Regulation 19 Rutland Local Plan

Object

Representation ID: 8068

Received: 12/11/2024

Respondent: Mr C Udale and Grafton Spaces Ltd

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Emphasis on the need for the Plan to be up-to-date means we are surprised that the Council is pressing ahead with the current draft plan unamended to reflect the housing requirement that the new NPPF Standard Methodology will require. There is no disadvantage to amending the draft Plan, which would go a considerable way to meeting the requirements of the revised methodology.

Including sites that have already been assessed, but excluded, would save time and resource for the Council and site promoters, producing an adopted Plan that would be compliant with, or substantially compliant with, the new NPPF when published.

Object

Representation ID: 8069

Received: 12/11/2024

Respondent: Mr C Udale and Grafton Spaces Ltd

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Empingham is, arguably, the most sustainable of the villages in the County, with a full complement of community facilities - school, pub, shop, post office, GP surgery and bus links to the towns and neighbouring villages. It is midway between Oakham and Stamford, on the main A606, providing direct access to the wider facilities, including education and employment, available there. The village is demonstrably capable of accepting a greater level of housing allocation than has been included in the Plan. It is unclear why other villages, that are less well connected and with fewer facilities, have greater housing allocations.

Object

Representation ID: 8070

Received: 14/11/2024

Respondent: Mr C Udale and Grafton Spaces Ltd

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

This policy should be strengthened to particularly identify the need to apply these principles to heritage buildings - especially where these have suffered a loss of their original function and so are in danger of falling into disrepair or dereliction.

Object

Representation ID: 8071

Received: 14/11/2024

Respondent: Mr C Udale and Grafton Spaces Ltd

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Whilst agreeing with the aspirations of Objective 2, it seems odd that the Council has not carried this forward to the way that development has bene allocated in the larger villages. It could be expected that the more sustainable villages - with better bus services, on strategic A roads, and with the greatest range and number of amenities would have been targeted for a greater level of development - as that would best follow the principles established by the Strategic Objective.

Object

Representation ID: 8072

Received: 14/11/2024

Respondent: Mr C Udale and Grafton Spaces Ltd

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

It is disappointing that the Council has continued to pursue the extant spatial strategy unchanged from the previous draft reg.18 plan. In the context of the forthcoming NPPF and the new Government's published changes to the calculation of housing numbers, it is effectively certain that the PLD's published in this plan for the Larger Villages will need to be amended almost immediately. This is a foreseeable change, that the Council could have made preparations for in the light of the Call for Sites process and site identification work that has been undertaken for this plan.

Object

Representation ID: 8073

Received: 14/11/2024

Respondent: Mr C Udale and Grafton Spaces Ltd

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Additional housing should be provided at Empingham, as this is the most sustainable of the Larger Villages (all community facilities are available, unlike in some of the other villages where more housing has been allocated and it lies on the strategic A606 east-west corridor, with its regular bus services). The Dovecote site at Exton Road would provide a deliverable site in a very short timescale.

Object

Representation ID: 8074

Received: 14/11/2024

Respondent: Mr C Udale and Grafton Spaces Ltd

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Promotion of land for 12 houses at the Exton Road site, Empingham. The allocation would enable the Dovecot to the north of the site, a listed building and Scheduled Monument.
A draft allocation policy is provided to cover site specific issues, including a buffer and the renovation and reuse of the Dovecot for community use. The Council has not satisfied the Duty to Cooperate. The submission included documentation previously submitted under the Call for Sites.

Object

Representation ID: 8075

Received: 14/11/2024

Respondent: Mr C Udale and Grafton Spaces Ltd

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

The policy gives little guidance with regard to the way that positive and proactive proposals might be brought forward to assist in the recovery and rejuvenation of heritage assets. The policy could, therefore, provide a direct reference to the way that buildings may be brought forward for re-use, most likely for uses alternative too their original function, and that the Council would consider such proposals favourably on their merits. The Council could take an innovative stance.

Object

Representation ID: 8124

Received: 28/11/2024

Respondent: Mr C Udale and Grafton Spaces Ltd

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Promoting the Dovecote site, Empingham as enabling development to allow the renovation of the SAM and listed dovecote for a suitable community or commercial use. RCC hasn’t taken account of information provided in the call for sites, or our response that addressed the reason for discounting it. The plan is not justified.