Regulation 18 draft Local Plan

Object

Representation ID: 7862

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: CPRE Rutland

Minor inconsistency – the policy is stated to apply to new build but the third bullet talks about conversions,
which are actually covered in SS10.

Objection noted.
Policy SS8 (now SS7) applies to residential development in the open countryside, which is not just restricted to new builds. Bullet point 3 references the re-use, adaptations and conversions of rural buildings which would be secured by policy SS10 (now SS9).
This does not require a policy change but this will be made clear in the policy description text.

Object

Representation ID: 7863

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: CPRE Rutland

is not mentioned in the introduction to this section or in the justification following the policies.

No change required.

Object

Representation ID: 7864

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: CPRE Rutland

The number of houses planned to be built during the plan period is 123 per annum, against a requirement for 130 per annum in the previous plan. Given that the population is now predicted to grow by a much greater proportion than in the previous plan (see comment above at Chapter 2), it is difficult to reconcile these figures. The Government's Standard Method for calculating housing need is currently based on the 2014 population figures, but it is understood that revised calculations using the 2021 Census results are likely to be released soon; the housing needs for Rutland will then need to be reviewed.

The evident disparity between housing numbers and population growth needs to be explained and the figures fully justified.

comments are noted and this section of the plan will be revised to provide greater clarity about what the plan is proposing in terms of housing numbers.

Object

Representation ID: 7865

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: CPRE Rutland

Table 4 proposes a total of 2512 houses to be built by 2041 including committed, therefore 140 to be completed each year. Is this consistent with the demographic trends in that timescale? Does this account for current housing waiting lists?

Considering existing commitments, the requirement for reduces to 75 pa up to 2041. More are likely to derive from windfall than is allowed. The windfall allowance of just 45 seems unrealistically low, given the rate of windfall completions to date; a more realistic figure, of up to 20 pa, might be more appropriate, leaving a requirement for new planned development to 55 dwellings pa.

Reserve Sites to accommodate 657 dwellings are listed, it should be made clear that they should not count towards the housing requirements, which already include a buffer, but can be used to ensure a 5 YLS. The impact of the possible development at St George's Barracks should also be made clear.

We welcome the acknowledgement that the
proposed policy considers that Neighbourhood Plans can make provision for more housing development than that
required in the strategic policy and the Council supports groups that wish to provide site allocations for housing
development within their neighbourhood plans that go beyond the minimum requirement contained in the strategic policy, particularly those who assess their local housing needs through an appropriate assessment and plan to meet it.

The proposed indicative housing supply for Uppingham should be specified as a minimum figure

All site appraisals have been reviewed in the light of comments and further evidence received to determine their suitability for allocation.

Object

Representation ID: 7866

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: CPRE Rutland

Presumably there is a risk that SKDC will not proceed with this proposal, which would impact significantly
on Rutland's numbers. What are the infrastructure implications in either case? - they need to be spelt out, i.e. will some of the infrastructure needs be met in Rutland and will there also be impact on existing Rutland infrastructure?

All site appraisals have been reviewed in the light of comments and further evidence received to determine their suitability for allocation.

Object

Representation ID: 7867

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: CPRE Rutland

c) – do all the opportunities have to be within the county?

Do the figures for housing mix add up to the requisite numbers to meet the anticipated population growth and profile going forward? - this needs to be clarified.

Is Table 5 also Figure 4?

The text implies significant changes/additions for the next version of the plan – these would need to be consulted
upon prior to Regulation 19.

Regarding H4(c), it gives the opportunity for people to live near places of work in Rutland. As stated in the supporting text for H2, the Stamford North proposal will promote the sustainable growth of Stamford.

Paragraph 5.6 of the HMA states; "A model has been developed that starts with the current profile of housing in terms of size (bedrooms) and tenure. Within the data, information is available about the age of households and the typical sizes of homes they occupy. By using demographic projections, it is possible to see which age groups are expected to change in number, and by how much.

Table 5 of the consultation document is also Figure 4 of the HMA.

Object

Representation ID: 7868

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: CPRE Rutland

The definition of affordability from the NPPF is acknowledged, but simply meeting this is very unlikely to
result in homes that are genuinely affordable to those most in need. Can the council not go further in some meaningful way?

78 per annum, from the HMA, out of the 123 required, seems like a very high proportion.

– Will affordable homes be required to remain affordable in perpetuity?

A wide range of affordable housing to meet needs will be provided. Affordable rented housing is modelled (capped at the Local Housing Allowance level) as the preferred option for developer-led sites in the Whole Plan Viability Assessment. This is because it is more viable and allows the preferred 2:1 ratio between rented and purchase affordable options and the 30% affordable housing provision to be maintained.

Delivery of affordable housing will be through a combination of developer-led sites with a minimum of 30% provision, wholly affordable sites, and exception sites (under Policies H8 and H9).

There is often a right to purchase rented properties and shared ownership properties outright unless a rural exemption can be put in place. Most occupants do not exercise these rights and the property remains for future occupants. Receipts contribute to new affordable housing provision. Section 106 agreements generally seek for this to be within Rutland. Special protections are in place for rural exception sites (see Policy H8). The 30% discount for First Homes is maintained for future purchasers. If this is not possible for a particular sale because it does not sell within a prescribed period of time, then the national model agreement allows a financial contribution for affordable housing to be paid to the Council.

Object

Representation ID: 7871

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: CPRE Rutland

Not clear - Where is the 'Five Counties Extension' defined?

These are H10.4, H10.5 and H10.6 on Inset Map 37.

Object

Representation ID: 7877

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: CPRE Rutland

Within this proposed policy, the Uppingham Gate site of 6.8ha is proposed for a range of employment uses.
However, the Uppingham Neighbourhood Plan Submission Draft, in its policies HA4 and BE1, allocates the Uppingham Gate site for mixed use development, to include not only B class employment uses, but also an element of retail and housing development. The rationale being that the wider range of uses is necessary to ensure that delivery of the B class employment uses on the site is financially viable. The preliminary Uppingham Gate masterplan proposals for the site demonstrate that the number and range of jobs provided by retail/care home/leisure as well as the Class B2 and E small business units, meet the overall Local Plan employment objectives.

Noted. Site appraisals have been reviewed in the light of comments and further evidence received.

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.

Noted. The employment allocations set out in Policy E1 have been informed by the evidence in the Rutland Employment Needs & Economic Development Evidence (August 2023) and the suitable level of growth regarding employment uses has been accounted for here in alignment with housing needs and growth. This is whilst also taking into account of sites which may come forward through this policy, which are not allocated in Policy E1.

Any new infrastructure requirements associated with new employment development will be delivered through s106/CIL.