Regulation 18 draft Local Plan

Object

Representation ID: 6973

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Stancliffe Homes Ltd

Agent: DLP Planning Ltd

A 20-year period is supported. However we do not think this plan will provide this because of the time to adoption and the plan period start date. Our extensive experience of the local plan process suggests that the programme in Appendix 1 of the Local Development Scheme 2022-2025 (January 2023) is over ambiguous and allows for no unforeseen delays.
The plan on the date of adoption should make provision for a full 15 years of housing land.
This can be achieved either by extending the plan period to 23 years extending it to 2043; or by updating the start of the plan period to 2023 (for which data is available), with the same consequential effect that the plan runs to 2043 rather than 2041.

Object

Representation ID: 7651

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Stancliffe Homes Ltd

Agent: DLP Planning Ltd

In full accordance with the PPG it is recommended that the housing requirement is increased to the average rate of 185 dpa. This is at the top of the range of demographically led projections in the HMA but falls significantly short of the level of housing needed to support the economic policy of the Reg18 plan and as such is likely to be required to be adjusted upwards.

Object

Representation ID: 7652

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Stancliffe Homes Ltd

Agent: DLP Planning Ltd

There is a significant mismatch between the SS1 employment land requirement of 27ha and the 40+ ha proposed in policy E1 the mismatch between these two figures that needs to be resolved.

There is a further mismatch between either of these figures and the much lower level of employment growth that would be supported by the minimum level of housing provision proposed in Policy SS1.
Policy SS1 should be amended to reflect the level of employment land being proposed in Policy E1 and the level of housing should be increased to that which will support the level of employment growth that is being pursued. At a minimum this should be at least 185 dwellings per annum (dpa).

Object

Representation ID: 7654

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Stancliffe Homes Ltd

Agent: DLP Planning Ltd

Given the risks with regard to the delivery of some of the larger proposed allocations (see below) and the significant mismatch of housing and the economic growth strategy of the plan it is considered that the part of Policy SS1 which includes the test of “exceptional circumstances” for proposals for housing development on greenfield sites adjoining the Planned Limits of Development should be removed and replaced with
“Proposals for housing development on greenfield sites adjoining the Planned Limits of Development of Oakham and Barleythorpe, Uppingham and the Larger Villages will only be released where it is demonstrated that they are needed to maintain a sufficient supply of deliverable and developable land.”.

Support

Representation ID: 7655

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Stancliffe Homes Ltd

Agent: DLP Planning Ltd

The policy states that the redevelopment proposals are not expected to deliver more than between 350 and 500 dwellings as part of a mixed-use development. It is noted that at this stage none of these dwellings are counted towards meeting the housing need in Policy H1 and this is considered to be the correct approach given the uncertainty of the timing of the release of the site and the complexity of its redevelopment.

Object

Representation ID: 7656

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Stancliffe Homes Ltd

Agent: DLP Planning Ltd

The overall level of allocations is almost an exact match to the minimum level housing provision advised by the Standard Method 2706 (123 x 20 plus 10%). Evidence provided on past rates of completions and the impact of the Council’s economic strategy the level of housing to be planned for should be substantially above the minimum requirement.
The total level of housing to be planned for should be amended as follows, taking into account the recommended extended time period above:

a) 185 dpa x 23 (to take the plan to 2043) plus 10%.
b) a total to be allocated of 4,680 dwellings (203dpa)

The Plan does not contain a trajectory to demonstrate that the allocations will deliver in a timely manner to meet the level of housing required to support the council’s economic strategy.

Object

Representation ID: 7658

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Stancliffe Homes Ltd

Agent: DLP Planning Ltd

The failure to consider suitable alternative sites in the background evidence: College Close, Great Casterton
This site is currently subject to a planning application that has recently been refused. The reasons for refusal are not particularly relevant to the consideration of the site for allocation to meet the level of housing required to meet the Council’s economy strategy.
Great Casterton is one of the Larger Villages which is not identified to have any housing provision made over the period of the plan.
The site is part of a much more extensive area assessed in the “Landscape Sensitivity Part 2 a” (GCA1) and the Report appears to support development in this more specific location. The SHLA’s conclusion on landscape impact does not align with the findings of the landscape assessment which concluded development could be suitably accommodated on this site within certain parameters.
Given the need to identify further housing allocations the Council should reconsider the allocation of this site.

Object

Representation ID: 7659

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Stancliffe Homes Ltd

Agent: DLP Planning Ltd

Policy H2 makes it clear that the Quarry Farm is part of this larger allocation.
Ninety nine percent of the application site is within South Kesteven but as the development needs to include a connection to Little Casterton Road in Rutland, the application has also had to be submitted to Rutland County Council. All of the potential housing in the Quarry Farm allocation in Rutland’s Regulation 18 Plan falls outside of this application. As part of the outline proposals, the scheme will deliver up to 1,350 new homes and significant new infrastructure to serve both new and existing residents.
At present the fact that major part of the scheme is being progressed without the inclusion of the Quarry Farm allocation casts considerable doubt as to the timing of the delivery of that element of the larger proposal.
There is considerable doubt as to the timing and delivery of this allocation and as such it is presently considered unsound to include all of the potential dwellings as being deliverable within the plan period.

Object

Representation ID: 7660

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Stancliffe Homes Ltd

Agent: DLP Planning Ltd

The Regulation 18 Plan proposes to alter the Planned Limits of Development at Great Casterton to include the school playing fields. This change is supported but is considered that this change highlights the fact that the proposed site adjacent to the school is enclosed on the other two sides also by development making the site appear as an insert into the settlement. The development of the site for housing appears to be entirely logical especially as there are no other proposals for development within this Larger Village.

Instead of the PLD boundary being amended to include the school it should be extended so as to include the site at College Close Great Casterton (see Figure 1).