Regulation 19 Rutland Local Plan

Object

Representation ID: 8360

Received: 02/12/2024

Respondent: Bowbridge Land Ltd

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Requirements in respects of M4 (2) should be deleted as it is not justified by evidence and duplicates Building Regulations.

The policy needs to provide caveats in respect of M4(3) to take account of site-specific factors such as vulnerability to flooding, site topography and any other circumstances that would prevent step free access.

Object

Representation ID: 8361

Received: 02/12/2024

Respondent: Bowbridge Land Ltd

Agent: Pegasus group

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

It is considered that to provide certainty in meeting the need for self/custom build, the Council should allocate specific sites or self/custom build housing and also provide a criteria-based approach to provide flexibility for more sustainable sites outside settlement boundaries to come forward and boost the supply of self/custom build within the County. Pockets of land within a strategic site are simply not an appropriate nor desirable location for those who want to construct their own home. The evidence base at paragraphs 7.20 and 7.22 of the Housing Market Assessment (August 2023) supports this approach.

Object

Representation ID: 8362

Received: 02/12/2024

Respondent: Bowbridge Land Ltd

Agent: Pegasus group

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

The policy duplicates policy within the NPPF and PPG with respect to viability assessments and therefore these elements should be removed.

Criterion d) outlines that affordable housing must

“achieve a minimum of 25% of all affordable homes secured through developer contributions as First Homes (with the exception of Oakham and Barleythorpe whilst they are covered by their Neighbourhood Development Plan which was 'made' on 24 June 2022), unless a contrary approach is justified by the relevant paragraph of the NPPF”

There is no justification provided for this exception.

Object

Representation ID: 8364

Received: 02/12/2024

Respondent: Bowbridge Land Ltd

Agent: Pegasus group

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

The Environment Act 2021 requires all development schemes in England, from January 2024, to delivery mandatory 10% biodiversity net gain to be maintained for a period of at least 30 years. It is therefore unnecessary for the local plan to set out a policy on this matter, requirements relating to matters such as Biodiversity Gain Plans and use of the DEFRA metric will all be covered by the Planning Practice Guidance.

This policy is not necessary, a single ecology policy should be prepared which should cross reference to the national mandatory requirement for 10% net gain.

Object

Representation ID: 8366

Received: 02/12/2024

Respondent: Bowbridge Land Ltd

Agent: Pegasus group

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

The policy repeats itself and contradicts itself with respect to how existing trees/hedgerows should be treated. The policy should be refined to state that trees of arboricultural/landscape/ecological value should be retained unless it can demonstrated that the need and/or public benefit of the proposed development outweighs the value of any trees or hedges removed.

Object

Representation ID: 8368

Received: 02/12/2024

Respondent: Bowbridge Land Ltd

Agent: Pegasus group

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Policy EN6 is not necessary as it repeats national policy set out in the NPPF.

The second bullet point includes the requirement to clearly demonstrate that there are no other more suitable and sustainably located sites available, this is too onerous and impractical to address on an individual site application in a scenario where, for example, additional housing land is needed to meet the five year supply requirements.

This policy should therefore be deleted.

Object

Representation ID: 8386

Received: 02/12/2024

Respondent: Bowbridge Land Ltd

Agent: Pegasus group

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

The site at Main street Barleythorpe has been submitted to the Council, but it has not been considered through the Council's site assessment. Our site should be assessed using the Council’s site assessment process and, in light of the findings, the spatial strategy should be reviewed, and amended as necessary to ensure it is the most appropriate strategy in light of the reasonable alternatives. We have carried out our own site assessment using the Council's process and the site is preferable to site allocated in the Local Plan, including the fact that it is sequentially preferable in flood risk terms.

Object

Representation ID: 8410

Received: 02/12/2024

Respondent: Bowbridge Land Ltd

Agent: Pegasus group

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

There are many elements in both policies that repeat policy within the NPPF. These elements
should be deleted.