Regulation 18 draft Local Plan

Object

Representation ID: 5639

Received: 05/01/2024

Respondent: Ashwell Parish Council

We object to the removal of Planned Limits of Development. PLD's have been defined in the previous Local Plan and have served small villages well. Without PLDs there will inevitably be an increase in the number of speculative applications for development on the margins of the villages and the encroachment into open countryside. The conditions (a-g) create a number of loopholes which will make it even harder to limit expansion in villages which lack the facilities and infrastructure to support such expansion.

Object

Representation ID: 5644

Received: 05/01/2024

Respondent: Ashwell Parish Council

A blanket minimum of 25 properties per hectare is unrealistic if you are true to other environmental, health and traffic aims: Each property will require parking for 1 or 2 vehicles and access roads will need to be wider if they are to be lined by trees and useable pedestrian pavements. Space will also be at a premium as a result of the orientation of individual properties with regard to the effective positioning of solar panels and appropriate storage for bins.

Object

Representation ID: 5648

Received: 05/01/2024

Respondent: Ashwell Parish Council

The building 650 properties on Rutland land, as part of Stamford North, should take a sizeable chunk out of the targetted 2460 houses needed to be built in Rutland over the next 20 years. However it appears that although these houses are being built in Rutland they will be part of the South Kesteven building target. Surely houses built on Rutland land should be part of Rutland's building load - reducing the demand for sites elsewhere in the county?

Object

Representation ID: 5653

Received: 05/01/2024

Respondent: Ashwell Parish Council

It is all too easy for a developer to pay CIL and then create a development without appropriate infrastructure. There needs to be a much more robust statement in the Plan from Rutland County Council which states that the CIL collected on a specific development will be used to enhance the infrastructure on that particular site. If CIL is banked and then used for appropriate facilities somewhere else in the county, rather than in accessible distance from the development, then we are just creating more traffic and another estate without local facilities and opportunities to interact as a vibrant community.

Object

Representation ID: 5656

Received: 05/01/2024

Respondent: Ashwell Parish Council

If this was truly a thorough meaningful consultation period, in which we were asked to absorb and respond appropriately to such a sizeable and significant document, we would never have been given such a narrow window of time.

Object

Representation ID: 5660

Received: 05/01/2024

Respondent: Ashwell Parish Council

We acknowledge the work that has gone into this draft Local Plan and are positive about much of the stated vision. However we were disappointed to see how many written commitments are then diluted by a list of conditions and exceptions. As a parish council, we feel that we will have less of a say in what happens in our County and more subjective decisions will be made within the County Council. If this Local Plan is to have credence then there needs to be more robust statements about enforcement and compliance - something that appears to be lacking currently.

Object

Representation ID: 5664

Received: 05/01/2024

Respondent: Ashwell Parish Council

The stated target number of 16 pitches for travellers and gypsies is unrealistic. There are more than that number of travellers encamped on Tambourine Lane, Ashwell , on the public bridleway now, let alone others currently in the County or others wishing to join them.