Support

Representation ID: 4868

Received: 22/12/2023

Respondent: Burley Parish Meeting

Agree with all objectives "A"-"G"

I am not sure how you can support local public houses but you must support village halls, for clubs such as Scouts, Guides, Rainbows etc.

Support noted.

Support

Representation ID: 5017

Received: 02/01/2024

Respondent: Mrs Sara Glover

The Officer's Mess or St George's barracks land could be use to site more tourist attractions eg a museum about the dinosaur or the Roman finds.

Noted.

Object

Representation ID: 5191

Received: 03/01/2024

Respondent: Mr Frank Brett

This is not clear, over broad and vague. What is the over-arching vision? Sustainability is at risk because of the implied increased requirement for road transport. The ‘character’ of the rural area is in part down to the narrow roads. We should seek not to increase (and even seek to decrease) the amount of road transport off the main A roads.

Bullet e) contains the words ‘adaption of modern agricultural practices’. Clarification of this term is needed. This needs to be expanded upon to make it clear that ‘industrial’, environmentally damaging agriculture will not be supported.

Noted. Policy E4 provides support for development which contributes to and supports the economy in the rural area, whilst simultaneously ensuring it is in the right location and at an appropriate scale and nature.

Proposals that will be considered against Policy E4 will also need to be in accordance with Policy SS9. This sets out that non-residential development in the countryside, specifically at criterion d) in the second part of the policy should demonstrate it would not generate an unacceptable increase in the amount of traffic movements.

An amendment to criterion e) of Policy E4 is considered not to be required as this criterion supports sustainable farming and food production businesses. The encouragement of this type of proposal is considered to be sufficient.

Support

Representation ID: 6309

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Mr Chris Read

Supported. Seems like common sense.

Support noted.

Support

Representation ID: 6438

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Mr Dennis Stanley

Rutland has seen many changes in recent years in its rural areas with farming in particular, incoming people , buying into the area to enjoy our good quality of life, the demise of much community infrastructure ,the village pub ,struggling churches and community center's. we need to understand these changes engage local communities needs, be high speed broadband to facilitate home working to, support to parish groups to access grants for better community facilities. Pro active support to innovative uses of redundant buildings from farm building conversions to business hubs in empty pubs

Noted.

Object

Representation ID: 6638

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Mr George Weightman

The policy should identify Key Employment Sites which for development management purposes may be within the 'countryside' and rural areas but are key to local communities and economies. Significant weight should be placed on supporting the economic growth and productivity of existing local businesses, their needs and wider opportunities for development. The policy should provide flexibility to support the expansion of these employment sites in rural areas. 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). Including Wireless Hill.

Noted. Policy E3 does not solely apply to those areas identified as 'Key Employment Sites', all and existing new contributors to the rural economy are supported by this policy.

It is considered however that criterion c) of Policy E3 provides sufficient support for rural businesses in circumstances where growth and expansion is required.

Object

Representation ID: 6771

Received: 05/01/2024

Respondent: Barrowden Parish Council

We would ask that the condition relating to Character etc in para (vi) be the same words as used in Policy E5 para (c).

Policy E4 sets out the types of development which will be supported outside Oakham, Uppingham and the larger villages and then outlines the requirements of any proposals that come forward, including criterion vi.

Whereas Policy E5 specifically relates to sustainable farm diversification which sets out a number of policy requirements for proposals of this nature. It is considered that the wording for this policy is tailored to this specific type of development, whilst also including a requirement for the proposal to consider the impact on character and landscape as included in criterion c, as included also included in Policy E4.

Support

Representation ID: 6814

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Wild Rutland

Agent: Savills

For ease of reference, the part of Policy E4 that is relevant to this representation states:

“Outside Oakham, Uppingham and the larger villages, developments which:

b. create or extend rural based tourist attractions, visitor facilities and recreational uses;

d. encourage the creation of start-ups and scale ups to innovation support and rural
diversification;

f. are considered essential to the wider strategic interest of the economic development of Rutland,
as determined by the County Council; or

will be supported where the development:

ii. supports the rural economy, and could not reasonably be expected to locate within the planned
limits of development;

We SUPPORT this policy, with particular support in the parts of the policy highlighted.

Support noted.

Support

Representation ID: 6816

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Hanbury Farms Partnership

Agent: Savills

For ease of reference, policy E4 states:

“Outside Oakham, Uppingham and the larger villages, developments which:

e. encourage the creation and expansion of sustainable farming and food production businesses
and allow for the adaption of modern agricultural practices;

The Estate SUPPORTS policy E4, particularly point (e) of the policy with regards to the encouragement of
creation and expansion of sustainable farming practices.

Support noted.

Support

Representation ID: 7008

Received: 04/01/2024

Respondent: Stoke Dry Estate

Agent: Phillips Planning Services

The Estate supports the content of the Policy as setting out a reasonable approach to protecting rural areas whilst acknowledging that rural areas can accommodate some farm diversification and employment provision.

Support noted.

Object

Representation ID: 7214

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: Nigel Blackburn

There seems to be a lack of proposes infrastructure plans for the rural area where the economy is growing.

The plan is short on detail in every area if the economy is going to grow, which we expect it to do.

Noted. Policies in Infrastructure and Delivery chapter seek to ensure that all new development is supported by the provision of the necessary infrastructure, services, utilities and facilities identified to meet the needs arising from new development in a timely way (Policy INF1). This is via the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) and Section 106 agreements

This also includes policies on sustainable and active travel (policies INF2 and INF3).

Object

Representation ID: 7683

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Best Little Building Co. Ltd

Agent: Invicta Planning

Policy E4 is therefore not ‘Consistent with National Policy’ and should be updated to:

• Remove reference or more specifically define the circumstance in which it could be demonstrated that an employment use ‘could not reasonably be expected to locate within the planned limits of development’;
• provide more flexibility to the circumstances in which employment uses can be located in the rural areas such as the expansion or relocation of existing rural businesses; and
• specifically allow for the construction of new buildings for employment uses.

Comments noted. However, the Council consider Policy E4 to be in accordance with the NPPF. Specifically paragraphs 88 and 89, which requires policies to enable the sustainable growth and expansion of all types of business in rural areas. This policy seeks to steer development to the most sustainable locations in accordance with this.

Support

Representation ID: 7924

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Ryhall Parish Council

E4 Rural Economy - Support

Support noted.