Meeting Business and Employment Needs

Showing comments and forms 1 to 11 of 11

Object

Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035

Representation ID: 666

Received: 31/01/2019

Respondent: Mrs Fiona Horn

Representation Summary:

Alot of work in Chichester is low paid, service/industrial work/part time or seasonal.Chichester needs a variety of smaller business/ industrial opportunities rather than large scale which does not suit the area. Plenty of land already available on existing brown field site without concreting more. Priority to regenerate the city centre which is dying because of too much out of town retail parks. Encourage cheaper parking, lower business rates etc.

Full text:

Alot of work in Chichester is low paid, service/industrial work/part time or seasonal.Chichester needs a variety of smaller business/ industrial opportunities rather than large scale which does not suit the area. Plenty of land already available on existing brown field site without concreting more. Priority to regenerate the city centre which is dying because of too much out of town retail parks. Encourage cheaper parking, lower business rates etc. REMOVE AL6 no data and incredibly damaging to the environment.Unless AL6 is adequately addressed in future iterations of this plan I will raise this with the examiner at the appropriate time.

Comment

Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035

Representation ID: 776

Received: 01/02/2019

Respondent: Mr Robert Marson

Representation Summary:

Why no site designated for employment north of the city centre . Residents living within the SDNP would need to travel to the city, or south of the city, for work putting extra onus on local roads and adding to the current congestion. Allocating land outside of the SDNP for employment , but close enough to residents living within the SDNP , would seem sensible. This is especially so close to the Rolls Royce factory and in land SW of Goodwood Motor Circuit. Why was this removed from the previous Local Plan. Seems non logical.

Full text:

Why no site designated for employment north of the city centre . Residents living within the SDNP would need to travel to the city, or south of the city, for work putting extra onus on local roads and adding to the current congestion. Allocating land outside of the SDNP for employment , but close enough to residents living within the SDNP , would seem sensible. This is especially so close to the Rolls Royce factory and in land SW of Goodwood Motor Circuit. Why was this removed from the previous Local Plan. Seems non logical.

Object

Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035

Representation ID: 926

Received: 05/02/2019

Respondent: Mr Pieter Montyn

Representation Summary:

Para 4.56 quotes the 2035 HEDNA requirement in Policy S8 for 231,835 sq.m or 23.2 hectares of new employment space;
Para 4.57 shows this is to be achieved through combination of additional space at AL 1 (6 ha), AL 2 (4 ha), and AL15 (2.4 ha), this leaves 11 ha at AL6-not 33 ha as quoted in AL6 Section. AL 5 will also have 0.9 ha of employment space.
11 ha can be accommodated spread over other sites with better connections and not requiring a costly environmentally damaging link road; AL 6 should be disregarded for employment space.

Full text:

Para 4.56 quotes the 2035 HEDNA requirement in Policy S8 for 231,835 sq.m or 23.2 hectares of new employment space;
Para 4.57 shows this is to be achieved through combination of additional space at AL 1 (6 ha), AL 2 (4 ha), and AL15 (2.4 ha), this leaves 11 ha at AL6-not 33 ha as quoted in AL6 Section. AL 5 will also have 0.9 ha of employment space.
11 ha can be accommodated spread over other sites with better connections and not requiring a costly environmentally damaging link road; AL 6 should be disregarded for employment space.

Support

Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035

Representation ID: 1275

Received: 06/02/2019

Respondent: HMPC Ltd

Representation Summary:

Support - additional employment sites offered. Compliance criteria should be reviewed to ensure control when planning policy might have limited influence.

Full text:

The Plan's commitment to developing a strong and thriving economy is supported by the Estate, which together with Rolls-Royce lying within its grounds, is a major economic driver in the District. In recognition the Estate supports, subject to some modification, the introduction of a new policy for the Goodwood Motor Circuit and Aerodrome, which recognises its importance to the local economy. In addition, and following the success of Rolls-Royce, the Estate wishes to promote two of its potential development sites for employment use. This would make appropriate provision for any expansion of Rolls-Royce, or a complimentary business(es). The sites at Westhampnett (Goodwood Sites 14 and 15 as promoted through the annual call for housing sites) alongside the site recently transformed to provide a car park for Rolls-Royce (Site 17) are ideally placed for employment use as a priority through this plan. The Estate will welcome the opportunity to discuss this opportunity further with the council.

The safeguarding of employment sites from unjustified loss is welcomed but this should be more robustly justified in paragraphs 7.53 - 7.60 and Policy DM9. In particular, how the policies of the Local Plan will take precedence over National Policy and Guidance set out in the NPPF and revisions to the General Permitted Development Order, where the proposal conflicts with the aims and objectives of the Local Plan. Compliance criteria are provided for use when considering the loss of existing employment sites but it is difficult to see how these would preclude conversions or redevelopments where planning policy might have limited influence.

Comment

Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035

Representation ID: 1586

Received: 07/02/2019

Respondent: Mr Robert Probee

Representation Summary:

These sites are all in the south. Why no area to the north of the plan area?

Full text:

These sites are all in the south. Why no area to the north of the plan area?

Object

Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035

Representation ID: 1639

Received: 07/02/2019

Respondent: Mr Dominic Stratton

Representation Summary:

Consideration needs to be made for employment sites to the North of the city.

Full text:

4.57 Makes no mention of employment site to the North of the city. This should be included in the plan to facilitate employment sites for those residents of CDC area outside of the local plan area that are likely to move to Chichester to become economically active. Only focusing on the other peripheral areas and in particular the South West means increased traffic journeys for staff or prospective staff to get to the workplace. Building employment space outside the SDNP but to the North of Chichester is essential to unlock access to employment opportunities from residents of the SDNP. Common sense business gravitas and business growth is achieved by collocation of grouped businesses. As a result the benefits of employment site development in the Goodwood Westhampnett area delivers a motor technical base and benefits all businesses in that sector. No mention is made of collocating like business that can have huge business benefit and the effects to the local economy for raised income and business profit.

Object

Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035

Representation ID: 1670

Received: 07/02/2019

Respondent: Mrs Claire Stratton

Representation Summary:

no mention of employment site to the North of the city. This should be included in the plan to facilitate employment sites for those residents of CDC area outside of the local plan area that are likely to move to Chichester to become economically active. Only focusing on the other peripheral areas and in particular the South West means increased traffic journeys for staff or prospective staff to get to the workplace. Building employment space outside the SDNP but to the North of Chichester is essential to unlock access to employment opportunities from residents of the SDNP.

Full text:

no mention of employment site to the North of the city. This should be included in the plan to facilitate employment sites for those residents of CDC area outside of the local plan area that are likely to move to Chichester to become economically active. Only focusing on the other peripheral areas and in particular the South West means increased traffic journeys for staff or prospective staff to get to the workplace. Building employment space outside the SDNP but to the North of Chichester is essential to unlock access to employment opportunities from residents of the SDNP.

Comment

Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035

Representation ID: 1717

Received: 07/02/2019

Respondent: Harbour Villages Lib Dems Campaign Team

Representation Summary:

4.52
We support the need for business and employment. This must though be well paid high quality jobs. Developing land for warehousing is not acceptable.

Full text:

4.52
We support the need for business and employment. This must though be well paid high quality jobs. Developing land for warehousing is not acceptable.

Comment

Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035

Representation ID: 2892

Received: 05/02/2019

Respondent: Councillor Christopher Page

Representation Summary:

Para 4.57 Allocations of Land: such allocation must take into account the need to safeguard production of food

Full text:

See attachment

Attachments:

Support

Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035

Representation ID: 2966

Received: 07/02/2019

Respondent: MR William Sharp

Representation Summary:

Strong support for improvements to "telecommunications" (particularly with the advent of 5G now on the horizon).

Full text:

See attachment

Attachments:

Support

Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035

Representation ID: 2993

Received: 04/02/2019

Respondent: Mrs Sarah Sharp

Representation Summary:

The interspersal of flexible working space close to housing reduces the need to travel.

Full text:

See attachment

Attachments: