Chichester Local Plan 2021 - 2039: Proposed Submission
Search representations
Results for Manhood Peninsular Action Group search
New searchObject
Chichester Local Plan 2021 - 2039: Proposed Submission
1.2
Representation ID: 4878
Received: 17/03/2023
Respondent: Manhood Peninsular Action Group
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? No
There has not been sufficient, recent public consultation. The last stage was in January 2019 on the Preferred Option as confirmed by the latest Statement of Community Involvement published in November 2018. Neither has there been published a Statement
of Common Ground. It is recommended that this be published at same time as Regulation 19 i.e. Proposed Submission of Draft Local Plan [Feb 2023]. Much has changed in four years, including government commitments to tackle Climate Change and Sustainable Transport.
Water, sewerage, sea level rise, pollution have all worsened all of which must be taken into account
There has not been sufficient, recent public consultation. The last stage was in January
2019 on the Preferred Option as confirmed by the latest Statement of Community
Involvement published in November 2018. Neither has there been published a Statement
of Common Ground. It is recommended that this be published at same time as Regulation
19 i.e. Proposed Submission of Draft Local Plan [Feb 2023]. Much has changed in four years,
including government commitments to tackle Climate Change and Sustainable Transport.
Water, sewerage, sea level rise, pollution have all worsened all of which must be taken into account
There is considerable flexibility open to LPAs in how the initial stages of local plan production are carried out and there is no requirement to have a further Regulation 18 consultation.
A Statement of Compliance (January 2023) with the Duty to Cooperate was published alongside the Regulation 19 Local Plan.
Object
Chichester Local Plan 2021 - 2039: Proposed Submission
Policy T1: Transport Infrastructure
Representation ID: 4900
Received: 17/03/2023
Respondent: Manhood Peninsular Action Group
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Yes
Current proposals will do nothing to improve the traffic flow on the A27
Relying on developers contributions to resolve the issues of over capacity on the A27 is totally inadequate..It will not help local traffic and through traffic will suffer further delays of a much long duration.
There needs to be substantial investment from Highways England to provide more capacity and reduce the accidents occurring on this road.
Contributions to the two A27 roundabouts for the uncommitted housing, 3351, about 40% of
total, is assessed at £7,728 per house at current prices. This is 4 times higher than
current level of £1,803. Nowhere does there appear to be an assessment as to whether this
is viable for the land developers and house buyers. Viability is a key test with regard to
deliverability but the Plan is silent on this key issue. So, is the plan deliverable? Does it
further price first-time buyers out of the market. Chichester
has already one of the highest Ratio of Affordability in Sussex .
Both the Local Plan Transport Study (2024) and the Plan (for example in paragraph 8.5) make it clear that the council has continued to seek Government funding for the infrastructure works, but there is no certainty that this will be received. It is therefore necessary to rely on developer funding to secure the mitigation required to allow further development to proceed. Further funding (which is also likely to come in part at least from developer contributions) will also be required to address traffic capacity issues on the local road network.
Object
Chichester Local Plan 2021 - 2039: Proposed Submission
Policy H2 Strategic Locations/ Allocations 2021 - 2039
Representation ID: 5651
Received: 17/03/2023
Respondent: Manhood Peninsular Action Group
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? Not specified
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Is the strategy reasonable and appropriate? By assuming that infrastructure will be funded in line with land release for housing but with no phasing proposed and no commitment to fund by National Highways; despite having £15m already, [and also in relation to waste water treatment improvements from Southern Water] then it does not pass this test. Surely, infrastructure needs should be met before more land is released, but there are no strategic phasing policies for housing. As is set out in Policy H1 6386 houses are already built or committed, that is 62% of the total allocation, and equivalent to 11 years of the annual requirement, meeting more than twice the 5-year land supply requirement.
It is proposed therefore that Policy H2 Strategic Locations/Allocations 2021- 2039 be amended so that the following strategic sites: A2, 4, 5, 8, 10, 11 and 13 are only released one year after work commences on the A27 improvements at the Fishbourne and Bognor roundabouts, and, where appropriate, waste water treatment works.
Contributions to the two A27 roundabouts for the uncommitted housing, 3351, about 40% of
total, is assessed at £7,728 per house at current prices. This is 4 times higher than
current level of £1,803. Nowhere does there appear to be an assessment as to whether this
is viable for the land developers and house buyers. Viability is a key test with regard to
deliverability but the Plan is silent on this key issue. So, is the plan deliverable? Does it
further price first-time buyers out of the market. Chichester
has already one of the highest Ratio of Affordability in Sussex .
Policy I1 requires infrastructure and its timing to be secured by way of condition or legal requirement. It is those conditions or legal agreements that will set out the detailed phasing and housing triggers.
It would not be practical to prevent all development from being provided until all accompanying infrastructure is completed as that would not be economically viable.
In relation to wastewater infrastructure the current position is set out in the Statement of Common Ground with Southern Water.
