Support

Representation ID: 4955

Received: 31/12/2023

Respondent: Mrs Jayne Williams

Wherever retrofitting can be achieved it should be encouraged. However, we must protect our heritage assets, listed buildings and conservation villages, from detrimental visual effects, if we pursue this policy.

Support noted. The policy is flexibly worded to encourage retrofitting whilst still protecting heritage assets as required under national planning policy and other policies on the historic environment in the Local Plan.

Support

Representation ID: 5069

Received: 02/01/2024

Respondent: Mary Cade

The special characteristics of heritage buildings should not be a barrier to retrofitting PV roof panels, given that there will be no future if we do not reach net zero.

Support noted. The policy is flexibly worded to encourage retrofitting whilst still protecting heritage assets as required under national planning policy and other policies on the historic environment in the Local Plan.

Object

Representation ID: 5150

Received: 03/01/2024

Respondent: Mr Frank Brett

The Policy should explicitly allow Solar PV in Conservation Areas (perhaps with caveats such that they could later be removed). There is a lot of Conservation Area in Rutland and to have declared a Climate Emergency and yet not allow this seems hypocritical.

The idea of building extensions leading to potential retrofit of the whole property is good and is supported.

The part of the policy on retrofitting is positively worded to ‘will be expected’ whilst still consistent with protecting heritage assets as required under national planning policy and other policies of the Local Plan. Support noted.

Object

Representation ID: 5412

Received: 04/01/2024

Respondent: North Luffenham Parish Council

The requirement to improve the energy efficiency of the "original building" for development applications for extensions seems unworkable - how will it be assessed, and what minimum level of improvement to the "original building" will be required. This is likely to deter improvements to the housing stock of Rutland, potentially reducing improvements in energy efficiency delivered via extensions, as people will be deterred from building them by this policy.

Comment noted. Disagree. A policy seeking to reduce energy consumption in existing buildings is justified and consistent with the aims and objectives of the Plan to reduce carbon emissions. The supporting text to the policy outlines how the Council intends to bring forward supplementary guidance on best practice for energy retrofitting measures which will help in drawing up and assessing the Energy Statement. There is no evidence to suggest that the policy would deter home improvements, and there are already a number of industry standards/targets relating to energy efficiency measures in place that have been and are currently applicable.

Support

Representation ID: 5472

Received: 05/01/2024

Respondent: Ms Janet Taylor

It should be easier to make changes in conservation areas to buildings that are not listed.

Support noted. In accordance with National Planning Policy and Local Plan built environment policies improvements in energy efficiency should be consistent with the asset’s significance. Policy CC7 allows for sensitive retrofitting in conservation areas.

Support

Representation ID: 5565

Received: 05/01/2024

Respondent: Mrs laura alcock

Heritage, listed building and conservation areas, yes important to protect, however reducing energy consumption and carbon emissions is more important. For example solar panels on a listed a building should be acceptable.

Support noted. The part of the policy on retrofitting is positively worded to ‘will be expected’ whilst still consistent with protecting heritage assets as required under national planning policy and other historic environment policies of the Local Plan.

Support

Representation ID: 5788

Received: 06/01/2024

Respondent: Mrs Sue Scarrott

I support this in principle but there needs to be an allowance for small extensions/alterations needed because people have become disabled or infirm etc. These people may not have the funds to upgrade their whole home.
Also RCC need to be offering grants for retro fitting home insulation to residents on lower incomes (means tested grants).

Support noted. The policy is flexibly worded (‘are expected where possible’) rather than mandatorily requiring the retrofitting of energy efficiency measures and it is acknowledged that many small extensions/alterations to dwellings all outside the scope of the policy as they would not require planning permission. It is not the role of the Local Plan to set out the Council’s policy on offering energy grants.

Support

Representation ID: 5844

Received: 06/01/2024

Respondent: RCC Expert Panel on Carbon Reduction

This is a welcomed policy as there are many historic and listed buildings in Rutland. However, the phrase “where possible” should be omitted in that sentence as it could be added to a new sentence “Any extension to an existing building should where possible have a minimum EPC rating of B” or a similar standard.

Solar panels (both PV and thermal) and the external units air source heat pumps should be more actively encouraged on or around listed buildings. Chelsea and Kensington Council have actively encouraged solar panels on listed buildings.

Support noted. Regarding setting of efficiency targets, it is intended that further work to update the cost evidence for a number of options for the wording of CC7 will be undertaken to inform the next stage of the local plan. This will build on the Whole Plan Viability Assessment (2023). Any changes to the draft policies arising from consultation responses and/or new evidence on climate change will be consulted on through the Reg 19 consultation. The part of the policy on retrofitting is positively worded to ‘will be expected’ and is intended to encompass all micro-renewables, including ASHPs, whilst still consistent with protecting heritage assets as required under national planning policy and other policies of the Local Plan.

Object

Representation ID: 6048

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: Mr Roderick Morgan

The reference to PV etc is at odds with the fact that new builds are still not required to have this as standard.
There are no explicit targets or timeframes. So this is not a plan in the sense of being serious about implementation of this policy.

Comments noted. There is no specific mention on pv panels, although these would be encompassed in ‘the appropriate use of micro-renewables’ as part of the retrofitting of energy efficiency measures. It would not be appropriate to set timeframes for redevelopment or retrofitting proposals. Regarding setting of efficiency targets, it is intended that further work to update the cost evidence for a number of options for the wording of CC7 will be undertaken to inform the next stage of the local plan. This will build on the Whole Plan Viability Assessment (2023). Any changes to the draft policies arising from consultation responses and/or new evidence on climate change will be consulted on through the Reg 19 consultation. Policy CC2, which considers new buildings, seeks to maximise the generation of energy from renewable sources on site.

Support

Representation ID: 6051

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: Mr David Lewis

The policy should actively encourage the reduction of energy use in historic buildings, for example by allowing windows to be replaced by double glazed windows, even if this changes the character of the building. It is important that historic buildings are made fit for future use.

Support noted. The policy is positively worded (‘will be expected’) with regards to retrofitting of energy efficiency measures such as double glazing and there are examples of double glazing, or other solutions such as shutters or secondary glazing, used in listed buildings that are consistent with the asset’s significance as required under National Planning Policy and the built environment policies in the Local Plan.

Support

Representation ID: 6292

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: Mr Chris Read

OK. This makes sense.
It needs to be appropriate.
Remember the downsides of heat pumps etc. Nobody wants their neighbour to have a heat-pump wailing away next to their garden or window. Nobody wants to try and heat a leaky house with a heat pump.
The inability to afford major improvements should not preclude necessary or desired building extension - as long as things are in the right direction.

Support noted. The policy is flexibly worded (‘are expected where possible’) rather than mandatorily requiring the retrofitting of energy efficiency measures and it is acknowledged that many small extensions/alterations to dwellings all outside the scope of the policy as they would not require planning permission. There is no evidence to suggest that the policy would deter home improvements, and there are already a number of industry standards/targets relating to energy efficiency measures in place that have been and are currently applicable.

Object

Representation ID: 6670

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Mr Philip Giles

The policy should include that solar panel retrofits on all buildings should be Permitted Development other than in Conservation Areas or on Listed Buildings where separate rules apply.

Comments noted but it is not within the power of the Local Plan to make legislative changes to permitted development rights.

Support

Representation ID: 6702

Received: 05/01/2024

Respondent: Mr David Holland

Solar panels should be encouraged on existing domestic and commercial buildings

Support noted. The policy is positively worded (‘will be expected’) with regards to retrofitting of micro-renewables (that would include solar panels) on existing buildings. Such provision is also supported and encouraged in policy documents such as the NPPF and PPG, the National Design Guide (2021) and Design Guidelines for Rutland (2021). Such an approach can, however, only be applied when a development proposal, that requires planning permission, for an existing building comes forward. It would be the role of the Council through its own initiatives and other organisations, potentially through grant schemes, to actively promote the retrofitting of solar panels.

Support

Representation ID: 6706

Received: 06/01/2024

Respondent: Ian Newsham

I believe solar panels should be encouraged on existing domestic and commercial buildings.

Support noted. The policy is positively worded (‘will be expected’) with regards to retrofitting of micro-renewables (that would include solar panels) on existing buildings. Such provision is also supported and encouraged in policy documents such as the NPPF and PPG, the National Design Guide (2021) and Design Guidelines for Rutland (2021). Such an approach can, however, only be applied when a development proposal, that requires planning permission, for an existing building comes forward. It would be the role of the Council through its own initiatives and other organisations, potentially through grant schemes, to actively promote the retrofitting of solar panels.

Support

Representation ID: 6710

Received: 06/01/2024

Respondent: Mr Andrew Leech

Solar panels should be encouraged on existing domestic and commercial buildings.

Support noted. The policy is positively worded (‘will be expected’) with regards to retrofitting of micro-renewables (that would include solar panels) on existing buildings. Such provision is also supported and encouraged in policy documents such as the NPPF and PPG, the National Design Guide (2021) and Design Guidelines for Rutland (2021). Such an approach can, however, only be applied when a development proposal, that requires planning permission, for an existing building comes forward. It would be the role of the Council through its own initiatives and other organisations, potentially through grant schemes, to actively promote the retrofitting of solar panels.

Support

Representation ID: 6713

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: Steven Tattersall

Solar panels should be encouraged on existing buildings.

Support noted. The policy is positively worded (‘will be expected’) with regards to retrofitting of micro-renewables (that would include solar panels) on existing buildings. Such provision is also supported and encouraged in policy documents such as the NPPF and PPG, the National Design Guide (2021) and Design Guidelines for Rutland (2021). Such an approach can, however, only be applied when a development proposal, that requires planning permission, for an existing building comes forward. It would be the role of the Council through its own initiatives and other organisations, potentially through grant schemes, to actively promote the retrofitting of solar panels.

Support

Representation ID: 6731

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: Lucy & Tom Pengilley Gibb

Number of people: 2

Solar should be encouraged on existing domestic and commercial buildings.

Support noted. The policy is positively worded (‘will be expected’) with regards to retrofitting of micro-renewables (that would include solar panels) on existing buildings. Such provision is also supported and encouraged in policy documents such as the NPPF and PPG, the National Design Guide (2021) and Design Guidelines for Rutland (2021). Such an approach can, however, only be applied when a development proposal, that requires planning permission, for an existing building comes forward. It would be the role of the Council through its own initiatives and other organisations, potentially through grant schemes, to actively promote the retrofitting of solar panels.

Support

Representation ID: 6735

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: Aileen Coupe

Number of people: 2

Solar panels should be encouraged on existing domestic and commercial buildings.

Support noted. The policy is positively worded (‘will be expected’) with regards to retrofitting of micro-renewables (that would include solar panels) on existing buildings. Such provision is also supported and encouraged in policy documents such as the NPPF and PPG, the National Design Guide (2021) and Design Guidelines for Rutland (2021). Such an approach can, however, only be applied when a development proposal, that requires planning permission, for an existing building comes forward. It would be the role of the Council through its own initiatives and other organisations, potentially through grant schemes, to actively promote the retrofitting of solar panels.

Support

Representation ID: 6754

Received: 05/01/2024

Respondent: Barrowden Parish Council

We fully support the retrofitting of energy efficient measures in listed buildings and buildings in Conservation Areas but would ask that there should be a presumption in favour of such improvements with the appropriate caveats to safeguard the historical aspects of listed buildings.

There is a typo in the Policy, second last line, the “in” is not required.

Support and typo noted. The part of the policy on retrofitting is positively worded (‘will be expected’) but flexibility in the policy is required meaning that a presumption in favour would not be appropriate given that where heritage assets are concerned, improvements in efficiency should be consistent with the asset’s significance and consistent with relevant national planning policy and with other Local Plan policies on the built environment.

Support

Representation ID: 6781

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Wendy Dalton

Existing housing - Energy efficiency modifications to be available for all housing including the listed and heritage stock in Rutland. This includes permitting solar panels to be erected under planning.
Existing industrial building - to be given planning permission and encouraged with 1 year lower business rates to add solar panels to buildings.

Support noted. The part of the policy on retrofitting is positively worded (‘will be expected’) but flexibility in the policy is required given that where heritage assets are concerned, improvements in efficiency should be consistent with the asset’s significance and consistent with relevant national planning policy and with other Local Plan policies on the built environment. With regards to existing industrial buildings, a lowering of business rates following the retrofitting of solar panels would be outside the scope of the remit of the Local Plan.

Support

Representation ID: 6800

Received: 02/01/2024

Respondent: Gary Firkins

The Local Plan should encourage roof top solar on existing domestic and commercial buildings.

Support noted. The policy is positively worded (‘will be expected’) with regards to retrofitting of micro-renewables (that would include solar panels) on existing buildings. Such provision is also supported and encouraged in policy documents such as the NPPF and PPG, the National Design Guide (2021) and Design Guidelines for Rutland (2021). Such an approach can, however, only be applied when a development proposal, that requires planning permission, for an existing building comes forward. It would be the role of the Council through its own initiatives and other organisations, potentially through grant schemes, to actively promote the retrofitting of solar panels.

Support

Representation ID: 6803

Received: 02/01/2024

Respondent: Mrs Jayne Williams

The Council should support the retrofitting of solar panels

Support noted. The policy is positively worded (‘will be expected’) with regards to retrofitting of micro-renewables (that would include solar panels) on existing buildings. Such provision is also supported and encouraged in policy documents such as the NPPF and PPG, the National Design Guide (2021) and Design Guidelines for Rutland (2021). Such an approach can, however, only be applied when a development proposal, that requires planning permission, for an existing building comes forward. It would be the role of the Council through its own initiatives and other organisations, potentially through grant schemes, to actively promote the retrofitting of solar panels.

Support

Representation ID: 6806

Received: 04/01/2024

Respondent: Mrs Carol Dry

Rather encourage solar panels on all new-builds and industrial buildings, and existing buildings. This is of the utmost importance .

Support noted. The policy is positively worded (‘will be expected’) with regards to retrofitting of micro-renewables (that would include solar panels) on existing buildings. Such provision is also supported and encouraged in policy documents such as the NPPF and PPG, the National Design Guide (2021) and Design Guidelines for Rutland (2021). Such an approach can, however, only be applied when a development proposal, that requires planning permission, for an existing building comes forward. It would be the role of the Council through its own initiatives and other organisations, potentially through grant schemes, to actively promote the retrofitting of solar panels.

Support

Representation ID: 6913

Received: 05/01/2024

Respondent: Ms Erica Downs

Solar panels should be encouraged on existing domestic and commercial buildings, including those grade 2 listed as has been done in London.

Support noted. The part of the policy on retrofitting is positively worded (‘will be expected’) whilst still consistent with protecting heritage assets as required under national planning policy and other policies of the Local Plan. Such an approach can, however, only be applied when a development proposal, that requires planning permission, for an existing building comes forward. It would be the role of the Council through its own initiatives and other organisations, potentially through grant schemes, to actively promote the retrofitting of solar panels.

Support

Representation ID: 7087

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: Bob Chidgey

Solar panels should be encouraged on existing domestic and commercial buildings.

Support noted. The policy is positively worded (‘will be expected’) with regards to retrofitting of micro-renewables (that would include solar panels) on existing buildings. Such provision is also supported and encouraged in policy documents such as the NPPF and PPG, the National Design Guide (2021) and Design Guidelines for Rutland (2021). Such an approach can, however, only be applied when a development proposal, that requires planning permission, for an existing building comes forward. It would be the role of the Council through its own initiatives and other organisations, potentially through grant schemes, to actively promote the retrofitting of solar panels.

Support

Representation ID: 7090

Received: 03/01/2024

Respondent: Mrs Sheila Storer

I live in a grade II+ listed building and have applied for planning permission to put solar panels on outbuildings but have been declined due to the status of the building. This was a huge blow as running costs are now so high that I can no longer afford the upkeep of the property.

There is so much scope for solar to be achieved by making it possible for EVERYONE to access the power generated naturally by the sun by the use of their rooftops.

Support noted. One of the Strategic Objectives of the new Local Plan is to take positive action to achieve net-zero through (in part) by promoting renewable energy generation in the right locations. This positive policy approach is reflected in the part of Policy CC7 on retrofitting on historic buildings which is positively worded to ‘will be expected’. Once adopted, this would be the policy approach taken when determining retrofitting proposals whilst also being consistent with national planning policy whereby improvements in energy efficiency should be consistent with the asset’s significance.

Support

Representation ID: 7131

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Mr Douglas Reid

Solar panels should be encouraged on existing domestic and commercial buildings.

Support noted. The policy is positively worded (‘will be expected’) with regards to retrofitting of micro-renewables (that would include solar panels) on existing buildings. Such provision is also supported and encouraged in policy documents such as the NPPF and PPG, the National Design Guide (2021) and Design Guidelines for Rutland (2021). Such an approach can, however, only be applied when a development proposal, that requires planning permission, for an existing building comes forward. It would be the role of the Council through its own initiatives and other organisations, potentially through grant schemes, to actively promote the retrofitting of solar panels.

Support

Representation ID: 7208

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: Peter Shaw

Solar panels should be a mandatory requirement for all new dwellings and industrial buildings and encouraged on existing domestic and commercial buildings.

Support noted. Policy CC7 covers existing buildings. The policy is positively worded (‘will be expected’) with regards to retrofitting of micro-renewables (that would include solar panels) on existing buildings. Such an approach can, however, only be applied when a development proposal, that requires planning permission, for an existing building comes forward. It would be the role of the Council through its own initiatives and other organisations, potentially through grant schemes, to actively promote the retrofitting of solar panels. Renewable energy generation on new dwellings is covered by Policies CC2 and CC4. It would not be appropriate to mandatorily require all new dwellings to have solar panels through a prescriptive local plan policy as there are a number of factors that would need to be taken into account such as location, efficiency, viability and whether other forms of renewable energy are more appropriate. Such provision is, however, supported and encouraged in policy documents such as the NPPF and PPG, the National Design Guide (2021), Design Guidelines for Rutland (2021) and Policies CC2 and CC4 seeks to maximise energy generation from on-site renewable sources.

Support

Representation ID: 7216

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Catherine Morgan

The priority should be on all new houses and commercial buildings to have roof mounted PV and solar heating, plus other renewable energy systems like heat pumps and batteries, and this should be actively supported to be fitted to existing buildings of all types.

Support noted. Policy CC7 covers existing buildings. The policy is positively worded (‘will be expected’) with regards to retrofitting of micro-renewables (that would include solar panels) on existing buildings. Such an approach can, however, only be applied when a development proposal, that requires planning permission, for an existing building comes forward. It would be the role of the Council through its own initiatives and other organisations, potentially through grant schemes, to actively promote the retrofitting of solar panels. Renewable energy generation on new dwellings is covered by Policies CC2 and CC4. It would not be appropriate to mandatorily require all new dwellings to have solar panels through a prescriptive local plan policy as there are a number of factors that would need to be taken into account such as location, efficiency, viability and whether other forms of renewable energy are more appropriate. Such provision is, however, supported and encouraged in policy documents such as the NPPF and PPG, the National Design Guide (2021), Design Guidelines for Rutland (2021) and Policies CC2 and CC4 seeks to maximise energy generation from on-site renewable sources.

Support

Representation ID: 7416

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Caroline McAlpine

I think it is quite wrong for Solar to be built on argricultural land where they should be put on warehouse roofing and houses and on brownfield land, not destroying all our precious countryside, especially in a small county like Rutland

Support for retrofitting of energy efficiency measures to existing buildings noted.