Regulation 18 draft Local Plan

Object

Representation ID: 6921

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Avant Homes

It is noted that the Consultation was prepared and released in advance of the recent (December 2023) changes to the NPPF. The Council, therefore, need to consider whether any information contained within that guidance has any impact on the emerging Plan. If so, it is likely that further consultation will be required.

Comments noted. Changes to Government policy and guidance made since the publication of the Reg 18 Plan will be taken into account in the drafting of the Reg 19 Plan. It should be noted that the Government is consulting on further changes to the NPPF and changes arising to this may need to be addressed through the Examination process.

Object

Representation ID: 7313

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Avant Homes

Avant welcome acknowledgement in the Vision to provide a range of high-quality housing that meets the County’s housing need. However, it is considered that the inclusion of ‘minimum’ implies that the Council will seek to limit the amount of housing at this level. The Council should be aspiring to reach a position above this figure in recognition of the connection between housing and future economic growth of the County and to ensure that there is adequate flexibility in the delivery of sites.

Comments noted however we feel using the term "a minimum" actually establishes that the number is a floor not a ceiling

Object

Representation ID: 7314

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Avant Homes

Whilst Avant supports the national intentions to set standards for energy efficiency through the Building Regulations, it is important that the Council do not seek to deviate from the Government policy position - either in terms of bringing additional enhancements in earlier than National Policy, or to a level that exceeds the National requirements. To do so, could lead to unnecessary delays to delivery of housing, and undermine the delivery of wider environmental objectives. As a principle, therefore, Avant would object to any policy which seeks to set higher benchmarks and standards when considered against National requirements.

Support for CC2 noted. Local Authorities do have a clear power, in sections 1-5 of the Planning and Energy Act 2008, to adopt planning policies that set higher targets for energy performance standards for development in their area than the national baseline, provided such standards comply with the usual plan-making requirements of section 19 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and are reasonable, in that they do not affect the viability of new development to an unreasonable extent. ((https://www.essexdesignguide.co.uk/media/2966/updated-open-advice-re-energy-policy-building-regs-26-2-24-final.pdf) It is acknowledged that the Government is committed to improving the energy efficiency of new homes through the Building Regulations system under the Future Homes and Buildings Standards which are due to take effect in 2025. The FHBS is still being debated, however, and there is no legal guarantee of that date being met. Recognising that buildings are the UK’s second-highest emitting sector, and that it is significantly cheaper and easier to install energy efficiency and low carbon heating measures when building from scratch rather than retrofitting them afterwards, Policy CC2 sets out a series of design principles for energy efficient buildings. The Plan acknowledges that a key consideration for Policy CC2 is its impact on the viability of new developments (that would include affordable housing). It is intended that further work to update the cost evidence will be undertaken to inform the next stage of the local plan. This will build on the Whole Plan Viability Assessment (2023) and will inform the policies at the next stage of the local plan. Any changes to the draft policies, such as setting standards for energy efficiency, arising from consultation responses and/or new evidence on viability in relation to the climate change policies will be consulted on through the Reg 19 consultation. Following this work there may be sufficient, robust evidence to set an energy use limit such as that used in other adopted local plans.

Object

Representation ID: 7315

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Avant Homes

This policy is ambiguous and does not provide enough detail as to how it can be proven that that all residential proposals provide the maximum generation of renewable energy that is viable on site. This implies that developers will need to submit a scheme viability with every application, which is not considered achievable or realistic and will cause unnecessary delays during the application process. This policy should be deleted and simply dealt with via Building Regulations.

Comments noted. The NPPF makes it very clear that plans should take a proactive approach to mitigating climate change and in order to increase the use and supply of renewable and low carbon energy, plans should provide a positive strategy for energy from these sources. It is acknowledged that the Government is committed to improving the energy efficiency of new homes through the Building Regulations system under the Future Homes and Buildings Standards which are due to take effect in 2025. The FHBS is still being debated, however, and there is no legal guarantee of that date being met. As a Local Plan has a limited influence on retrofitting existing buildings, in order to reach targets for carbon reductions, significant reductions in the energy requirements of new buildings are urgently needed and Policy CC4 seeks this aim. The Plan acknowledges that a key consideration for Policy CC4 is its impact on the viability of new developments. It is intended that further work to update the cost evidence will be undertaken to inform the next stage of the local plan. This will build on the Whole Plan Viability Assessment (2023) and will inform the policies at the next stage of the local plan. Any changes to the draft policies, such as setting standards for renewable energy generation, arising from consultation responses and/or new evidence on viability in relation to the climate change policies will be consulted on through the Reg 19 consultation. Following this work there may be sufficient, robust evidence to set a renewable energy level such as that used in other adopted local plans.

Object

Representation ID: 7316

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Avant Homes

The Council should not be seeking to establish policies which go above and beyond the national policy position. This can cause unnecessary delays when this matter is already dealt with via Building Regulations. This policy should be deleted.

Comment noted. Disagree. Para 158 of the NPPF states that ‘Plans should take a proactive approach to mitigating and adapting to climate change, taking into account the long-term implications for flood risk,…..water supply…. The Water Management criteria are justified as they meet these requirements set out in the NPPF, particularly given that Rutland is in a serious water stressed area (as defined in the 2021 classification by the Government), with flexibility (subject to a number of proposed changes) built into the policy.

Object

Representation ID: 7317

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Avant Homes

The NPPG is clear that Standard Method is a ‘starting point’ for a district’s housing requirement and there are a few factors which should be taken into account when considering whether this figure should be increased - including the need to provide a range of choice of sites, the need for flexibility, viability considerations and whether higher levels of open market housing are required in order to secure increased delivery of affordable housing.

If the Council are to meet the Vision for providing the ‘minimum’ amount of affordable and market housing, then at least the higher position from the 2019 SHMA should be taken, which is 190 dwellings, with a 10% contingency.
Council also needs to set out clear intentions and guidance on how housing delivery is to be effectively monitored so that if there is a delay to delivery can address any shortfall as soon as possible.

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

Object

Representation ID: 7318

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Avant Homes

Avant welcome the specific reference to ‘Land west of Ashwell Road, Oakham’ within Policy H1 for future delivery of 286 dwellings and can confirm our formal legal interest and desire to develop the land.

In light of earlier comments made regarding housing requirement and delivery, Avant consider that the site should be upgraded from being a Reserved Site (H1,g) to a formal residential allocation and be contained within the PLD area boundary. This would ensure that the site can be brought forward by Avant as easily and quickly as possible.
Avant note that a number of the proposed allocations may be delayed in deliver as they are brownfield with uses on site, may have viability issues and sites such as Stamford North likely to take some time.

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

Support

Representation ID: 7319

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Avant Homes

Avant support the requirement for the Plan to deliver a mix of house types/sizes. Avant would be unsupportive of the introduction of more prescriptive policies and welcome the flexibility provided for in the current drafting i.e to enable local needs at any specific time period to be provided for.

Noted.

Object

Representation ID: 7320

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Avant Homes

Avant consider that it is important that the Council do not seek to deviate from the Government policy position in advance of the latest policy and guidance being finalised, and that any benchmark should not be set above the 10% biodiversity net gain position, as set out in the Environment Act. Developers and landowners incur significant costs with meeting the 10% provision and it is important to ensure that BNG does not prevent, delay or reduce housing delivery.

In addition, it should be noted that large and complex sites where the development is phased, should not be obligated to deliver 10% BNG on each phase, as the guidance is clear that the 10% BNG requirement must be delivered at the end of the development.

Comments noted. Change from 15% to 10% as a higher percentage than the statutory objective of biodiversity net gain needs to be evidenced. In order for the Local Plan to be deemed sound this uplift above the mandatory level must be robustly evidenced.