Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035

Comment

Representation ID: 3066

Received: 06/02/2019

Respondent: Chichester Harbour Conservancy

Page 25, 3.13 Manhood Peninsula:
"Local industries such as horticulture, agriculture, fishing and tourism will flourish with a particular focus on local food production."

3.13 does not make sense. There is no evidence that building more dwellings will result in these industries flourishing.

Object

Representation ID: 3067

Received: 06/02/2019

Respondent: Chichester Harbour Conservancy

Thorney Island is entirely within Chichester Harbour AONB. However, Policy S17 provides unprecedented support for developments on Thorney Island for military use, if they have regard for the range of environment designations.

Chichester Harbour Conservancy objects to the wording of "have regard" because it is weak terminology and open to misinterpretation, i.e. what the Conservancy considers "have regard" to mean may be different to what the Ministry of Defence considers "have regard" to mean.

Comment

Representation ID: 3068

Received: 06/02/2019

Respondent: Chichester Harbour Conservancy

Suggest rewording opening paragraph of Policy S18

Comment

Representation ID: 3069

Received: 06/02/2019

Respondent: Chichester Harbour Conservancy

It is unclear whether all of 1-13 need to be met in order to satisfy the policy.

Comment

Representation ID: 3070

Received: 06/02/2019

Respondent: Chichester Harbour Conservancy

The wording of S21 is very general. The commitment from the LPA towards this new policy does not come across.

Comment

Representation ID: 3071

Received: 06/02/2019

Respondent: Chichester Harbour Conservancy

There is a lack of evidence supporting this important policy.

Object

Representation ID: 3073

Received: 06/02/2019

Respondent: Chichester Harbour Conservancy

Page 82, 5.37 Countryside and Countryside Gaps:
Refers to "the special characteristics of Chichester and Pagham Harbours."

Firstly, the two Harbours should be kept separate; and secondly, Chichester Harbour has a list of 10 special qualities that constitute the AONB designation. These are not "characteristics" and they do not apply to Pagham Harbour. The wording is inaccurate and misleading, indicating a lack of understanding by the LPA.

Comment

Representation ID: 3074

Received: 06/02/2019

Respondent: Chichester Harbour Conservancy

Clarification in text:
For the first line of the policy, we suggest the word "only" is inserted in between "will" and "be."

Object

Representation ID: 3075

Received: 06/02/2019

Respondent: Chichester Harbour Conservancy

Page 84, 5.46 The Coast:
Firstly, there is no mention of the Special Protection Area (SPA).

Secondly, the wording is unclear whether the Local Plan is referring to the Chichester District coastline, inclusive of Chichester Harbour, or whether it is referring just to the coast outside of the Harbour.

Comment

Representation ID: 3076

Received: 06/02/2019

Respondent: Chichester Harbour Conservancy

Firstly, it is not the "Chichester Harbour Conservancy Harbour Management Plan." It should be called the "Chichester Harbour AONB Management Plan." This also applies to: 7.59, page 151; and the appendix, page 229.

Secondly, on the topic of flood defence, Chichester District Council are advised that Chichester Harbour Conservancy and Royal Haskoning DHV have published guidance for installing, replacing or strengthening shoreline defences in Chichester Harbour AONB. Reference could be made to that document here:

https://www.conservancy.co.uk/page/planning

Thirdly, a reference could be made to coastal squeeze.