Policy E2 – Employment development on unallocated sites

Support

Representation ID: 5189

Received: 03/01/2024

Respondent: Mr Frank Brett

Supported

Object

Representation ID: 5454

Received: 04/01/2024

Respondent: Les Allen

The economic policies do little to encourage new inward employment investment. Most counties seek to champion particular employment clusters which promote skills and cross transfer of knowledge? Given our demographics, we should be encouraging new talent into the region. We could perhaps add to our reputation of wildlife champions by focussing on environmental science and ecological protection. We have less trees per hectare than any other UK county and yet we try to be the UK's leader in bird protection? Instead of dumping concrete within metres of Rutland Water, we should try to meet and beat our mandatory environmental targets!

Object

Representation ID: 6634

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Mr George Weightman

The policy should provide enhanced support for the exapansion of Existing Key Employment Sites. The key employment sites should be those identified in the Employment Land Update (2013), Employment Land Assessment Update (2016), Policy RLP20 of the emerging Rutland Local Plan 2016-2036 (withdrawn). This includes the Wireless Hill Industrial Estate. The policy support the expansion of these employment sites in accordance with para 85, 87, and 88 of the NPPF. Significant weight should be placed on supporting the economic growth and productivity of existing local businesses, their needs and wider opportunities for development.

Support

Representation ID: 6769

Received: 05/01/2024

Respondent: Barrowden Parish Council

We support the Policy for work-live units but would ask that there should be similar protection as in Barrowden and Wakerley Neighbourhood Plan Policy BW11 to ensure that the impact on the surrounding properties is minimised.

Object

Representation ID: 7298

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Ketton and Tinwell Joint Neighbourhood Plan Steering Group

Whilst the Ketton and Tinwell Neighbourhood Plan identified that the Pit Lane area of Ketton would be a suitable place for any further business development (as opposed to any possible alternative sites within the Plan Area) we have some concerns about the size of the area to be considered as employment land.

In the first instance, this whole area is very much a mix between wildlife-rich nature reserve, recreation areas, local wildlife sites and small business. The saturation of that area by a sprawl of new businesses would be detrimental to wildlife corridors that currently exist and could result in the significant loss of valuable habitat. We note that the sites were identified as potential development areas in the 2023 biodiversity survey (of which see more below) but we do not feel that these parcels of land have been adequately studied to be able to support their zoning for development. Our concerns are particularly in the context of bat foraging areas.

The second point of concern is whether there is an overall strategy that the Local Authority sees for how these areas would be populated by small businesses. There are already not only a large number of businesses in the Pit Lane area, but also operating from private homes within Ketton. In that context we feel that it would be advisable to have a clearer proposal from the Local Authority as to the structure of the business opportunities, rather than the somewhat random approach as now.

Object

Representation ID: 7880

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: CPRE Rutland

Has the relationship between employment opportunities and housing needs been fully assessed?
Presumably, a proportion of any jobs created will be filled by residents of other counties, with concomitant implications for infrastructure, especially transport.

Support

Representation ID: 7922

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Ryhall Parish Council

E2 Employment Development on Unallocated Sites - Support