Object
Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035
Representation ID: 566
Received: 07/02/2019
Respondent: Mrs Zoe Neal
Admirable including Wildlife Corridors but the positioning of these in the West of the City and their size is questionable in the actual benefits to the whole Plan area's biodiversity It is short sighted to think that using these corridors to prevent development without actually exploring in acute detail with further input from nationally recognised, local plan area conservation bodies, in identifying other areas better suited for the protection and enhancement of our fragile biodiversity. There is no point having empty Wildlife corridors ineffective at stopping the loss of Chichester's fragile and nationally protected biodiversity.
Including Wildlife corridors is admirable. However designated strategic wildlife corridors in the view of professional conservationists do little good when they are too close to the the hostile A27 bypass and other busy roads/rail network and urbanised areas with little green space and are too narrow to support the wildlife as do not go far enough in their coverage. They recommend that a single much wider corridor, which would provide wildlife with the natural space in which to move, connect with other ecological networks and breed undisturbed. The West of City corridors positioning seem at odds with 5.23 Transport infrastructure, CDC's resolution to support a northern alignment to the A27 as they are positioned in areas of the entrance/exit points onto the A27. This begs the question are these corridors' positioning meant to help the wildlife or are they merely self serving? Have any other areas been explored when the CDC focused on these? I wish to raise this with the examiner.