Object

Representation ID: 7493

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Mrs Marlen Godwin

The main area of concern for us within the Draft Local Plan relate to the abolition of PLD’s in small villages and the quality of life which is being affected by the increasing traffic on the A606.

Noise pollution has just increased and continues to be an issue.

Development throughout the county needs to consider the sustainability of the homes and drainage, especially after this last week’s flooding. It is imperative to know where ‘natural’ excess water flowed before adding more homes. Plus the number of affordable homes is still lacking despite assurances by developers.

Comments noted.
It is considered that policy SS4 (now SS3) provides sufficient restrictions to prevent large scale development in small villages whilst allowing for appropriate small scale infill and redevelopment. It should be noted however that the policy has been amended in response to other representations.

Support

Representation ID: 7510

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Wing Parish Council

The addendum to this policy acknowledges that Neighbourhood Plans may propose “small scale adjustments to PLDs to allow for additional development
which meet their community’s needs”. We strongly support this provision, although it appears to contradicts SS1, as it allows local communities to respond flexibly to
changing local need.

Support noted.

Support

Representation ID: 7612

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Paula Johnstone

On the point of PLD, it should be clear that any development beyond a PLD is not acceptable.

Noted. Some development may be acceptable beyond the PLD subject to policy.

Object

Representation ID: 7660

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Stancliffe Homes Ltd

Agent: DLP Planning Ltd

The Regulation 18 Plan proposes to alter the Planned Limits of Development at Great Casterton to include the school playing fields. This change is supported but is considered that this change highlights the fact that the proposed site adjacent to the school is enclosed on the other two sides also by development making the site appear as an insert into the settlement. The development of the site for housing appears to be entirely logical especially as there are no other proposals for development within this Larger Village.

Instead of the PLD boundary being amended to include the school it should be extended so as to include the site at College Close Great Casterton (see Figure 1).

The inclusion of GtC3 within the PLD reflects its use as school playing fields contiguous with the settlement’s built form under criteria In.F of the PLD Review Study 2023. However, there is no presumption in favour of development for land falling within the PLD. All planning applications for proposed development will be considered against all relevant policies within the Development Plan and any material considerations.

Accordingly, the inclusion of the site does not result in the adjacent open field being substantially enclosed by built development, nor would it be a small site necessary for inclusion under criterion In.E. The site therefore remains identified as open countryside.

Object

Representation ID: 7677

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: South Luffenham Parish Council

Needs Clarification - Where sites have been indicated within the plan but not adopted, can the Developer seek review with RCC /DoE to still develop the site, or does the fact the application has been discounted and does not form part of the plan, effectively block development.

An applicant can always put a planning application in for any site at anytime. the Local Plan cannot prevent an application being made for a site.

Object

Representation ID: 7689

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Cavendish Gospel Hall Trust

Agent: Andrew Beard Planning

There is no reference within SS3 to immediately adjacent sites, which should be included for non-housing services. I.E Religious Buildings

Noted. It is considered that revised policies SS3 and SS4 and policy SC5 would allow for appropriate community facilities on the immediate edge of a settlement, subject to detailed policy considerations

Support

Representation ID: 7789

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Edith Weston Parish Council

We support Policy SS3, and this is reinforced by the emerging Neighbourhood Plan.

Support noted

Object

Representation ID: 7832

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: CPRE Rutland

Planned Limits of Development (PLD) are a Material Planning Consideration when determining applications for new build and extensions in the small villages. There is a presumption against planning consent for developments outside of the planned limits of development. PLD’s therefore have a most important role in preventing continuous expansion and enlargement of small villages, and also in ensuring that unauthorised development is not permitted in the open countryside which by definition lies beyond the immediate boundary of the PLD. Some villages, furthermore, might wish to retain their PLD.

It is not clear that removing PLDs has ever been asked for in community feedback; if it has, this needs to be brought
out clearly. The only evident reference to such a move is in the Spatial Strategy Evidence Report, which assumed that PLDs would be removed from smaller villages but did not actually recommend such a change.

Comments noted.
It is considered that policy SS4 (now SS3) provides sufficient restrictions to prevent large scale development in small villages whilst allowing for appropriate small scale infill and redevelopment. It should be noted however that the policy has been amended in response to other representations.

Support

Representation ID: 7899

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Ryhall Parish Council

SS3 Development within Planned Limits of Developments - Support

Support noted