Regulation 18 draft Local Plan

Object

Representation ID: 4921

Received: 28/12/2023

Respondent: William Davis Ltd

Agent: William Davis Ltd

The overall direction of Policy SS1 is supported, by identifying Uppingham as one of the main areas for housing growth. However the overall number of dwellings required annually for Rutland, of at least 123 dwellings, would in reality result in a level of housing delivery which is lower than the current level, of 160 dwellings per annum.

It is suggested that the overall number of dwellings required during the plan period should be increased to the economic growth strategy level (210 homes per annum total 4200) as referred to in Paragraph 6.6 of the Sustainability Appraisal so that growth is shared amongst the most sustainable settlements and, that the wording of Policy SS1 is amended to ensure that greater levels of housing growth are accommodated in Uppingham, given that the Local Plan identifies it as one of the three most sustainable locations in the county for new housing development.

Object

Representation ID: 4922

Received: 28/12/2023

Respondent: William Davis Ltd

Agent: William Davis Ltd

The overall allocation of dwellings to Uppingham in the emerging Local Plan should be increased above the 316 dwellings identified in Policy H1.

Sites U-HA4 and U-HA5 of the Uppingham Neighbourhood Plan have difficult access arrangements and are proposed as longer-term allocations. The difficulty in achieving access is because they are potentially ransomed due to neighbouring land being in different ownership and therefore it may take time to identify suitable means of access to both sites. It may be the case that these allocations may prove more difficult to deliver than has been considered as part of the Neighbourhood Plan.
We would therefore support a wider allocation of land for housing to the north and northeast of the existing built form of Uppingham, set within the boundaries of the A47 to the north and Glaston Road to the east, to ensure that any delays in delivery of sites U-HA4 and U-HA5 can be met on immediately adjacent sites.
This would be reflected in a higher housing requirement for Uppingham and for the County as a whole as suggested in our comments on policy SSP1