Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035
Search representations
Results for Chichester Harbour Conservancy search
New searchComment
Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035
Policy DM: Accomodation for Gypsies, Travellers and Travelling Showpeople
Representation ID: 3100
Received: 06/02/2019
Respondent: Chichester Harbour Conservancy
There are a few opportunities for Chichester District Council to strengthen this policy.
See attachment
Comment
Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035
Policy DM6: Accomodation for Agricultural and other Rural Workers
Representation ID: 3101
Received: 06/02/2019
Respondent: Chichester Harbour Conservancy
The policy wording could be improved.
Please refer to Planning Principle 06 for guidance on how to improve the wording of this policy
https://www.conservancy.co.uk/page/planning - page 18
See attachment
Comment
Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035
Transport, Accessibility and Parking
Representation ID: 3102
Received: 06/02/2019
Respondent: Chichester Harbour Conservancy
Would like a site for a car park off Dell Quay Road to be allocated n the Plan.
See attachment
Comment
Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035
Policy DM8: Transport, Accessibility and Parking
Representation ID: 3103
Received: 06/02/2019
Respondent: Chichester Harbour Conservancy
It says under point 2:
"Development ...should not create or add to problems of ...air pollution, or other damage to the environment."
Practically, this is a policy set-up to fail because development under DM8 will almost certainly lead to increased air pollution, at the very least.
See attachment
Comment
Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035
Policy DM9: Existing Employment Sites
Representation ID: 3104
Received: 06/02/2019
Respondent: Chichester Harbour Conservancy
Under points 1. and 2. it is unclear what "no material increase in noise levels" and "unacceptable levels of traffic" means. It is unclear how this would be enforced.
The Conservancy would also like the policy to be extended to include this text:
"Existing marine, coastal and water-based employment sites will be retained to safeguard their contribution to the local economy. Planning permission will only be granted for alternative uses if the site can be demonstrated to be not-fit-for-purpose for a marine-related business and that any marine related business is unviable."
See attachment
Comment
Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035
Built Tourist and Leisure Development
Representation ID: 3105
Received: 06/02/2019
Respondent: Chichester Harbour Conservancy
Page 158, 7.80 Built Tourist and Leisure Development:
Given the comparative sizes of Chichester Harbour and Pagham Harbour, Chichester Harbour should be listed first, and Pagham Harbour second.
See attachment
Comment
Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035
Caravan and Camping Sites for Tourism
Representation ID: 3106
Received: 06/02/2019
Respondent: Chichester Harbour Conservancy
The Conservancy would support seasonal closures of caravan and camping sites within 1 kilometre of the AONB in accordance with the overwintering bird season, between 1 October and 31 March.
See attachment
Comment
Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035
Horticultural Development
Representation ID: 3107
Received: 06/02/2019
Respondent: Chichester Harbour Conservancy
Page 163, 7.97 Horticultural Development:
The biggest source of light pollution around the City of Chichester is from large-scale greenhouses. This should be much better regulated.
See attachment
Comment
Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035
Characteristics of the Plan Area
Representation ID: 3108
Received: 06/02/2019
Respondent: Chichester Harbour Conservancy
Page 166, 7.100 Sustainable Design and Construction:
"A key issue for the plan area is accommodating the development needs within environmental and landscape limitations, whilst promoting more sustainable patterns of
development through enabling improved accessibility to key services and facilities, public
transport nodes and employment opportunities."
This is central to the Local Plan and should be reproduced in 2.29 as a key challenge.
See attachment
Comment
Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035
Stand-alone Renewable Energy
Representation ID: 3109
Received: 06/02/2019
Respondent: Chichester Harbour Conservancy
Page 168, 7.106 Stand- alone Renewable Energy:
"Proposals should therefore be accompanied by a landscape assessment appropriate to the nature and scale of the proposal and its setting, especially near the South Downs National Park and designated areas, such as the Chichester Harbour Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty."
See attachment