1. There is a fundamental flaw flying in the face of due process in CDC's proposals so far as Bosham is concerned.
2. 250 dwellings is a totally arbitrary number, pulled out of the ether to fit what is perceived to be an available site.
To put the point a different way, had Highgrove Farm been 15 hectares CDC would have proposed 300 dwellings, or had it been only 8 hectares the proposal would be only 150 dwellings. This arbitrary allocation of a requirement cannot be right.
3. CDC has to prove 'need'. Where is the need for 250 more houses in Bosham? Where is the evidence?
4. If CDC can get past those hurdles, there are serious questions over these draft proposals.
5. No evidence had been provided to demonstrate that the site is capable of holding 250 dwellings, plus a school, plus public open spaces and play areas, as well as adequate on-site parking. How much area is being allocated to each? Current independent views are that the site is not big enough for all this.
6. Surely the whole point of this process is to increase the number of affordable houses? But there is no specific mention of this aim. It is critical CDC impose a binding requirement that at least 30% of the dwellings are affordable.
7. Who is to fund the building of this new school? Has Bosham Primary School confirmed it wishes to go down this route and relocate north of the A259? Are all the parents happy for their children to walk from Bosham village northwards over the A259? What is the happen to the area if the proposal to build a school is not feasible?
8. Traffic access onto the A259 at Chequers Lane, currently difficult, will become significantly more dangerous once the new Hospice is working and generating the estimated extra 500 vehicle movements each day. On top of this will be additional vehicle movements from the 50 houses to be built at Highgrove opposite Chequer Lane. To add another 250 houses at the same location begs the question: Where is the money going to come from to widen the A259 and make it safe both for traffic and everybody who will have to cross it?
S106 (or its equivalent) funds will be there, but they will also be required to fund improvements to the Fishbourne roundabout, open spaces, a new school, upgrading sewage works, possibly a pedestrian bridge or underpass, to name but a few. Where is the feasibility study for the use of community funds?
9. It is well known that the site floods, with the result that the watercourses to the south become over-whelmed which in turn leads to flooding in Bosham village. This happens on a regular basis now. Having in mind the amount of hard-standing and non-percolation which 250 houses will generate, there is a major concern about future flooding risks which will not matter to the developer, but which matters to all of us who live to the south. The writer has personal experience of fluvial flooding in June.
10. The state and capacity of Bosham's sewers are well known. The current development at Highgrove has overcome the capacity problem by funding larger capacity pipes within the present system. It is understood that this brings the pumping station almost to capacity. Before this proposal moves any further, it is essential CDC seek the views of Southern Water on the feasibility of connecting another 250 dwellings into the system, on top of the new Hospice and the 50 houses at Highgrove.
11. How is CDC going to manage such a large project in a highly sensitive area and guarantee delivery of a "high quality form of development" when they are under-staffed, I suspect under-resourced, and cannot cope with their current work load? To build yet more houses adjacent to the AONB will require specialist design input to help advise and direct the developers. What are CDC's management proposals for handling this and other developments? Just to 'muddle through' should not be acceptable. These big projects need and must be fully resourced.
12. The last time there was a public consultation on development at Highgrove, Bosham villagers decided it was the least acceptable site of many put forward in the Village Plan. Despite this, CDC decided not to support Bosham, notwithstanding that at the same time, approval was given for the building of the new Hospice in the AONB.
CDC has over the years approved many housing proposals in the AONB within the district, and Bosham should be no exception.
13. Rather than continue and extend a problem, which fly's in face of CDC stated policy of keeping the coastal villages separate with their own identities, CDC should work with the village in deciding what are its need and how best to meet them, whether they be inside or outside the AONB.
14. For a start, there are identified 'brown-field' sites available, as well as other areas, which Bosham would prefer. Should not the village have a real say it what is best for it?
At the consultation in Bosham on 7th January, CDC suggested Bosham could do this, provided its alternative proposals were for 250 dwellings, or that it explained where any shortfall in its suggestions should be sited. Not only is that an impossible task unless CDC is willing to make available the same resources as it has, but it assumes 250 dwellings is an appropriate number, which comes back to my opening remark.