Chichester Local Plan 2021 - 2039: Proposed Submission

Object

Representation ID: 4070

Received: 14/03/2023

Respondent: Southbourne Parish Council

Legally compliant? No

Sound? Yes

Duty to co-operate? No

“Residential development within the catchment of the Thornham Wastewater Treatment Works, a drainage impact assessment should show that the development complies with the principles set out in the latest Thornham Position Statement"
There is a line in the TPS which states: "There is at present no certainty of a deliverable solution for the Thornham catchment and any solution will take time to deliver."
Why is development being proposed in Southbourne when there is no guarantee that appropriate waste water treatment can be provided at the right time?

The drainage assessment is required in order to assess compliance, so the additional wording is unnecessary.

Support

Representation ID: 4355

Received: 16/03/2023

Respondent: Southbourne Parish Council

A substantial part of Southbourne Parish lies within the AONB and the Harbour provides a very important and protected resource for wildlife, with access to both local residents and visitors. The Parish Council, for its part, recognises this and intends to do all it can to protect and enhance the Harbour’s natural beauty and character.

Comment noted

Object

Representation ID: 4359

Received: 16/03/2023

Respondent: Southbourne Parish Council

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

The proportion of 3/4/4+ bedroom market dwellings adds to 50-65% whereas 1/2 bedroom dwellings amount to only 35-50%. These proportions should be the other way round. One and two-bedroom dwellings (bungalows/apartments/terrace houses) are what is needed which would then release existing larger housing stock.

The housing mix is based on the latest evidence set out in the HEDNA 2022. Consequently, the indicative percentages are considered to be appropriate

Object

Representation ID: 4363

Received: 16/03/2023

Respondent: Southbourne Parish Council

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Needs to include a positive statement of having the goal to minimize light pollution.

Minimising light pollution is implicit in paragraph 4.127 which sets out that the design of lighting schemes should be carefully considered to prevent light spillage and glare. Planning Practice Guidance on Light Pollution makes reference to efficient lamp and luminaire selection as well as other measures for reducing the impact of lighting – national guidance is referred to at criterion 1 of the policy.

Object

Representation ID: 4364

Received: 16/03/2023

Respondent: Southbourne Parish Council

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Needs to specify requirement for energy-efficient forms of lighting.

Minimising light pollution is implicit in paragraph 4.127 which sets out that the design of lighting schemes should be carefully considered to prevent light spillage and glare. Planning Practice Guidance on Light Pollution makes reference to efficient lamp and luminaire selection as well as other measures for reducing the impact of lighting – national guidance is referred to at criterion 1 of the policy.

Object

Representation ID: 4365

Received: 16/03/2023

Respondent: Southbourne Parish Council

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Ref. Bullet point 4. A requirement needs to be added regarding the use of cowls and careful directional lighting.

Minimising light pollution is implicit in paragraph 4.127 which sets out that the design of lighting schemes should be carefully considered to prevent light spillage and glare. Planning Practice Guidance on Light Pollution makes reference to efficient lamp and luminaire selection as well as other measures for reducing the impact of lighting – national guidance is referred to at criterion 1 of the policy.

Object

Representation ID: 5240

Received: 16/03/2023

Respondent: Southbourne Parish Council

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Bullet 9

Summary: At present the Wildlife Corridor area shown around the Ham Brook differs between the Local Plan and the Neighbourhood Plan. The Wildlife Corridor should be larger as shown in the Southbourne Parish Neighbourhood Plan, Submission Modified Plan 2014 – 2029 Ham Brook Strategic Wildlife Corridor Map (Plan D, page 47). The results of surveys commissioned by the District Council confirm this, as do the more thorough surveys commissioned by the Parish Council and validated by the Sussex Biodiversity Record Centre.

It is not clear whether the Map prepared by the District Council is definitive, or a strategic guideline. The Local Plan (Policy NE4, Map NE4a and para. 4.16) appears to confirm that the boundaries are definitive. However, District Council officers in discussion with officers of the South Downs National Park (Duty to Cooperate Statement of Compliance Jan 2023, page 38) it appears that that it was agreed that details would be agreed through Neighbourhood Plans. This conflict requires rectification.

Conclusion - The Wildlife corridor should be extended to include the area shown in the Neighbourhood Plan on the basis of the evidence secured by both District and Parish Councils. Confirmation is required about whether boundaries are defined in the Local Plan or in Neighbourhood Plans.

The Strategic Wildlife Corridors Background Paper (June 2024) sets out details of the methodology used to identify the location and extent of the corridors.

Object

Representation ID: 5241

Received: 16/03/2023

Respondent: Southbourne Parish Council

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Bullet 2

Legal Compliance – The Parish Council was not consulted about this part of Policy A13 or Policies H11, H12, H13 or H14 until now. Parish Councils are listed as one of the bodies the District Council must consult under the Town and Country Planning (Local Planning) (England) Regulations 2012. (See also Para. 3.4 of the Local Plan Statement of Community Involvement).
Soundness – The proposed intensification of the site at Sunrise in Southbourne is not deliverable (Policy H12 – Proposed 1 additional pitch at Sunrise as shown in Local Plan Appendix I).

As set out in the Gypsy and Traveller and Travelling Showpeople Background Paper (May 2024), the Council have explored a number of options for pitch/plot delivery. This has included a ’Call for Sites’ and an assessment of the potential for intensification on existing Gypsy and Traveller sites but the likely provision arising from these sources does not meet the assessed level of pitch or plot need, requiring provision to be made on the proposed strategic housing sites. Specifically, in terms of Travelling Showpeople, the majority of the plot need arising is from the Priors Leaze Lane site at Southbourne and, as such, it is considered appropriate for the need to be met within the same locality.

Object

Representation ID: 5245

Received: 16/03/2023

Respondent: Southbourne Parish Council

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Bullet 1
The evidence explaining why there has been a reduction from 1250 to 1050 dwellings as set out in the District Council “Southbourne Broad Location for Development Background Paper (Jan 2023)” is incorrect. Should the housing numbers for the Local Plan be increased across the parishes for any reason, it is important that they are not increased in Southbourne. This is because it has been acknowledged by the District Council that 1050 additional dwellings are the most that should be accommodated in the period to 2039. The Parish Council considers that more than 1050 dwellings would be likely to compromise other policies in the Local Plan, probably give rise to market saturation locally and also pose problems integrating new residents with those already living in the village.

Planning permission for the 199 dwellings north of Cooks Lane was granted prior to the base date of the Local Plan.

Comments regarding an increase in the housing figure for Southbourne is noted. A higher housing number was considered but it was determined that there was no certainty of a higher quantum of development being delivered during the plan period due to infrastructure capacity constraints (Sustainability Appraisal - Section 7).

Object

Representation ID: 5246

Received: 16/03/2023

Respondent: Southbourne Parish Council

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Refers to bullets 2 and 3

Legal Compliance – The PC has not been consulted about this part of Policy A13 (or Policies H11 - H14) until now. Parish Councils are listed as one of the bodies the District Council must consult under the Town and Country Planning (Local Planning) (England) Regulations 2012 (see also Para. 3.4 of the Local Plan Statement of Community Involvement). Twelve new pitches and 12 new plots is a considerable number to accommodate in addition to those already occupied within the parish and therefore it is considered appropriate to raise an objection (see response to Policy H11).

Soundness – The proposed intensification of the site at Sunrise in Southbourne is not deliverable (Policy H12 – Proposed 1 additional pitch at Sunrise as shown in Local Plan Appendix I) – see response to Policy H12.

As set out in the Gypsy and Traveller and Travelling Showpeople Background Paper (May 2024), the Council have explored a number of options for pitch/plot delivery. This has included a ’Call for Sites’ and an assessment of the potential for intensification on existing Gypsy and Traveller sites but the likely provision arising from these sources does not meet the assessed level of pitch or plot need, requiring provision to be made on the proposed strategic housing sites. Specifically, in terms of Travelling Showpeople, the majority of the plot need arising is from the Priors Leaze Lane site at Southbourne and, as such, it is considered appropriate for the need to be met within the same locality