Policy P11 Conservation Areas

A clear distinction between the Residential areas of the City Centre. Zoning of Bar/Club night time economy (south Street) should be sought for the protection of the Conservation Area and Residents.

RADAR objects to this on the grounds of Soundness. CDC has a dismal track record on Planning Enforcement. What confidence can any Inspector have that the CDC will implement or enforce proposed Policies given what has happened at a Premises in West Street recently.(withheld for Legal reasons) Past performance undermines the Soundness of the Plan and possibly the Legality. City should be protected by the CDC but Planning Department who have not implemented/enforced policies with any effect/Confidence nor taken account of the sensitivity of the area next to Cathedral/Boarding School and has left the Conservation Area and Residents and RISK.

WGPC supports this policy.

If not accepted already, the Courts & Bus Station and related area should be registered a conservation area to preserve the early 20th century architecture and style.

See attachment.

Re; criteria A2 requiring development to ‘protect the setting’, Bellway recommend changing this to ‘adopting sensitive approach to the setting (including views into and out of the area)’ or words to that effect.

See attachment.

Modification of the plan to reduce the size of the development or cancel the development to maintain the existing views from Saxon Meadow.

See representation

Plan needs move away from conservation areas otherwise Council will be acting unlawfully. To protect and preserve views, farmland and rural nature of historic Tangmere, conservation area needs to be extended to incorporate Tangmere and Oving. Council should look to use brownfield sites rather than destroy greenfield sites. Council should prioritise using unused buildings within city centre and urban sites to comply with its legal obligations under P11.

Local authorities are required by law to preserve or enhance their Conservation Areas and part of that is to
process is the production of a character appraisal to explain what is important about the area. I think that
policy 11 has not been legally complied with as the council has failed in that its building plan fails to
“preserve and enhance” its conservation area. In fact, far from being legally compliant, the council has
ignored and disregarded the Character Appraisal carried out for it which concludes: “that the most
significant features of the Tangmere Conservation Area are:
- Tranquil and rural character of the earlier historic core along Church Lane.” (see relevant marked
page from the Character appraisal) and extract from page 10 Tangmere Conservation Area
(character appraisal and management proposals 2014)
The heritage of the “historic core” centres around the Saxon church (mentioned in the Doomsday Book) and
its immediate environs i.e. Saxon Meadow and the fields surrounding it and Saxon Meadow.
The commonwealth graves situated in St Andrew’s Churchyard are of national importance and deserve to
be surrounded with tranquillity and treated with respect. The links with WW11, the battle of Britain and
Douglas Barder should be noted.
The views into and from Saxon Meadow include wide open farmland with vistas that incude Oving Church
Spire and Chichester Cathedral spires, as well as the South Downs. This farm land and the historic views
within in both into and out of Saxon Meadow are worth saving and protecting for future generations. Indeed,
the Saxon church of St Andrew’s Tangmere has an historical link with St Andrew’s Church, Oving which is
situated along Church Lane in Oving. The fact that you can see the spire of the linked churches I,e from
Oving you can see Tangmere church spire and vice versa is of import as there is an historical link between
the two churches.
The rural nature of the historic tangmere around church lane, its wide open vistas and good arable farm
land should be “preserved and protected” not destroyed. The plan is in total contrast this legal duty. The
size, density and proximity of the buildings in a rural setting is unsympathetic and will destroy what I would
have thought a conservation area was established to preserve.
For the reasons above the plan is also unsound.
See extracts and photos

As the Government's adviser on the historic environment Historic England is keen to ensure that the protection of the historic environment is fully taken into account at all stages of the planning process. This includes formulation of local development policy and plans, supplementary planning documents, area and site proposals, and the on-going review of policies and plans.

There are many issues and matters in the consultation document that are beyond the remit and concern of Historic England and our comments are, as required, limited to matters relating to the historic environment and heritage assets. In our previous comments (by online submissions dated I - 6 February 2019), Historic England focused on the objective of the National Planning Policy Framework to set out a positive strategy for the conservation, enjoyment and enhancement of the historic environment (now Paragraph 190, NPPF); and contain policies to deliver the conservation and enhancement of the historic environment (now Paragraph 190a, NPPF).

Our comments on the Regulation 18 stage draft Local Plan largely have been addressed in the current Publication version or are, in our view, not now likely to affect the soundness of the Local Plan.

We welcome the inclusion of policies for the historic environment in the local plan at Policies P9 - P13 that, along with other policies, meet the obligation for preparing the positive strategy required by the NPPF. The key test of the soundness of the plan and the achievement of sustainable development as defined in the NPPF in respect of the elements that relate to the historic environment (paragraph 190), in our view, have been met.