"CDC requirement

We appreciate that CDC , after allowing for the Country Park and the AONB, has only some 35% of its total area in which to meet the national need for more housing (which we support).

But we believe that totally inadequate emphasis has been given to the flood risk in the coastal area. We understand that Planning authorities have already been advised to consider the risk in the next 50 years, but that is surely far too short for planning future housing development. There can be no valid case for building in the extremely low areas of the coastal villages.

Our very low-lying area is itself an asset for its ability to absorb carbon dioxide, on which further building should be restricted, remembering that, at the same time, its available area will be further reduced by the advancing sea level.

Priorities for development

The infrastructure of the coastal strip is already seriously overloaded, particularly its drainage and sewage disposal. These deficiencies must be made good before development is authorised.

There should be much more emphasis on using every bit of available brownfield, and every opportunity should be taken to redevelop redundant commercial and industrial sites for accommodation, including for instance, surplus shopping areas in Chichester, which will offer opportunities to revive the liveliness of the city centre, as retailing moves to areas with easy parking, and to on-line shopping.

Maximum priority should be given to enabling anything which reduces the need for CO2. For example, solar panelling, now more cost-effective, should be encouraged, even within conservation areas.

Finally, if further building in the Bosham area is inevitable, we would enter a plea (which we know is not fully supported in the local community)

More building on the Highgrove Farm site would exacerbate still further the ribbon development along the A259 which is already blurring the division between the various village communities. Furthermore, it would increase the division between the two parts of Bosham village, the proposed site for a larger village school being especially unhelpful and divisive. A much more sensible choice would be the equally level area between Delling and Taylors Lanes. This would make obvious sense for the village and its amenities, and do much to unify the village geography..

Although we recognise that this would conflict with the guidance for AONBs, surely we are being encouraged to treat such rules flexibly, for the common good. The alternative central site which we are proposing is, of course, agricultural land, but so is the Highgrove Farm area. As for the visual benefits, the Highgrove site is actually more generally visible.. The Delling/Taylors Lane area provides an obviously better location for central features such as a new school - subject, of course, to the flooding considerations already mentioned."