Policy S2: Settlement Hierarchy

Object

Representation ID: 2917

Received: 07/02/2019

Respondent: N/A

Agent: Genesis Town Planning Ltd

The Settlement Hierarchy Background paper sets out that the majority of development should be focused in Chichester.

Object

Representation ID: 2975

Received: 07/02/2019

Respondent: Plaistow And Ifold Parish Council

Unsound - does not meet sustainable criteria; social , economic environmental. Unsound designation of Plaistow and Ifold as one service village. No settlement boundary, therefore in countryside. Consider following issues:
* dwellings to suit incomes, needs, lifestyle, stages of life
* environmentally friendly way of life
* healthy lifestyle and benefit from sense of wellbeing supported by good access to ... health, leisure, open spaces.. sports and other essential facilities
* does not allow residents in the Parish settlements to live in sustainable neighbourhoods supported by necessary infrastructure and facilities.
- Sustainable transport modes

Support

Representation ID: 3004

Received: 06/02/2019

Respondent: Danescroft Land Ltd

Agent: Neame Sutton Limited

Support identification of Chichester as sub-regional centre.

Support

Representation ID: 3015

Received: 07/02/2019

Respondent: Sunley Estates Ltd

Agent: Neame Sutton Limited

Support identification of Chidham & Hambrook as a service village

Support

Representation ID: 3221

Received: 07/02/2019

Respondent: Elberry Properties Ltd

Agent: Genesis Town Planning

Support strategic allocation at E of Chichester as Chichester in the sub regional centre

Comment

Representation ID: 3235

Received: 07/02/2019

Respondent: Taylor Wimpey Strategic Land

Agent: Henry Adams LLP

All service villages should accommodate a proportionate level of housing growth.

Support

Representation ID: 3241

Received: 07/02/2019

Respondent: WSCC (Estates)

Agent: Henry Adams LLP

Support identification of Chichester as a sub-regional centre.

Comment

Representation ID: 3268

Received: 06/02/2019

Respondent: Landacre Developments Ltd

Agent: Genesis Town Planning

The Settlement Hierarchy background paper forms the basis for the proposed distribution of growth by distinguishing between those settlements considered to be the most sustainable having the best range of facilities and accessibility from those with the least. Most development is focused on the former and development to meet local needs or no development whatsoever on the latter. We agree that Fishbourne is properly classified as a service village in the hierarchy ranking 9th in terms of population with 10 total facilities.

Comment

Representation ID: 3270

Received: 06/02/2019

Respondent: Loxwood Parish Council

Plaistow should have a settlement boundary.

Support

Representation ID: 3288

Received: 06/02/2019

Respondent: Chichester Grain Ltd

Agent: Genesis Town Planning

The Settlement Hierarchy background paper forms the basis for the proposed distribution of growth by distinguishing between those settlements considered to be the most sustainable having the best range of facilities and accessibility from those with the least. Most development is focused on the former and development to meet local needs or no development whatsoever on the latter. We agree that Southbourne is properly classified as a settlement hub in the hierarchy background paper being the 3rd largest settlement behind Chichester & Selsey in terms of population and having 26 total facilities.

Object

Representation ID: 3290

Received: 07/02/2019

Respondent: Barratt Homes

Agent: Luken Beck MDP Ltd

Bosham should be classified as a Settlement Hub.

Support

Representation ID: 3298

Received: 07/02/2019

Respondent: Barratt Homes

Agent: Luken Beck MDP Ltd

Support classification of East Wittering/Bracklesham as a Settlement Hub

Support

Representation ID: 3309

Received: 06/02/2019

Respondent: Domusea

Agent: Genesis Town Planning

We agree that Southbourne is properly classified as a settlement hub in the hierarchy background paper being the 3rd largest settlement behind Chichester & Selsey in terms of population and having 26 total facilities.

We agree that North Mundham/Runcton is properly classified as a service village in the hierarchy.

Comment

Representation ID: 3312

Received: 06/02/2019

Respondent: Landlinx Estates Ltd

Agent: Genesis Town Planning

The Settlement Hierarchy background paper provides justification for the hierarchy in Policy 2 of the Local Plan. It forms the basis for the proposed distribution of growth by distinguishing between those settlements considered to be the most sustainable having the best range of facilities and accessibility from those with the least. Most development is focused on the former and development to meet local needs or no development whatsoever on the latter. We agree that Loxwood is properly classified as a service village in the hierarchy.

Support

Representation ID: 3324

Received: 04/02/2019

Respondent: Seaward Properties Ltd

Agent: Luken Beck MDP Ltd

Support classification of Tangmere as a Settlement Hub.

Comment

Representation ID: 3331

Received: 06/02/2019

Respondent: Mr Samuel Langmead

Agent: Genesis Town Planning

The Settlement Hierarchy background paper provides justification for the hierarchy in Policy 2 of the Local Plan. It forms the basis for the proposed distribution of growth by distinguishing between those settlements considered to be the most sustainable having the best range of facilities and accessibility from those with the least. Most development is focused on the former and development to meet local needs or no development whatsoever on the latter. We agree that Birdham is properly classified as a service village in the hierarchy.

Comment

Representation ID: 3337

Received: 07/02/2019

Respondent: Mr and Mrs R Ellis

Number of people: 2

Agent: Genesis Town Planning Ltd

The Settlement Hierarchy background paper provides justification for the hierarchy in Policy 2 of the Local Plan. It forms the basis for the proposed distribution of growth by distinguishing between those settlements considered to be the most sustainable having the best range of facilities and accessibility from those with the least. Most development is focused on the former and development to meet local needs or no development whatsoever on the latter. We agree that North Mundham/Runcton is properly classified as a service village where development will be provided based on land being available in suitable locations.

Support

Representation ID: 3352

Received: 05/02/2019

Respondent: CEG

Agent: CEG and the Landowners (D C Heaver and Eurequity IC Limited)

Support identification of Chichester city as the sub-regional centre.

Support

Representation ID: 3360

Received: 07/02/2019

Respondent: Junnell Homes Ltd

Agent: Genesis Town Planning

We agree that North Mundham is correctly identified as a service village in the hierarchy.

Comment

Representation ID: 3364

Received: 06/02/2019

Respondent: Mr Jeff Ferguson

Agent: Genesis Town Planning

The Settlement Hierarchy background paper provides justification for the hierarchy in Policy 2 of the Local Plan. It forms the basis for the proposed distribution of growth by distinguishing between those settlements considered to be the most sustainable having the best range of facilities and accessibility from those with the least. Most development is focused on the former and development to meet local needs or no development whatsoever on the latter. We agree that West Wittering is properly classified as a service village in the hierarchy.

Comment

Representation ID: 3370

Received: 07/02/2019

Respondent: Landlink Estates Ltd

Agent: Luken Beck MDP Limited

Suggest amend policy wording

Comment

Representation ID: 3380

Received: 06/02/2019

Respondent: Mr and Mrs Tearall

Number of people: 2

Agent: Genesis Town Planning

Settlement Hierarchy background paper forms basis for proposed distribution of growth by distinguishing between settlements considered to be most sustainable, having best range of facilities and accessibility, from those with the least. Most development is focused on former and development to meet local needs or no development whatsoever on the latter. Agree that Hambrook is correctly identified as a service village. However, table in Policy S2 refers to Hambrook/Nutbourne yet list of Parish housing sites in S5 refers to Chidham & Hambrook parish. Policy AL10 also allocates 500 dwellings to Chidham and Hambrook parish.

Comment

Representation ID: 3384

Received: 06/02/2019

Respondent: Ms Rebecca Newman

Agent: Genesis Town Planning

The Settlement Hierarchy background paper provides justification for the hierarchy in Policy 2 of the Local Plan. It forms the basis for the proposed distribution of growth by distinguishing between those settlements considered to be the most sustainable having the best range of facilities and accessibility from those with the least. Most development is focused on the former and development to meet local needs or no development whatsoever on the latter. We agree that Hunston is properly classified as a service village in the hierarchy.

Support

Representation ID: 3389

Received: 04/02/2019

Respondent: Seaward Properties Ltd

Agent: Luken Beck MDP Ltd

The Preferred Approach carries forward the Adopted Chichester Local Plan: Key Policies 2014-2029 classification for Hermitage as one of the District's Service Villages. We welcome the focus in the supporting text (ref. para 4.18) on the services villages as locations for new strategic development, as part of the Council's strategy to disperse development across the Plan area in suitable locations.

Support

Representation ID: 3394

Received: 06/02/2019

Respondent: Seaward Properties Ltd

Agent: Luken Beck MDP Ltd

The Preferred Approach carries forward the Adopted Chichester Local Plan: Key Policies 2014-2029 classification for Hermitage as one of the District's Service Villages. We welcome the focus in the supporting text (ref. para 4.18) on the services villages as locations for new strategic development, as part of the Council's strategy to disperse development across the Plan area in suitable locations.

Support

Representation ID: 3398

Received: 06/03/2019

Respondent: Seaward Properties Ltd

Agent: Luken Beck MDP Ltd

We support the Settlement Hub classification for Southbourne as the District's third largest settlement (in population size) after Chichester and Selsey and joint fourth highest ranking settlement in terms of number of key services and facilities.

Support

Representation ID: 3401

Received: 07/02/2019

Respondent: Seaward Properties Ltd

Agent: Luken Beck MDP Ltd

We support the Settlement Hub classification for Southbourne as the District's third largest settlement (in population size) after Chichester and Selsey and joint fourth highest ranking settlement in terms of number of key services and facilities

Support

Representation ID: 3407

Received: 06/02/2019

Respondent: Seaward Properties Ltd

Agent: Genesis Town Planning

We agree that Fishbourne is properly classified as a service village in the hierarchy ranking 9th in terms of population with 10 total facilities.

Object

Representation ID: 3408

Received: 06/02/2019

Respondent: Greenwood Group Ltd

Agent: Genesis Town Planning

Object on grounds that Sidlesham should be categorised as a 'service village' in hierarchy due to population and range of facilities.

Comment

Representation ID: 3415

Received: 06/02/2019

Respondent: Meadows Partnership

Agent: Genesis Town Planning

The Settlement Hierarchy background paper provides justification for the hierarchy in Policy 2 of the Local Plan. It forms the basis for the proposed distribution of growth by distinguishing between those settlements considered to be the most sustainable having the best range of facilities and accessibility from those with the least. Most development is focused on the former and development to meet local needs or no development whatsoever on the latter. We agree that West
Wittering is properly classified as a service village in the hierarchy.