Regulation 18 draft Local Plan

Object

Representation ID: 7365

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: The Society of Merchant Venturers

Agent: Savills

In a similar context to Policy SC1, the draft wording for Policy SC2 confirms that local character and distinctiveness should have regard to the Rutland Landscape Character Assessment 2022 and the RSLSS
2023. As set out above, it is considered in relation to the south of Oakham, that these assessments are outdated as they do not reflect the Oakham Pastures development which has extended the town further south and forms the new arrival into Oakham.

As such, this policy should be sufficiently flexible to refer to any new/updated evidence base documents relating to landscape which are produced as part of the evidence base for this Plan (and therefore reflect any new development which changes the character of the settlement since the March 2022 base date of the original studies).

Noted. The Landscape evidence was commissioned and completed in 2022 and 2023 and is considered up to date, albeit as a snapshot in time. It is therefore acknowledged that there will continue to be occasions where development has taken place which changes the nature of the Local Plan evidence base, however criterion b) of policy SC2 which refers to these two studies in particular is considered to provide sufficient flexibility.

Object

Representation ID: 7366

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: The Society of Merchant Venturers

Agent: Savills

The overall aspiration to secure high standards of design in the County broadly reflects the aims of the
NPPF. It is particularly important however that design guidance is not unnecessarily prescriptive or repetitive, in order that full consideration is given to site-specific characteristics and that flexibility of design standards is allowed for where appropriate.

It is noted that Policy SC3 includes cross-references to a number of other Local Plan policies including
Policies SC6, H4, H7, CC13 and SC5. The NPPF (2023) (paragraph 16) is clear that plans should avoid
‘unnecessary duplication of policies’ and therefore it is recommended that Policy SC3 is reviewed and
refined for clarity.

The Local Plan aspiration to achieve high standards of design should also take into account the need for
development to be deliverable and viable, as required by the NPPF (2023), in order to ensure that a sufficient supply of homes is delivered.

Comments noted. Design is a broad and wide-reaching subject that aims to bring a range of other disciplines together to achieve well designed places -it is therefore expected that cross references will be made and it is justified to highlight these policy interrelationships in the pursuit of good design.

Object

Representation ID: 7367

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: The Society of Merchant Venturers

Agent: Savills

Policy SC4 adds that – ‘In achieving this, development should be designed from the outset to improve air, land and water quality and promote environmental benefits.’ Paragraphs 191 and 194 of the NPPF (2023) are clear that policies should seek to minimise potential adverse effects and focus on ensuring an acceptable use of land. The requirement for proposals to ‘improve’ air, land and water quality ‘from the outset’ therefore does not appear to align with other text in Policy SC4 and goes beyond the overall provisions of the NPPF (2023). It is therefore recommended that the current policy wording is reviewed
and revised accordingly.

The policy as worded adds detail to the advice of NPPF. In particular it is noted that paragraph 180 e) says that policies should prevent new and existing development from contributing to .... unacceptable levels of soil, air, water or noise pollution or land instability and ..... wherever possible, help to improve local environmental conditions such as air and water quality.
and Paragraph 192 of NPPF refers to opportunities to improve air quality or mitigate impacts, and paragraph

Object

Representation ID: 7368

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: The Society of Merchant Venturers

Agent: Savills

Policy SC5 and the supporting text and evidence base, do not however include any evidence or justification for the specific HIA thresholds set out. Given the lack of evidence informing Policy SC5, it is considered that the proposed thresholds for the need to undertake a health impact assessment are too low for development in Rutland. Instead, health impact assessments should relate to strategic development, generally where Environmental Impact Assessments are also required, or for Major Infrastructure Projects (as set out within Figure 2 of the Planning Practice Guidance). The policy should also be more explicit in confirming the type of HIA required for the scale of development proposed.

Policy threshold should be amended to 10 or more dwellings to align with the definition of major development. As evidenced and required by the Health Impact Assessment of the Local Plan

Support

Representation ID: 7369

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: The Society of Merchant Venturers

Agent: Savills

The overall aim for major new developments to make provision for public open space aligns with the provisions of the NPPF (2023) and is therefore supported.
Policy SC7 states that the type of provision will depend on the nature and location of the proposal and local needs. However, parts a to g then set out a number of expectations for the design and provision of new open space. Given the acknowledgement that public open space provision should take into account site specific circumstances and local needs, it is particularly important that design guidance is not rigidly applied in order to ensure that appropriate development comes forward.

Noted. The criteria are considered to be flexible whilst providing clarity and certainty about what is expected.

Object

Representation ID: 7370

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: The Society of Merchant Venturers

Agent: Savills

In all instances, the policy approach broadly matches the provisions of Paragraph 186 of the NPPF (December 2023) and is therefore considered an acceptable approach.

It is however noted that the policy as currently drafted partly duplicates the provisions of other policies in the draft Local Plan, specifically those in relation to Biodiversity Net Gain (Policy EN3). Based on paragraph 16 of the NPPF (December 2023), the references to Biodiversity Net Gain in Policy EN1 are considered unnecessary duplication, alongside creating potential confusion and contradiction with the secondary legislation of the Environment Act 2021. It is therefore recommended that the references to Biodiversity Net Gain in this policy are deleted.

Comments noted. Disagree. Part 5 of Policy EN1 follows the mitigation hierarchy set out in para 186 of the NPPF and aims to limit the negative impacts of development on biodiversity with compensation only being considered after all other options have been explored and strictly as a last resort. It does not detail how Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG) will be applied but does make reference to Policy EN3 that covers BNG.

Support

Representation ID: 7371

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: The Society of Merchant Venturers

Agent: Savills

This approach is broadly in line with the requirements of Paragraph 185 of the NPPF

Indeed, ‘Land at Uppingham Road’ and ‘Land south of Stamford Road’ (ref. H1.3) have potential to accommodate high quality development and supporting uses, including green infrastructure such as nature recovery (including biodiversity net gain and habitat creation), in line with the aims of Policy EN2.

Support and comments noted.

Object

Representation ID: 7372

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: The Society of Merchant Venturers

Agent: Savills

It is considered therefore that, in line with the provisions of NPPF paragraph 185b and the Environment Act 2021, the new Local Plan should support a requirement for 10% net gain on all sites.

Policy EN3 of the draft Local Plan is, in contrast, proposing a requirement for 15% biodiversity net gain (a
significant increase above the forthcoming national requirements) on all development sites. The Council
has published a Biodiversity Assessment (May 2023) as part of the evidence base for this policy, however
this confirms that ‘Suggested wording for a new BNG policy is given below: “Development will only be
permitted for major developments where a Biodiversity Net Gain of at least 10% is demonstrated and
secured in perpetuity (for at least 30 years)…’.

It is therefore not clear why the draft Policy deviates from this suggestion and there has been no supporting evidence or justification that has been provided to support this proposed alternative approach and significantly higher requirement.

It is considered that the Policy could include wording to support developments that go above the 10%
biodiversity net gain requirement, however a higher figure shouldn’t be the mandatory requirement for all
development proposals (as this is likely to have an effect on the viability of sites and their deliverability).

In addition, it is considered that the requirements for biodiversity net gain will be covered by the Environment
Act 2021 and secondary legislation. There is therefore risk that Policy EN3 contradicts with the provisions
of national policy. Accordingly, to ensure the soundness of the plan as it progresses to Regulation 19, it is
considered that Policy EN3 could be deleted.

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.

Object

Representation ID: 7373

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: The Society of Merchant Venturers

Agent: Savills

The overall approach of Policy EN4 broadly reflects paragraphs 136 and 180 of the NPPF (2023) which
acknowledges the contribution and benefits of trees and woodland. However, whilst the need to provide
replacement planting is acknowledged, it is not clear or justified why there is a specific need to provide at
least 3 replacement trees for each tree lost. Accordingly, it is therefore recommended that this specific
requirement is removed and that a flexible approach is taken to replacement planting to take into account
site-specific circumstances and individual affected trees.

Comments noted. Amend policy text.

Object

Representation ID: 7374

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: The Society of Merchant Venturers

Agent: Savills

The aim to protect the best and most versatile agricultural land broadly reflects the provisions of the NPPF
(2023) (paragraph 180), however there is no reference to not granting development on specific grades, only directing towards areas of a poorer quality (as evidenced by footnote 62 of the NPPF. Given that some of the best and most versatile agricultural land in the county is located around
Oakham, which is identified as the focus for new development in the County, it is important to ensure that
Policy EN6 does not unnecessarily prohibit appropriate development in this area and therefore the policy
text should be updated to reflect footnote 62 of the NPPF. The supporting text to Policy EN6 acknowledges ‘it may be that some BMV land is necessary to ensure that the need for homes and jobs can be met in a sustainable manner.’ Accordingly, it is recommended that a flexible approach is taken to Policy EN6 in order to ensure that future growth needs can be met.

Comments noted. Agree to align with footnote 62 in the NPPF.