

I support the wording but this is a collection of buzz words that RCC need to be seen to propose. RCC practices directly contradict stated policy. Impact of train noise and restricted traffic flow damage quality of life. Inadequate medical and school provision cause problems. Planning approvals involving fossil fuel energy impact climate change needs.
Proximity to the A1 and cities close by should be leveraged in terms of business development planning and housing provision. This could impact the growth of wage levels available to Rutland residents with the additional effect of access to housing.

Support

Representation ID: 6414

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Ms Carol Brys

While I overall support this vision, I feel the following has been overlooked. Apologies if this is covered elsewhere.
Our area lacks access to genuinely high-speed broadband. This impacts those of us who work from home, are self-employed, or who run businesses outside of the larger towns. It is essential for everyone living in the 21st century for basic functionality, such as access to utilities, information, etc. This must be considered an essential part of infrastructure to support your stated goals. Everyone in Rutland should have access to high-speed broadband.

Support

Representation ID: 6507

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland ICS

Suggested additional wording - The provision of adequate supporting infrastructure that also enables improved physical access to the above.

Support

Representation ID: 6509

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: RDC Limited

Agent: Harris Lamb

We generally support the vision. Regarding meeting the housing needs of Rutland County that will compromised if around 50% of the allocated housing total is directed to an urban extension of Stamford as Rutland County is rural with two very small market towns and 52 villages.

Object

Representation ID: 6809

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Leicestershire & Rutland Wildlife Trust

The bullet point “protection and preservation of heritage assets and natural environment” is weak and insufficient for tackling the joint Climate Crisis and Ecological Emergency that we are facing and has been declared by the authority.
In order for the vision to align with the aims of the Environment Act, 2021 - much greater emphasis must be placed on the need for biodiversity enhancement and nature restoration at scale, through the development of a robust Nature Recovery Network.
The role of high quality and accessible natural habitats in providing a wide range of health and wellbeing benefits to local communities must also be included as a key visionary element.

Object

Representation ID: 6841

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: Nicki Hooper

I am concerned that the Councils vision does not reflect that of the residents of Edith Weston.

Support

Representation ID: 7014

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: House Builders Federation

HBF agree that the Vision for Rutland should include reference to the need to meet the current and future housing needs of the whole community, including for market and affordable housing. We agree that new housing is needed in towns, larger villages and smaller settlements. HBF also agree that it is important for the Local Plan Objectives to recognise the connection between housing and the future aspirations for the local economy.

Support

Representation ID: 7126

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Hereward Homes

Agent: Barmach Ltd

Hereward Homes supports the continued, sustainable growth of all villages in Rutland which is essential to meet
housing demand. There is a need for more high-quality housing to provide consumer choice, particularly of
bespoke and custom-built homes in village locations. Such development ensures that there is a balanced housing
offer alongside estate style development in larger settlements.

Object

Representation ID: 7292

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Ketton and Tinwell Joint Neighbourhood Plan Steering Group

The statement in the Vision on the need to for ‘protection and preservation… of natural environment’ is wholly weak and out of keeping with many of the detailed policies in the draft Plan. At the very least, the Vision should include the ‘protection, preservation and enhancement of the county's natural environment’, together with an emphasis on biodiversity increase and nature recovery.

Moreover the emphasis in the narrative in this section describing "internationally recognised" environmental features tends to imply that only the Rutland Water area is important. There is a great deal of biodiversity/geological characteristics within the county which make its natural environment important on both the local and national level. We would suggest this section of the Plan needs stronger drafting.

Object

Representation ID: 7429

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: Cottesmore Parish Council

the Vision Statements together with the Spatial Portrait does give the impression of a less than optimistic Vision of Rutland. There is too much emphasis on the need for change and significant improvements, rather than championing what is good about Rutland, as a place ‘to live, work, shop and play’! The Local Plan should start from a much more positive view of the County.
We would also like more clarity and explanation about how the inevitable conflicts around delivering these elements of the Vision will be resolved and justified, including the weight to be given. For example, will protecting the countryside and particularly protecting views and agricultural land be given precedent over unnecessary build development or will the needs for housing and employment prevail. The relationship between the Local Plan and other local strategies for Health, Education and particularly transport and other infrastructure need to be much more clearly set out.

Object

Representation ID: 7536

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Mr Roderick Morgan

2041 date set, but with no concrete metrics our targets for elements of the vision. This is therefore not a 'plan' in the sense of a coherent approach for implementing policies to achieve defined outcomes, however worthy.

The Local Plan will have supported the delivery of:
• Improve people's quality of life? According to what measures? By how much? Address impacts of CC to what extent? Will Rutland be carbon net zero or not?
• Economy has to be linked to centres of employment and commerce in surrounding towns and nearby cities (where people work in significant numbers). This is absent from the plan.
• a range of high-quality housing that meet the County's minimum housing needs - Why not state a concrete goal regarding a top priority, i.e. Truly affordable housing, and specialist needs. Specific aspects of 'quality' must be identified - with teeth to enforce it, this should be in the vision too, or this lacks credibility.
• As private vehicles dominate transport in Rutland, the vision needs to emphasise and explain in detail how public transport and active mobility can and will be done differently in approach and quantity from now to shift the balance away from total reliance on cars,
• Development and change which also respects Rutland's rural character - This is so vague and in tension with itself as to be a nearly meaningless statement in terms of practical policy.
• protection and preservation of heritage assets and natural environment - No, not strong enough - this needs to state hard targets in terms of enhancing, restoring and expanding (use of or extent of) heritage assets and (critically) the natural environment. Needs to be set as a priority requiring compromise with agriculture, transport, development,
• appropriate infrastructure to mitigate the impact of new development - No, not strong enough - high quality integrated infrastructure needs to precede, shape and enable new development so that there is a positive net impact, when development takes place. A serious, tangible long term strategy is required.

Support

Representation ID: 7572

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Historic England

Reference to heritage assets in the 6th bullet point is
welcomed. This should also include reference to settings.
Reference to the historic environment within the 11th
bullet point is welcomed.

Bullet point 6 could be amended to read:-
“protection and preservation of heritage assets and their
settings together with the natural environment.”

Support

Representation ID: 7724

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Anglian Water

Anglian Water support the 2041 Vision and specifically the local delivery of carbon net zero through the Local Plan. With regard to the list of infrastructure (bullet 7) we note that water and water recycling are not referenced. Given the importance of Rutland Water and the potential for WRCs to support a spatial distribution of growth that complies with the sustainability hierarchy, Anglian Water would welcome the inclusion of water supply and water recycling plus flood prevention in the Vision text.

Object

Representation ID: 7776

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Edith Weston Parish Council

Recent policies propose intensive re-development of the St George’s Barracks site and greenfield development in the Edith Weston parish.

Whilst this represents a reduction from previous proposals, these proposals are at odds with the vision, particularly with respect to climate change, rural character and natural environment and infrastructure.

Object

Representation ID: 7816

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: CPRE Rutland

The first paragraph is unclear. The section headed 'Why are the Vision and Strategic Objectives needed?’ should be moved to a position before the vision itself to improve the flow of the narrative.

The Vision statement reads almost as if the Plan is intended to build up from a pretty low base; it needs to be more positive about where we are now and how we hope to move on from there. It would probably also be useful to set out how the various policies and objectives will contribute to achieving the vision – see comments below against the Spatial Strategy Chapter.