Regulation 19 Rutland Local Plan

Object

Representation ID: 8675

Received: 02/12/2024

Respondent: Anglian Water

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Policy EN10 does not support the sustainable development of Rutland Water, which is vital for water supply and recreational activities. The policy overlooks the essential infrastructure status of Rutland Water and the operational requirements of AWS. There has been insufficient engagement with AWS during the policy drafting process, undermining its relevance. The policy lacks clarity regarding its geographic scope, development types, and criteria for planning decisions. EN10 conflicts with various strategic objectives, particularly those related to health, resource use, and biodiversity funding.

Object

Representation ID: 8676

Received: 02/12/2024

Respondent: Anglian Water

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

On the Policies map we note that the Oakham inset looks to include land to the east of the A606 Burley Park Way and north of the A606 Stamford Road in the area covered by Policy EN10. AWS is concerned that the Policy
EN10 including its contradictions will prevent those environmental improvements including improving water quality and as a result mean that AWS would need to object to planning applications for new homes and businesses, who if connected would increase the nutrient loads being discharged via the Oakham WRC.

Object

Representation ID: 8677

Received: 02/12/2024

Respondent: Anglian Water

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

AWS notes there is no reference to wastewater/ water recycling in Policy WST1. As planning applications for environmental improvements or upgrades in capacity would be determined by RCC this is a significant omission which goes to the soundness of the Plan and its positive
preparation. The omission from WST1 may mean then Plan is not proportionate or effective. There is a
single word reference to wastewater in RCC’s April 2024 Local Waste Needs Assessment.

Support

Representation ID: 8678

Received: 02/12/2024

Respondent: Anglian Water

AWS welcomes the inclusion of sewage treatment works (WRCs) in part f) of Policy WST2. AWS remains of the view that our development is different from other waste development and as indicated above further investment will be required at Oakham WRC, for example, from 2025
onwards in part to address P-TAL.

Support

Representation ID: 8679

Received: 02/12/2024

Respondent: Anglian Water

Note the waste site monitoring proposed by RCC in part d) of Policy MIN10. AWS recommends that monitoring by waste planning authority’s such as RCC is undertaken in liaison with the EA.

Object

Representation ID: 8680

Received: 02/12/2024

Respondent: Anglian Water

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

AWS would welcome the specific inclusion of water and water recycling infrastructure to the first bullet point in the ‘three main categories. AWS supports the penultimate paragraph in Policy INF1 covering foul (wastewater/water recycling) infrastructure. The policy also needs to include the signing posting of applicants to AWS for water supply advice and the specific requirements for developers requiring above 20m3 of non- domestic water per day to complete and submit a Water Resources Assessment to AWS. We note that water supply is listed in the supporting text.

Support

Representation ID: 8681

Received: 02/12/2024

Respondent: Anglian Water

AWS supports the inclusion of the Policy CC6 on water efficiency in new homes in the Monitoring Framework. We agree that this can be assessed by data from planning decisions and suggest that a two-stage data collection at application validation and then conditions in approved applications can enable effective monitoring by RCC.

Object

Representation ID: 8682

Received: 02/12/2024

Respondent: Anglian Water

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

On Policy EN10, the policy may be directed at Strategic Objective 8, but conflicts with Objectives
2 and 4 and potentially prejudices the delivery of Objective 3

Object

Representation ID: 8683

Received: 02/12/2024

Respondent: Anglian Water

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

AWS broadly supports the draft Plan and considers its spatial approach is deliverable. The delivery of the environmental and economic benefits of that proposed development could though be compromised if the Rutland Water policy and possible local landscape designations are not reviewed and amended.