Policy AL6: Land South-West of Chichester (Apuldram and Donnington Parishes)
Comment
Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035
Representation ID: 2909
Received: 05/02/2019
Respondent: Councillor Christopher Page
Policy AL6; 4th bullet: a minimum of 100 houses on a disputed link road, followed by a glib statement about improving the highway. The latter should be the pre-condition for the former.
See attachment
Object
Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035
Representation ID: 2923
Received: 06/02/2019
Respondent: CPRE Sussex
This major development is directly adjacent to the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) and it is inevitable that it will have both a direct and indirect negative impact on this protected landscape. Add considerably to the negative impact through air, soil and light pollution. Falls within the SSSI impact zone. Construction planned on a flood plain. Proper consultation has not taken place with the Harbour Conservancy on this proposal. No evidence is presented of an environmental audit of this area adjacent to the AONB. we fully endorse all the objections and comments submitted by the Chichester Harbour Conservancy
See attachment
Object
Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035
Representation ID: 3087
Received: 06/02/2019
Respondent: Chichester Harbour Conservancy
* Major development on the fringe of the AONB.
* Loss of the buffer zone outside the AONB.
* Breach of current and emerging AONB Management Plan
* SSSI Interest Impact Risk Zone, which affects the SAC, SPA and Ramsar designations.
* Wildlife
* Flooding
* Chichester views
* Highest quality agricultural land
* Urbanisation
* Light, air, noise, and soil pollution.
* Wastewater
* Mitigation by public open space not necessary since AONB is a nationally important landscape already designated for the nation to enjoy.
* Increased RTAs
* Lack of support for link road
Object to link road
See attachment
Comment
Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035
Representation ID: 3131
Received: 06/02/2019
Respondent: Mr John Templeton
Support the development provided no built development takes places to the west of the proposed link road.
See attachment
Comment
Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035
Representation ID: 3145
Received: 07/02/2019
Respondent: Rolls-Royce Motor Cars Limited
Agent: David Lock Associates Ltd
Whilst further work to be done on site, the deliverability has yet to be established.
Ste does not fulfil RR's requirement for expansion
See attachment
Object
Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035
Representation ID: 3160
Received: 04/02/2019
Respondent: Mr John Ridd
- Development will destroy the traditional agricultural nature of SW approach to city
- Employment land should be located within Goodwood buffer zone
- Object to link road due to elevation needed and air light and noise pollution
- Destruction of priority views
- Damage to AONB
- Lack of infrastructure - schools
See attachment
Object
Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035
Representation ID: 3168
Received: 05/02/2019
Respondent: Mr Alan Carn
This area, with its flooding potential, and proximity to Chichester Harbour, should not be developed further. 100 new dwellings are not sustainable, a new link road will generate more traffic close to a sensitive area and make it harder to refuse future development plans when the area is served by the 'new road'. The area is now fairly inaccessible and should be left as an important link in the North-South wildlife corridor, rather than opened up to dog walkers etc. Keep the inaccessible area as it is.
See attachment
Object
Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035
Representation ID: 3183
Received: 04/02/2019
Respondent: Mrs Sarah Sharp
Objections on grounds that link road not wanted by residents; road and housing will take away valuable agricultural land and lead to further congestion; direct links between new development and the city centre/bus and rail transport hub need to be provided. Walkers and cyclists need to travel most direct route; bridges should have slopes as well as stairs; it is not possible to mitigate the destruction of wildlife.
See attachment
Support
Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035
Representation ID: 3247
Received: 07/02/2019
Respondent: WSCC (Estates)
Agent: Henry Adams LLP
Support principle however there is opportunity for infrastructure requirements to be delivered without reliance on other sites/infrastructure funds if greater proportion of housing is delivered on site.
Site is suitable to accommodate a strategic employment site.
See attachment
Object
Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035
Representation ID: 3343
Received: 05/02/2019
Respondent: CEG
Agent: CEG and the Landowners (D C Heaver and Eurequity IC Limited)
Not enough evidence to demonstrate the suitability/deliverability of the site.
The site also scored poorly in the SA
See attachment
Object
Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035
Representation ID: 3460
Received: 07/02/2019
Respondent: A + D Lygo-Baker
Number of people: 2
Use buffer zone at Goodwood for industrial development
See attachment
Object
Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035
Representation ID: 3526
Received: 15/01/2019
Respondent: West Wittering Parish Council
Concerns about AL6. The link road site is at risk of both tidal and fluvial flooding on ground which already has a high-water table and no consideration is given to rising sea level associated with climate change. This site should be rejected and replaced by AL4, which is in the current Local Plan, even if this requires compulsory purchase powers to acquire it.
The Parish Council challenges the assertion that the provision of new dwellings will make the area more self contained. This needs more robust evidence. Currently the village of East Wittering has lost 4 banks, a holiday centre and a large pub and businesses rely heavily on seasonal tourism for trade. New homes without new local jobs will be a drain on current infrastructure. market homes are likely to add to the number of residents getting off the peninsular for work and will therefore not reduce the areas reliance on Chichester city centre.
In addition:
1 The funding for the £65m to carryout the road mitigation measures for the A27 etc exceeds the figure which could reasonable be obtained by developer contributions. The ability to delivery these measures to mitigate the additional traffic arising from the local plan housing numbers is therefore uncertain. The local plan should therefore set out how it plans to deal with this major uncertainty. This could possibly be achieved by having clearly defined phasing with trigger points which require a change in approach, or the housing numbers reduced. This has happened before with road mitigation works not being delivered because of lack of funding (Selsey Tram)
2 There are major concerns about the strategic industrial / housing site AL6 (Land South West of Chichester Apluldram & Donnington). This requires the construction of a Link road between Fishbourne Birdham Lane at Donnington. This site is at risk of both tidal and fluvial flooding on ground which already has a high-water table and no consideration is given to rising sea level associated with climate change. To quote WSCC who are the Lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA) 'These limits how the site can be effectively drained without a step change from typically employed methods to embrace more innovative and currently expensive options'. This site should be rejected and replaced by AL4, which is in the current Local Plan, even if this requires compulsory purchase powers to acquire it.
3 The above link road combined with the proposed A27 junction designs at Stockbridge and Whyke which bans right turns would result in significant forecast changes to traffic flows on the Manhood Peninsula. As WSCC, as the Highways Authority, points out it requires further feasibility work before the Local Plan is submitted to show that the transport strategy can be delivered and funded.
4 Both CDC and WSCC promoted a Mitigated Northern Route for the A27 at Chichester as the preferred option. Policy S30 which introduces 'wildlife corridors' conflicts with the ability to deliver a Northern Route. Policy S30 requires amending so that it does not exclude the possibility of a Northern Route. There cannot be any policy which excludes the possibility of a Northern route.
5 Additional traffic at the Fishbourne roundabout should be assessed in terms of air quality and accident numbers.
Object
Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035
Representation ID: 3536
Received: 05/02/2019
Respondent: Penny Kirk
Proposed plans for the A27 and AL6 will further deteriorate Air Quality.
Stockbridge already EXCEEDS the recommended air quality levels.
Proposed plans for the A27 and AL6 will further deteriorate Air Quality.
Stockbridge already EXCEEDS the recommended air quality levels.
The Council should be looking at REDUCING the pollution levels rather than increasing them to the detriment of the local population.
Object
Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035
Representation ID: 3545
Received: 10/01/2019
Respondent: Dr Carolyn Cobbold
Object to the provision of a commercial development site and raised link road near Apuldram/Donnington as this area contains some of the most important cathedral views in the district from the harbour, marina, Salterns Way, and A286- views enjoyed by many visitors and residents.Also site is on flood plain and adjacent to internationally important habitat areas.This development would be better sited in the noise buffer zone to the south/west of the motor racing circuit
Generally support but consider increasing housing numbers in the city and adjacent surrounds by allocation of more social housing and higher density housing, including more apartments. Object to the provision of a commercial development site and raised link road near Apuldram/Donnington as this area contains some of the most important cathedral views in the district from the harbour, marina, Salterns Way, and A286- views enjoyed by many visitors and residents.Also site is on flood plain and adjacent to internationally important habitat areas.This development would be better sited in the noise buffer zone to the south/west of the motor racing circuit