Regulation 18 draft Local Plan

Object

Representation ID: 7260

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Manton Parish Council

Whilst we agree with this Policy, consideration must be given to taxi and public transport infrastructure.

Comments noted. The Rutland Retail, Leisure & Town Centres Study (2023) recognises that although public transport usage for access to Oakham and Uppingham town centres is low. This report states that the retention and enhancements of existing public transport, specifically bus services are key, given Oakham's role as a hub for local shopping and services. The same also applies to Uppingham. The Council recognises the importance of maintaining and enhancing the two town centres and where possible will seek to action the recommendations as set out in this report.

Object

Representation ID: 7261

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Manton Parish Council

Whilst we agree with this Policy, consideration must be given to taxi and public transport infrastructure.

Comments noted. The Rutland Retail, Leisure & Town Centres Study (2023) recognises that although public transport usage for access to Oakham and Uppingham town centres is low. This report states that the retention and enhancements of existing public transport, specifically bus services are key, given Oakham's role as a hub for local shopping and services. The same also applies to Uppingham. The Council recognises the importance of maintaining and enhancing the two town centres and where possible will seek to action the recommendations as set out in this report.

Object

Representation ID: 7262

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Manton Parish Council

It is not clear whether there is a plan for Oakham town centre. Without such a plan the approach outlined for retail development seems potentially haphazard.

Noted. Policies E10, E11 and E12 provide a clear approach to the role of retailing in Oakham, where it is defined as the main town centre, serving as the focus for retail development in Rutland.

Therefore allowing it to develop and strengthen its role as the principal comparison-shopping destination in the County.

Both the Economic Strategy and Retail, Leisure and Town Centres Study, both undertaken in 2023 recognise that high streets and in particular retailing is supported via local plan polices to assisting a thriving retail and visitor economy and given clear direction Oakham town centre.

Further detail is provided in the 'Why is this policy needed?' underneath Policy E10.

Object

Representation ID: 7263

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Manton Parish Council

(2a) Use of active and public transport is not only an issue relating to the design of the development. It has more to do with the location of the site, the availability of safe roads, cycle tracks and footpaths and the availability of public transport not only during the day but also in the evening.

Comments noted. In the policy there is reference to encouraging sustainable and active travel modes such as walking, wheeling, cycling and the use of public transport – in achieving this the site location and local roads and footpaths will be considered and recommendations made to the improvement of these to make connections. Policy INF2 further addresses sustainable transport.

Object

Representation ID: 7265

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Manton Parish Council

Safer, healthier, communities. This must include access to vital services like healthcare, elderly care, police and emergency services and the impact any development would have on demand and hence access to these services which is already limited. This policy should refer to Rutland Infrastructure priorities. This should be over and above that covered in INF1.

As the council operates the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL), developers of qualifying developments will make CIL payment to the Council for the infrastructure needs arising from their development. It is not appropriate to include a criteria in this policy requiring developers to meet these service needs.

Object

Representation ID: 7266

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Manton Parish Council

A quarter of Rutland waste is municipal waste from households and business. This is not clearly addressed- this is important as it values community contribution towards environmental strategy.

Policy WST2 Waste-related development, sets out the criteria where waste related development will be acceptable in principle including where sites enable communities and businesses to take more responsibility for their own wastes and support the management of wastes in line with the proximity principle.

Object

Representation ID: 7267

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Manton Parish Council

The Plan states that “ It is recognised that improving accessibility and providing realistic alternatives to car travel in a rural area like Rutland is particularly challenging. Residents without access to a private car can be isolated and have significant issues in accessing employment, education and training as well as other services and facilities. Therefore, the location of new development can have significant impact on achieving sustainable patterns of travel and accessibility”. We believe that significant new development in rural areas, such has Manton, has not taken into account the substance of the above statement.

Comment Noted. The NPPF reiterates that Local Plans should “set out an overall strategy for the pattern, scale and quality of development”. The settlement hierarchy plays an important role in identifying sustainable locations for development and is a way of categorising the settlements in Rutland and grouping together those that have similar characteristics. At the top of the hierarchy are the larger settlements that have the best infrastructure in terms of facilities and services and are the most accessible by sustainable forms of travel. The smaller settlements with the least facilities, services and accessibility to public transport will be towards the bottom of the hierarchy. The settlement hierarchy does not in itself determine the appropriate level of growth a particular settlement can support but does seek to identify the most sustainable places where growth could be directed. Manton is defined as a Small Village in the Rutland settlement hierarchy. These villages tend to have only some of the key facilities and/or are less accessible to higher order centres than villages in the Local Service Centre category, such as Edith Weston, which comprise those that have most of the ‘key facilities’ and also score well in terms of either ‘other services’ provision or are more accessible in terms of frequent public transport provision or close proximity to the main settlements.

Object

Representation ID: 7268

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Manton Parish Council

Most of these proposals are above and beyond the normal remit of a developer eg. Bus routes, rail facilities, cyclist tracks etc. How will this be funded and what will be the process for dealing with the matters which are not within the development itself. To take Bus routes as an example even if a short term solution is provided how will funding in the long term be guaranteed.

We note that in the previous “Issues and Options” Consultation Healthcare was classified as being No.1 Priority. However, Healthcare has been reduced to No.3 Priority in Rutland's Infrastructure Priorities. Why is this?

You comment in Chapter 2 that the proportion of the population aged over 80 years will rise by 1/3rd to 11.3% over the plan period. It is not clear, however, how this Local Plan will ensure that the right facilities such as Healthcare and Elderly Care are available to this segment of the population. It is also not clear how the policies set out will lead to an appropriate mix of housing types to meet their needs.

CIL funding plus grant funding from Central Government are the primary funding pots for infrastructure requirements that are not planning obligations associated with specific schemes via S106 agreements. Given the decision made to withdraw the previous version of the Local Plan, there is an imperative for the Council to determine priorities and governance for determining the strategic element of CIL expenditure in the interim period pending the adoption of a new Local Plan which is expected in 2026.The interim prioritisation of strategic CIL expenditure by the Council is based on good practice from other local authorities enabling funds accrued and any spending to be focused on key infrastructure needs that will support identified growth in the interim period until the adoption of a new Local Plan. It is proposed that expenditure is focused on critical infrastructure that is necessary to unlock and enable development or is considered essential to mitigate the impact of development. Individual decisions on CIL expenditure require Director approval if under £100k, Cabinet approval if between £100k and £1m and approval by Council if over £1million. The infrastructure priorities set out in Policy INF2 are the primary areas of proposed investment and priorities for the allocation of CIL fund will be considered on a scheme by scheme basis depending on the nature and mix of the proposals and the infrastructure impacts identified. Policy considerations related to housing mix are set out in Policy H4 (Meeting all Housing Needs) and Policy H7 (Affordable Housing).