Chichester Local Plan 2021 - 2039: Proposed Submission

Object

Representation ID: 5139

Received: 16/03/2023

Respondent: South Downs National Park Authority

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

It is noted that a substantial number of new homes are proposed on the A259 corridor between Emsworth and Chichester. This is a sensitive stretch of land in the coastal plain between the coast, the south coast railway and the A27. This corridor provides the connection, including intervisibility, between the protected landscapes of the South Downs National Park and Chichester Harbour AONB, for example views of the channels within the Harbour from the Trundle and Stoke Clump. The amendments to policy set out earlier in this consultation response will help to ensure that development coming forward in this sensitive area positively addresses the South Downs National Park and its setting.
It is noted that several settlements around the South Downs National Park have been given a figure to be identified through either Neighbourhood Development Plans or through a potential future Site Allocations DPD. We particularly note Southbourne (1,050 homes), Wisborough Green (75 homes), (Kirdford (50 homes) and Boxgrove (50 homes). We raise concern about these figures and the challenge neighbourhood planning groups may have as many potential sites in these areas are likely to be in the setting of the South Downs National Park. It will be important that attempts to meet these target figures address the requirements of NPPF paragraph 176 on setting.

See response to comments on Policy NE2

Support

Representation ID: 5140

Received: 16/03/2023

Respondent: South Downs National Park Authority

We welcome reference in policy A9 Land at Westhampnett/North East Chichester to provision of green links to the South Downs National Park (criterion 4) and the need for design with special regard to the landscape sensitivity of the site.

Support noted

Support

Representation ID: 5141

Received: 16/03/2023

Respondent: South Downs National Park Authority

We note the findings of the latest GTAA (2022) which is for the area of Chichester district outside the SDNP. The additional pitch provision needs set out in Table 5.1 and 5.2 are for Chichester outside the SDNP only.

We would highlight that there is limited capacity in the National Park to allocate sites for Gypsies and Travellers through duty to cooperate, given significant landscape constraints. Indeed, the protection afforded to National Parks is such that unmet need in the South Downs National Park may be displaced to other (non-designated) authorities outside the National Park.

Policies H11, H12 and H13 are supported, including the mechanisms for making provision for travellers accommodation, i.e. provision of pitches on new strategic allocations and appropriate intensification of existing authorised sites.

We’d welcome continued joint working between the coastal authorities and the South Downs National Park Authority in regard to addressing the need.

The comments are noted and the council is happy to continue joint working with neighbouring authorities, including the SDNP. However, given the extremely high need within the plan area it is not likely to be realistic for the council to accommodate additional pitches from elsewhere.

Support

Representation ID: 5142

Received: 16/03/2023

Respondent: South Downs National Park Authority

We note the findings of the latest GTAA (2022) which is for the area of Chichester district outside the SDNP. The additional pitch provision needs set out in Table 5.1 and 5.2 are for Chichester outside the SDNP only.

We would highlight that there is limited capacity in the National Park to allocate sites for Gypsies and Travellers through duty to cooperate, given significant landscape constraints. Indeed, the protection afforded to National Parks is such that unmet need in the South Downs National Park may be displaced to other (non-designated) authorities outside the National Park.
Policies H11, H12 and H13 are supported, including the mechanisms for making provision for travellers accommodation, i.e. provision of pitches on new strategic allocations and appropriate intensification of existing authorised sites.

We’d welcome continued joint working between the coastal authorities and the South Downs National Park Authority in regard to addressing the need.

The comments are noted and the council is happy to continue joint working with neighbouring authorities, including the SDNP. However, given the extremely high need within the plan area it is not likely to be realistic for the council to accommodate additional pitches from elsewhere.

Support

Representation ID: 5143

Received: 16/03/2023

Respondent: South Downs National Park Authority

We note the findings of the latest GTAA (2022) which is for the area of Chichester district outside the SDNP. The additional pitch provision needs set out in Table 5.1 and 5.2 are for Chichester outside the SDNP only.

We would highlight that there is limited capacity in the National Park to allocate sites for Gypsies and Travellers through duty to cooperate, given significant landscape constraints. Indeed, the protection afforded to National Parks is such that unmet need in the South Downs National Park may be displaced to other (non-designated) authorities outside the National Park.
Policies H11, H12 and H13 are supported, including the mechanisms for making provision for travellers accommodation, i.e. provision of pitches on new strategic allocations and appropriate intensification of existing authorised sites.

We’d welcome continued joint working between the coastal authorities and the South Downs National Park Authority in regard to addressing the need.

The comments are noted and the council is happy to continue joint working with neighbouring authorities, including the SDNP. However, given the extremely high need within the plan area it is not likely to be realistic for the council to accommodate additional pitches from elsewhere.

Object

Representation ID: 5144

Received: 16/03/2023

Respondent: South Downs National Park Authority

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

We would highlight that the transport assessment carried out to inform the South Downs Local Plan indicated a potential severe impact on the Petersfield Road / Bepton Road / Rumbolds Hill junction in Midhurst of additional development in the town, in the context of junctions already becoming overcapacity due to background traffic growth, for example, arising from strategic development in neighbouring planning authorities. Rumbolds Hill in Midhurst is also a designated Air Quality Management Area which came into force in January 2020.
It is noted from the Transport Assessment that there is expected to be some increase in traffic on the A286 towards Midhurst, although it is not clear from the study how this will impact the relevant junctions in Midhurst, including the designated Rumbolds Hill AQMA. SDNPA may seek further assurance that such potential impacts have been looked at, and appropriate mitigation sought.

The evidence base to support the Local Plan has considered neighbouring local authorities including South Downs National Park Authority (SDNPA), East Hampshire District Council (EHDC), Waverley Borough Council (WBC) and Horsham District Council (HDC). This has been supported by on-going discussions with these and other local authorities in the course of preparing the Local Plan.
A further update has been incorporated into the Transport Study (2024).

Object

Representation ID: 6261

Received: 16/03/2023

Respondent: South Downs National Park Authority

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Note policy NE13, a dedicated policy for addressing the AONB and its setting and suggest that an equivalent policy covering key matters relevant for the South Downs National Park would be appropriate.

NE13 covers development within the Chichester Harbour AONB which is in the plan area.

NE2 refers to the SDNP