Regulation 18 draft Local Plan

Support

Representation ID: 4839

Received: 20/12/2023

Respondent: ANCER SPA Ltd

We support the focus on development within the Planned Limits of Development of the identified principal towns. It is important to restrict speculative development on unallocated sites elsewhere in Rutland, to ensure that the delivery of allocated sites in the PLD’s is not compromised.
We also welcome the statement that the proposed housing delivery of 123 dwellings per annum is quoted as being the minimum requirement for the whole of Rutland. This will allow an element of flexibility to respond to changing circumstances over the Plan period.

Support

Representation ID: 4849

Received: 21/12/2023

Respondent: ANCER SPA Ltd

Restricting the allocation of new dwellings in Uppingham to 316 does not provide sufficient flexibility for the UNP and local development proposals to respond to any changes in circumstances concerning the need for and delivery of dwellings both in Uppingham and elsewhere in Rutland.

We accordingly support the wording of Policy H1 on the proviso that the proposed indicative housing supply for Uppingham is specified as a minimum figure.

Object

Representation ID: 4850

Received: 21/12/2023

Respondent: ANCER SPA Ltd

The Uppingham Neighbourhood Plan Submission Draft in its policies HA4 and BE1 allocates the Uppingham Gate site for mixed-use development, to include not only B class employment uses, but also significant retail and assisted living housing development. The wider range of uses is not only meeting local demand for the type of development proposed but also market demand necessary to ensure a fully viable development.
We therefore OBJECT to policy E1 which allocates the Uppingham Gate site solely for employment uses and instead it should be redesignated as a mixed-use site.

Object

Representation ID: 4851

Received: 21/12/2023

Respondent: ANCER SPA Ltd

The Uppingham Neighbourhood Plan Submission Draft Policy OR1: Preferred locations for larger convenience stores has already confirmed that the provision of additional food/convenience stores, of an appropriate scale to meet the growing needs of Uppingham, will be supported as part of a mixed-use development on the Uppingham Gate site.

Local Plan proposed policy E10 should acknowledge the role of the Uppingham Gate site in resolving the acknowledged currently restricted level of provision and choice of convenience shopping in Uppingham.

Object

Representation ID: 4852

Received: 21/12/2023

Respondent: ANCER SPA Ltd

The policy text admits that the Government requirement for Bio-diversity Net Gain is only 10%, but the Council has aspirations for 20% and have settled on a seemingly arbitrary 15% in Policy EN3.
We consider that requiring any BNG to exceed a level of 10% will have a negative effect upon the viability of development in Rutland, particularly for sites where employment uses are required. We therefore OBJECT to the proposed policy EN3 that BNG for a development should be at least 15%.

Support

Representation ID: 4853

Received: 21/12/2023

Respondent: ANCER SPA Ltd

If Rutland County Council wants housing and employment targets to be met, it will have to take a realistic attitude to the extent that CIL, planning obligations and other policy principles costs can be borne by a development. Therefore, robust viability assessments of proposed developments will be critical. The Council’s Whole Plan Viability Study should be seen as a flexible document that needs to be updated on a periodic basis.