Regulation 19 Rutland Local Plan

Object

Representation ID: 8303

Received: 02/12/2024

Respondent: Define (on behalf of Mr PJSR Hill and Pikerace)

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

The general scope of Policy CC2, which expects new developments to meet “the highest possible energy efficiency standards” is appropriate.

However, to ensure that the policy is “clearly written and unambiguous” as required by paragraph 16d of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), it should clarify that developments are expected to meet the highest standards, subject to feasibility and viability; so decision-makers will clearly understand the factors that define what is “the highest possible” standard.

Object

Representation ID: 8304

Received: 02/12/2024

Respondent: Define (on behalf of Mr PJSR Hill and Pikerace)

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

It is noted that the policy name is referred to as “net zero carbon (operational)” which is not actually a requirement of Policy CC4. It is suggested, therefore, that the policy name changes to ensure that the policy as a whole is “clearly written and unambiguous” as required by NPPF paragraph 16d, and that the policy is applied consistently.

Object

Representation ID: 8305

Received: 02/12/2024

Respondent: Define (on behalf of Mr PJSR Hill and Pikerace)

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

The general scope of the spatial strategy and the sites the RLP identifies to realise the spatial strategy (notably those at Woolfox), are supported. However, some modifications are required:
- As set out in response to Policy E1.5, Policy SS1 should make reference to the delivery of a higher level of employment growth. As set out in response to Policy E1.5, the allocation boundary for the Woolfox Depot Employment Area should be extended and the proposed employment uses should be widened.
- As set out in response to Policy SS4, modifications are required to ensure that that it is sound.

Object

Representation ID: 8306

Received: 02/12/2024

Respondent: Define (on behalf of Mr PJSR Hill and Pikerace)

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

As the sole landowner of the site at Former RAF Woolfox Barracks (henceforth “Woolfox”), Mr PJSR Hill and his family business Pikerace support the identification of the site as a “Future Opportunity Area” in Policy SS4. That is entirely appropriate in that it will maximise the potential of a suitable part-brownfield site in a strategic location to deliver a residential-led mixed use development to meet housing and employment needs arising in the County (and potentially the wider region) in the medium to long-term. However, some modifications to the policy are required to ensure that it is sound in NPPF terms.

Object

Representation ID: 8307

Received: 02/12/2024

Respondent: Define (on behalf of Mr PJSR Hill and Pikerace)

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

The owners strongly support the identification of the Woolfox employment allocation, which reflects the strategic merits of the site and its suitability to accommodate employment uses. However, to ensure that the policy is effective and positively prepared, it should be modified to accommodate a greater quantum and wider range of employment uses, with the site’s boundary modified accordingly, and the proposed allocation policy requirements should be modified to reflect the realities of delivering the site.