Appendix A - Plan Area Sub-Area Maps

Comment

Representation ID: 306

Received: 21/01/2019

Respondent: Mr Robert Styles-Forsyth

Why is the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) not included on the map?
Why is the Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) not included on the map?

Object

Representation ID: 568

Received: 07/02/2019

Respondent: Mrs Zoe Neal

I object to the fact that the Chichester Harbour AONB, RAMSAR, SPA and SSSI site is omitted from the Map describing the East-West Corridor, yet the SDNP takes precedence. In planning policy terms AONBs are equal to National Parks. Chichester Harbour AONB was designated in 1964 under the National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act 1949. The Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000.

Object

Representation ID: 573

Received: 05/02/2019

Respondent: Mr Pieter Montyn

The Chichester Harbour AONB is neither referenced nor indicated in these maps while it is within the local plan area. Why are there recurring references to the SDNP throughout this document when it is not inside the plan area..

Comment

Representation ID: 2913

Received: 05/02/2019

Respondent: Councillor Christopher Page

Appendix A Map A1: Is a perfect representation of how the development of our district has suffered from the requirements of the SDNP and as previously observed, shows that inevitably, there will be continuous development eventually from Southbourne to Tangmere

Comment

Representation ID: 2990

Received: 07/02/2019

Respondent: Plaistow And Ifold Parish Council

Plaistow AND IFOLD Parish Council draw CDC attention yet again to the wrong name being used for this Parish. Map A3 and Map B1 both only refer to Plaistow , please can you amend and amend your records as this is a constant mistake. Also Map 4.1 Key Diagram only shows the settlement of Ifold and not Plaistow even though they are designated one service village.

Object

Representation ID: 3349

Received: 07/02/2019

Respondent: Mr and Mrs R Ellis

Number of people: 2

Agent: Genesis Town Planning Ltd

SB3 - consider areas identified as part of the adopted Site Allocations DPD are misleading, should simply be accorded settlement boundary status as they are already developed. Plan should be changed to include site at Lagness Road which forms a logical settlement boundary extension and is contiguous with existing development.