Regulation 19 Rutland Local Plan

Support

Representation ID: 8719

Received: 24/12/2024

Respondent: National Highways

National Highways agree in principle to the vision and objectives of the Regulation 19 Local Plan.

Support

Representation ID: 8720

Received: 24/12/2024

Respondent: National Highways

Employment and Housing Requirements

Based on our review of the Regulation 19 consultation, we note that the housing requirement has not changed since the ‘Regulation 18 – Draft Local Plan’ consultation. It

outlines as part of Policy SS1 a requirement to deliver at least 123 dwellings per annum (2,460 over 20 years between 2021-2041). There is also consideration for an additional 10% allowance, increasing housing provision to 2,705 new dwellings and provision for approximately 27 Ha of employment land.
The largest allocation of housing is proposed in Oakham, Uppingham, and Stamford North. In terms of employment, the largest allocation is proposed at Tickencote.

Support

Representation ID: 8721

Received: 24/12/2024

Respondent: National Highways

St George’s Barracks has the potential to deliver between 350 to 500 dwellings and Woolfox 4,000 dwellings and 100 Ha of employment. Although these two sites will not be allocated in the local plan, they have been identified as future opportunity areas (policy SS4). The policy includes a framework to secure the viability of these sites for future housing and employment provision through the Local Plan review or the preparation of separate Development Plan Documents (DPD).
National Highways welcomes the provision of a framework to require provision of a detailed transport assessment including proposals for the delivery of sustainable transport and active travel to minimise the reliance on private car use. In due course, we will welcome further engagement to understand and address transport-related matters, including access and potential mitigations, related to the A1.

Support

Representation ID: 8722

Received: 24/12/2024

Respondent: National Highways

In terms of the proposed allocations, National Highways has raised specific interest in understanding the cumulative impacts of planned growth within the area, particularly regarding traffic generation and associated pressures on the A1 trunk road. Additionally, the future opportunity areas have the potential to generate a significant number of trips on the SRN.
Therefore, we await a detailed assessment to understand the impacts of this growth on the SRN and welcome further engagement with the Rutland County Council to develop a strategic approach for any necessary mitigation on the SRN to support the planned growth.

Support

Representation ID: 8723

Received: 24/12/2024

Respondent: National Highways

Impact Assessment
As noted in our response during the Regulation 18 consultation, any potential sites anticipated to have an impact on the SRN in the area are subject to consultation with National Highways, and the proposal to be appropriately assessed in line with the DfT

Circular 01/2022, to determine the potential impacts on the SRN. Depending on the scale of likely impacts, the applicant may need to identify suitable mitigation measures.
It is to be noted that the cumulative impact of the proposed site allocations also needs to be assessed in line with the Circular for understanding the likely traffic impacts on the SRN, in terms of capacity and safety and identifying any possible mitigation measures required.
We note a commitment for a Transport Impact Assessment (Policy H2), this is welcomed and we look forward to receiving the document for review.

Object

Representation ID: 8724

Received: 24/12/2024

Respondent: National Highways

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Rutland Traffic Modelling

During the Regulation 19 consultation, we reviewed the Rutland Traffic Model (RTM) Options Scoping Note and agreed on a proportional approach for testing the Local Plan, considering limited housing allocations and timelines.
Subsequently, National Highways provided comments on the Local Model Validation Report (LMVR) and Forecasting Report (FR). Following this, to address some of our comments, we received updated versions of the LMVR (v1.02) and FR (v1.5) on 16 October 2024 along with an email providing further clarifications to outstanding queries.
From the review of the most recent information provided on 16 October 2024, our comments below provide our latest position on the traffic modelling evidence base for the Rutland Local Plan testing.
a) We have reviewed the modelling methodology applied, which is sensible and proportional for providing an evidence base for the Rutland Local Plan Regulation 19 consultation.
b) The evidence base is developed by creating a version of the Pan Regional Traffic Model (PRTM) developed by Leicestershire County Council to include areas within Rutland. As the model is proportional, the road network to the east of the A1 is less detailed, with the understanding that the Quarry Farm (Monarch Park) site in Stamford is being tested in another local model and other major sites in Oakham and Uppingham are away from the A1.
c) Section 8.3.1 of the LMVR notes that C2 database counts used for validation were collected between September 2022 and November 2022 but were not rebased to 2023, as the factors were insignificant. This is not a concern to us.
d) Thank you for providing us with screenline count details to the west of the A606 / A1 junction with a count ID PRTM-59.27. We note that this location fails in one of two directions in each time period, eastbound in the AM and westbound in the PM peak, overestimating the traffic in both directions while the overall screenline is a very good match to the observed counts. Though not ideal, such issues are not

uncommon in such a large regional model and any development traffic routed through this count ID should be monitored.
e) We have noted that the proposed trip generation of future housing developments is proposed to be 0.45 two-way trips per dwelling. This number is acceptable.
f) We are content with the sites chosen to be represented in each of the future scenarios presented and that they are reflection of the uncertainty log within the local plan.
g) The distribution of traffic has been based on the PRTM model. However, we request that distribution flow plots be provided for our review, so we can assess the distributions and how the proposed sites in the local plan will impact the network.
h) We are content with the growth of the network applied from the PRTM model.
i) Several junctions along the A1 are noted as being nearly at or over capacity in all 2041 future-year local plan scenarios. This includes parts of all junctions on the A1 from A1 / A606 by Stamford to Wittering. We note that two of these fall within the Rutland County borders and are likely to require testing against future sites. The junctions are:
a. A1 / A606
b. A1 / A6121
Overall, progress has been made in developing RTM. We would welcome continued engagement and recommend that the modelling results be shared with us and included in the Regulation 20 submission. This inclusion will ensure that National Highways has sufficient information to understand the impacts of the Local Plan on the SRN.

Support

Representation ID: 8725

Received: 24/12/2024

Respondent: National Highways

Policy CC8 of the local plan sets out the Council’s policy on proposed development for the production of renewable energy. National Highways acknowledges that proposals will be considered in regard to their traffic impacts. As we have previously commented in Regulation 18, we recommend that you make note of the DfT policy included below with respect of proposals, including those delivering renewable energy, located close to the SRN.
As set out in DfT Circular 01/2022 paragraph 65-67, wind turbines should not be located where motorists need to pay particular attention to the driving task, such as the immediate vicinity of connections, sharp bends, and crossings for pedestrians, cyclists and horse- riders. To mitigate the risks to the safety of road users arising from structural or mechanical failure, wind turbines should be sited a minimum of, height + 50 metres, or height x 1.5 (whichever is the lesser), from the highway boundary of the SRN.
In addition, as per DfT Circular 01/2022 paragraph 70, some developments, notably solar farms, wind turbines and those with extensive glass facades, have the potential to create glint and glare which can be a distraction for drivers. Where these developments would be visible from the SRN, National Highways should be consulted on an appropriate assessment of the intensity of solar reflection likely to be produced. This should satisfy National Highways that safety on the SRN is not compromised.

Support

Representation ID: 8726

Received: 24/12/2024

Respondent: National Highways

As we have previously commented in response to Regulation 18, we note that Policy CC14 of the local plan sets out the Council’s requirements of ensuring new development does not increase the risk of flooding. In doing so we note that the policy remains to allow for discharging surface water to highway drains. However, it should be noted that this would not be permitted with respect to the SRN (with reference to DfT Circular 01/2022 paragraph 59).

Support

Representation ID: 8727

Received: 24/12/2024

Respondent: National Highways

Policy INF1 sets out the Council’s policy on the provision and delivery of infrastructure. National Highways acknowledges that the mechanisms identified in this section focus on the use of Section 106 contributions and Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) to deliver infrastructure. However, we note that the following comment detailed in our previous Regulation 18 response has not been addressed in Regulation 19: we recommend that the text be amended to state that, delivery mechanisms under the Highways Act 1980 through Section 278 Agreements are also included for the delivery of highway mitigation.

Support

Representation ID: 8728

Received: 24/12/2024

Respondent: National Highways

We acknowledge that the Regulation 19 Local Plan has specifically focussed on policies CC1 – CC14 to tackle climate change through a reduction in carbon emissions, improving sustainable modes of transport, and development of energy efficient buildings etc.
We note that the following policies remain the same as stated in the Regulation 18 consultation and we welcome this. Policy INF2 (Securing Sustainable Transport) sets out the need for planning applications to demonstrate how the development ensures adequate accessibility and connectivity, measures to improve sustainable transport, and the requirement to produce a Transport Assessment and Travel Plan where necessary, and we welcome this. References have been made in Policy INF3 on how developers are expected to create an environment that encourages walking, cycling and public transport when designing their schemes.
Policies CC13 (Provision for Electric Vehicle charging and Electric Bike parking), INF2 (Securing Sustainable Transport) and INF3 (Walking and Cycling and non-car-based journeys) sets guidelines on improving sustainable transport. We appreciate the effort taken in developing these policies and consider this to be aligned with the expectations set out in the National Planning Policy Framework and National Highways’ Net Zero Strategy.