Object

Chichester Local Plan 2021 - 2039: Proposed Submission

Representation ID: 4354

Received: 16/03/2023

Respondent: Mr Stephen Jupp

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

Point 3 again seems to seek to introduce a gap policy with no specific boundaries drawn on the proposals map.
Does it real solely to settlements with a policy boundary?
Does it relate to gaps within the AONB or from a settlement within to a settlement outside?

Point 6 - What is the justification for a 25m setback for ALL development - it is not explained in supporting text and in some cases it just wont be possible.
For replacement the reference to further back - is that further back than 25m or further back than the existing building?

Change suggested by respondent:

Remove 3 or have a plan showing the gaps.

Reword 6 to include 'Where possible' at the beginning. Also clarify the set back for replacement buildings

Full text:

Point 3 again seems to seek to introduce a gap policy with no specific boundaries drawn on the proposals map.
Does it real solely to settlements with a policy boundary?
Does it relate to gaps within the AONB or from a settlement within to a settlement outside?

Point 6 - What is the justification for a 25m setback for ALL development - it is not explained in supporting text and in some cases it just wont be possible.
For replacement the reference to further back - is that further back than 25m or further back than the existing building?