Support

Representation ID: 4540

Received: 23/11/2023

Respondent: Stewart MacDonald

The rural nature of the county needs to be protected by protecting all agricultural land, open spaces, trees and conservation areas etc.

Support noted

Object

Representation ID: 5202

Received: 03/01/2024

Respondent: Mr Frank Brett

There is a risk that the wording effectively prevents the siting of wind turbines or solar farms anywhere in the County. I think that additional or changed wording is needed to show that renewable energy sources (which are effectively temporary in nature - in that they can be removed in the future) will be actively supported. See also policy SC1.

Policy CC8 provides positive and detailed criteria for determining proposals for renewable energy sources. Policy SC2 is a general policy providing overarching guidance for all types of development and should not specifically reference any particular type of development

Support

Representation ID: 5678

Received: 06/01/2024

Respondent: Mrs Jayne Williams

Agree, particularly regarding solar farms and wind turbines regarding scale and design.

Support noted

Support

Representation ID: 5833

Received: 06/01/2024

Respondent: Braunston-in-Rutland Parish Council

Especially important to take note of “h”

Support noted

Support

Representation ID: 5983

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: Jane Ellis

Rutland is a rural, agricultural county and its character should be protected. Policies must be adhered to and not ignored regarding housing development

Support noted

Object

Representation ID: 7104

Received: 02/01/2024

Respondent: Stamford Civic Society

Policy SC2 – Place shaping principles. This policy whilst welcomed, may not be capable of full consideration in relation to Quarry Farm/Monarch Park, because of the proximity to the SKDC boundary and the relationship to Stamford. At the same time SKDC will not be able to apply their policies to this proposed development.

Applications for the two parts of Stamford North will be determined in light of the policies within each respective local authorities development plan.
Policy SC2 is written to cover all forms of development within the county and is not specific to certain types or locations for development.

Support

Representation ID: 7311

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Manor Oak Homes

Agent: Mr Andy Moffat

The listed place shaping principles are supported.

Support noted

Object

Representation ID: 7365

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: The Society of Merchant Venturers

Agent: Savills

In a similar context to Policy SC1, the draft wording for Policy SC2 confirms that local character and distinctiveness should have regard to the Rutland Landscape Character Assessment 2022 and the RSLSS
2023. As set out above, it is considered in relation to the south of Oakham, that these assessments are outdated as they do not reflect the Oakham Pastures development which has extended the town further south and forms the new arrival into Oakham.

As such, this policy should be sufficiently flexible to refer to any new/updated evidence base documents relating to landscape which are produced as part of the evidence base for this Plan (and therefore reflect any new development which changes the character of the settlement since the March 2022 base date of the original studies).

Noted. The Landscape evidence was commissioned and completed in 2022 and 2023 and is considered up to date, albeit as a snapshot in time. It is therefore acknowledged that there will continue to be occasions where development has taken place which changes the nature of the Local Plan evidence base, however criterion b) of policy SC2 which refers to these two studies in particular is considered to provide sufficient flexibility.

Object

Representation ID: 7561

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: House Builders Federation

This policy seems to be seeking to give Local Plan status to an existing SPDs which is not appropriate. Planning policy must be made through the Local Plan process
and be subject to mandatory requirements for public consultation and independent scrutiny through the Examination process.

Agree. Criterion h) should be amended to refer to "adopted SPD" rather than to list specific SPDs

Support

Representation ID: 7586

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Historic England

Criteria a), b), c) and h) are welcomed.

Support noted

Object

Representation ID: 7800

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Edith Weston Parish Council

We have concerns that this policy is too vague and generic.

Comments noted. Policy is not used in isolation and greater detail about all of these principles is provided in other policies in the plan.

Support

Representation ID: 7935

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Ryhall Parish Council

SC2 Place Shaping Principles - Support

Support noted