Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035
Search representations
Results for North Mundham Parish Council search
New searchComment
Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035
Settlement Hierachy
Representation ID: 1243
Received: 06/02/2019
Respondent: North Mundham Parish Council
It is not clear how may of the 'services and facilities' are required to designate an area as a 'Service Village'
It is not clear how may of the 'services and facilities' are required to designate an area as a 'Service Village'
Comment
Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035
Development Strategy
Representation ID: 1244
Received: 06/02/2019
Respondent: North Mundham Parish Council
It is not clear how the required expansion of Service Villages (4.18) is reconciled with protecting the countryside (4.20)
It is not clear how the required expansion of Service Villages (4.18) is reconciled with protecting the countryside (4.20)
Object
Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035
Meeting Housing Needs
Representation ID: 1245
Received: 06/02/2019
Respondent: North Mundham Parish Council
No justification is presented for the requirement to accommodate the unmet needs of the South Downs National Park, at the expense of an area already constrained by the need to protect the Chichester Harbour ANOB and the Pagham Harbour SPA
No justification is presented for the requirement to accommodate the unmet needs of the South Downs National Park, at the expense of an area already constrained by the need to protect the Chichester Harbour ANOB and the Pagham Harbour SPA
Object
Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035
Policy S4: Meeting Housing Needs
Representation ID: 1246
Received: 06/02/2019
Respondent: North Mundham Parish Council
Allocating 9,956 houses in the East-West Corridor and 1,933 houses on the Manhood Peninsula within the Plan period will significantly impact on Chichester Harbour AONB, Pagham Harbour and the coastal fringe.
Allocating 9,956 houses in the East-West Corridor and 1,933 houses on the Manhood Peninsula within the Plan period will significantly impact on Chichester Harbour AONB, Pagham Harbour and the coastal fringe.
Comment
Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035
Affordable Housing
Representation ID: 1247
Received: 06/02/2019
Respondent: North Mundham Parish Council
The aspiration that affordable housing should be indistinguishable from market housing in terms of external appearance etc is difficult to reconcile with the existing practice which means that affordable housing is distinguished by not having garages
The aspiration that affordable housing should be indistinguishable from market housing in terms of external appearance etc is difficult to reconcile with the existing practice which means that affordable housing is distinguished by not having garages
Comment
Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035
Policy S6: Affordable Housing
Representation ID: 1248
Received: 06/02/2019
Respondent: North Mundham Parish Council
The aspiration that affordable housing should be indistinguishable from market housing in terms of external appearance etc is difficult to reconcile with the existing practice which means that affordable housing is distinguished by not having garages
The aspiration that affordable housing should be indistinguishable from market housing in terms of external appearance etc is difficult to reconcile with the existing practice which means that affordable housing is distinguished by not having garages
Comment
Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035
Addressing Horticultural Needs
Representation ID: 1249
Received: 06/02/2019
Respondent: North Mundham Parish Council
It is acknowledged that Runcton HDA is almost at capacity including current extant permissions. But paragraph 4.79 also states that land adjacent to the HDA can also be considered suitable for development. Bearing in mind the comment about lack of capacity within the Runcton HDA (4.78.2), what is the justification for the reductions in area in the north of the HDA (4.78.4) shown on the policies map?
It is acknowledged that Runcton HDA is almost at capacity including current extant permissions. But paragraph 4.79 also states that land adjacent to the HDA can also be considered suitable for development. Bearing in mind the comment about lack of capacity within the Runcton HDA (4.78.2), what is the justification for the reductions in area in the north of the HDA (4.78.4) shown on the policies map?
Object
Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035
Policy S11: Addressing Horticultural Needs
Representation ID: 1250
Received: 06/02/2019
Respondent: North Mundham Parish Council
The wording of the policy which makes provision for glasshouses and polytunnels development has been interpreted to allow packhouse development on the Runcton HDA which is far in excess of that required to handle the produce grown on the HDA. This has led to a loss of valuable high-grade agricultural land which has been acknowledged as being in short supply, and has a severely detrimental effect on the landscape.
The wording of the policy which makes provision for glasshouses and polytunnels development has been interpreted to allow packhouse development on the Runcton HDA which is far in excess of that required to handle the produce grown on the HDA. This has led to a loss of valuable high-grade agricultural land which has been acknowledged as being in short supply, and has a severely detrimental effect on the landscape.
Comment
Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035
Providing Supporting Infrastructure and Services
Representation ID: 1251
Received: 06/02/2019
Respondent: North Mundham Parish Council
The difficulty of finding funding for the necessary infrastructure provision is difficult to reconcile with the need for affordable housing in the district, particularly in the parishes identified as Service Villages. Without a viability study it is difficult to justify the projected housing figures in the Plan
The difficulty of finding funding for the necessary infrastructure provision is difficult to reconcile with the need for affordable housing in the district, particularly in the parishes identified as Service Villages. Without a viability study it is difficult to justify the projected housing figures in the Plan
Comment
Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035
Policy S12: Infrastructure Provision
Representation ID: 1252
Received: 06/02/2019
Respondent: North Mundham Parish Council
Past performance and evidence from the local foul sewer performance indicate that the local planning authority has been far too ready to accept the assurances of the utility provider that adequate capacity exists.
Past performance and evidence from the local foul sewer performance indicate that the local planning authority has been far too ready to accept the assurances of the utility provider that adequate capacity exists.
