Regulation 18 draft Local Plan

Object

Representation ID: 7063

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Wing Parish Council

The Viability Report, concerned primarily with the production of ‘Housing’ in the context of the present
situation in Rutland, is wide-ranging and comprehensive. However, we have a number of seriously critical comments, as follows

1. At clause 1.17, there is a vital and substantial caveat on interpreting the Report – part of which states “No part of this Report constitutes a valuation and should not be relied upon in that regard.” Much of the viability calculation relates to relative valuations in determining yield, the Report thereby cannot be relied on and effectively falls at the first hurdle.

3.2. Similarly, the Report clearly states that the Consultant does not warrant the estimates and projections made, which again are key to comprehending the range and levels of risk inherent to the Assessment. The second hurdle is failed because the caveat is absolute.

3.3. These opening clauses also make clear, and it is repeated at certain junctures throughout the paper, that much of the data and information used to underpin the
Assessment has been provided by the Local Authority (RCC), or its “contractors” (unspecified), for which HDH carries no responsibility. This caveat potentially invalidates the notion of ‘third party opinion being independent and based on objective technical and professional review’ in the Assessment. A third fundamental hurdle is failed.

3.4. The Report states that the Plan contains “no Strategic Sites”. Does this mean that RCC have ruled out of their consideration all potential Strategic Sites in determining
the Plan and its viability, if so, clearly closing the door on such option for a considerable period? St. Georges Barracks is mentioned and even the reduced number of houses cited, as a percentage of RCC’s total housing estimates would clearly have strategic impact on all other RCC Policies. This appears contradictory.

3.5. Whilst the EUV+ is a recognised and accepted approach to forecasting development costs, there is little detailed argument about how the + element might be impacted in the context of rapidly changing adverse market conditions, the Report relying instead on historic averages.

3.6. Similarly, the calculation of Development Returns is estimated at between 15 to 20%, such range of figures being associated with a buoyant purchasing housing
market and taking no account of either the changes referred to at (5) or the additional statutory demands made by Government environmental commitments that are yet fully to feed into Development Costs.

3.7. Rutland already has ‘outlier’ status in terms of the number of ‘four bedroom plus’ houses, and in terms of under-occupancy, it has high average house prices in
total all partly as a product of the above planning/market distortions. However there is no indication of attempting to correct these figures related to expressed housing needs. This will be compounded by the estimates being suggestive of those existing market outlier size distortions being the most capable of meeting the expressed demands related to enhanced environmental and energy measures, which could reinforce those market distinctions/distortions, creating an even greater scarcity of affordable housing to both rent and buy within Rutland.

Comments noted. It is important that the Council puts forward deliverable policies in this plan that enable viable development to take place and further work to update the cost evidence for a number of options for the wording of the housing policies will be undertaken to inform the next stage of the Local plan. This will build on the Whole Plan Viability Assessment (2023). Any changes to the draft policies arising from consultation responses and/or new evidence on climate change will be consulted on through the Reg 19 consultation.

Object

Representation ID: 7500

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Wing Parish Council

We are pleased to see the prominence given to this critical issue, but feel strongly that the Council could and should be more ambitious. Several policies have been considerably watered down from the carbon reduction targets we had hoped RCC would follow. Central Lincs and Cambridge have set the necessary targets and their plans are adopted, while RCC appear to have backed down because of their flawed Viability Assessment. The situation has been made more difficult with the Minister putting out a directive that all LP’s must follow Building Regulations while the Future Homes Standard (FHS) intended to upgrade these is currently out for consultation. Astonishingly, the FHS does not even list solar panels as a developer requirement

Support for prominence given to climate change in the Local Plan noted. The evidence base on climate change includes consideration of the impact of policies on the viability of new developments. Further work to update this cost evidence is intended and this will inform the policies at the next stage of the local plan.
LPAs have the power under 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 providing that they are reasonable, comply with the usual plan-making requirements and do not affect the viability of new development to an unreasonable extent. A number of development plan documents have passed examination which have successfully included energy efficiency and/or other emissions reduction requirements beyond those of the Building Regulations. Such policies allow LPAs to meet the obligation on them to ensure development plan documents include policies designed to secure that development of land in the local authority’s area ‘contribute to the mitigation of, and adaption to, climate change’. The Future Homes and Buildings Standards (which aims to improve the energy efficiency and carbon emissions of new homes and non-residential buildings through the Building Regulations system) should take effect in 2025. With such regulations still being debated and no legal guarantee that they will come into effect in 2025, and recognising that buildings are the UK’s second-highest emitting sector, the Local Plan sets out a positive strategy through the Climate Change policies for carbon reduction and to mitigate against the impact of climate change. The Plan acknowledges that a key consideration for Policy CC2: Design Principles for Energy Efficient Buildings is its impact on the viability of new developments. It is intended that further work to update the cost evidence for a number of options for the wording of CC2 will be undertaken to inform the next stage of the local plan. This will build on the Whole Plan Viability Assessment (2023).

Object

Representation ID: 7501

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Wing Parish Council

This is very much “motherhood and apple pie”, lacking specifics and with no indication of how it will be enforced. What does “highest possible energy efficiency standards” mean? Where is an ambitious target? There are local concerns about how to improve energy efficiency of homes in Wing especially older/listed houses but the planning constraints imposed by RCC on altering existing housing are significant. The adoption of Future Homes Standard will provide little energy efficiency gain so not offsetting Rutland’s older housing stock.

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.
The Local Plan has little, if any, influence over domestic retrofitting, or the financing, of solar panels/insulation where such alterations do not require planning permission. Policies in the Local Plan would not necessarily prevent solar panels on protected buildings where listed building consent is required.

Object

Representation ID: 7502

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Wing Parish Council

Again the policy is weak, in requiring only that developers should “consider” various elements in their designs.

Agree in part. The PPG advises that when preparing Local Plans, authorities should pay particular attention to mitigation and adaptation. As worded, there is no requirement for developers to document their considerations as set out in the policy but some flexibility as to the relevance of the policy to the scale/type of proposals must be retained.

Object

Representation ID: 7503

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Wing Parish Council

This should be worded more strongly to require that all new
developments must provide all their own energy needs and achieve the net zero carbon targets. The policy is simply not ambitious enough to address the objectives outlined at the start of the Plan.

Comments noted. 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 having looked at the feasibility and cost implications of such policies. Any changes to the draft policies, such as setting standards for renewable energy generation or rewording from ‘maximum 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 energy demand targets for renewables such as that used in other adopted local plans. In the absence of such feasibility evidence the policy cannot state that new development ‘must’ provide all their own energy needs.

Object

Representation ID: 7504

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Wing Parish Council

We support the principle of reducing energy consumption in existing buildings but we know from the experience of residents of Wing (which has many older and listed buildings) that this is often far from easy. There can be severe technical difficulties in retrofitting old buildings to use new energy sources, apart from planning issues which require clear policies to balance conservation and energy efficiency.

Support for principle of Policy CC7 noted. It does seek to balance the retrofitting of energy efficiency measures on/in historic buildings whilst still consistent with protecting such heritage assets as required under national planning policy and other policies of the Local Plan.

Object

Representation ID: 7505

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Wing Parish Council

The policies map shows a variety of “suitable” locations for solar and wind initiatives, the methodology behind these sites is not easily accessible. There is no transparency and no consultation with local communities.

It appears that the map has been generated based on geographical features, with no regard for practicality, aesthetics or local sensitivity. It seems that the same methodology has been used to identify potential sites for wind turbines or solar panels, which have very different requirements and implications.

The study should have applied height criteria when considering turbines, and different gradient criteria for turbines and solar. The map is a hostage to fortune that could be used to encourage speculative and wholly inappropriate developments.

We strongly object to the identified locations near Wing, which are not supported at this scale in our NP. In particular, the site north of the village in the Chater valley.

The study was prepared by the same consultant AECOM who also has prepared the FHS. Yet, the FHS dismisses the need for solar panels on houses and relies on decarbonising the grid to make up the necessary carbon reduction. However, the Rutland Renewable Energy Study clearly states the lack of capacity in the grid to realise the potential renewable energy generated.

What weight will be given to sustainable energy in manufacturing when set against the capacity for ‘green’ energy generation? The plan is silent on these important issues.

Comments noted. The Rutland Renewable Energy Study (parts 1 and 2) is one of the supporting pieces of evidence used for the Reg 18 Local Plan and so formed part of the suite of documents consulted on. The study is a high level initial assessment showing options of areas for further investigation. The Neighbourhood Plan, when adopted, would be part of the statutory development plan and, as set out in the supporting text, would be used to assess renewable energy schemes. Issues relating to country of manufacture and modern slavery fall outside national planning guidance and so cannot be considered in the Local Plan. The total available ‘headroom’ on the distribution network is currently 11.26 MW, which gives an annual yield generation of 15.3 GWh. This means that the availability of grid connections will likely not be a barrier to renewable energy installation up to that total capacity. It should be noted that availability of connection capacity is dynamic: it changes as new connections are agreed or grid upgrade are carried out.

Object

Representation ID: 7506

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Wing Parish Council

It is disappointing that the policy on sustainable travel deals only with provision for electric vehicles and charging points and fails to consider other forms of public or private transport, including buses and cycling

Comments noted. The changing of the title of the policy to ‘Electric Vehicle Charging and Electric Bike parking’ will help clarify the extent of the policy. Other policies in the Local Plan, namely SC3: Promoting good quality design, INF1: Infrastructure and connectivity, INF2: Securing sustainable transport and INF3: Walking and cycling seek to promote and enhance opportunities for other forms of sustainable transport.

Object

Representation ID: 7507

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Wing Parish Council

Much of this chapter appears contradictory (and confusing) especially on planned limits of development and the assessed need for housing.

Noted

Support

Representation ID: 7508

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Wing Parish Council

We are pleased to note that Wing is identified as a larger village, appropriately reflecting the range of facilities and character of the village.

Support noted