Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035

Object

Representation ID: 2922

Received: 06/02/2019

Respondent: CPRE Sussex

We understand that this is a key aspect of the plan, but we are concerned at the loss of green fields and agricultural land involved. If there is such a development, we welcome the protection of named sites and the suggestion of possible enhancements (net gain). We also welcome the recognition of the need for mitigation in relation to special protection areas.

Object

Representation ID: 2923

Received: 06/02/2019

Respondent: CPRE Sussex

This major development is directly adjacent to the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) and it is inevitable that it will have both a direct and indirect negative impact on this protected landscape. Add considerably to the negative impact through air, soil and light pollution. Falls within the SSSI impact zone. Construction planned on a flood plain. Proper consultation has not taken place with the Harbour Conservancy on this proposal. No evidence is presented of an environmental audit of this area adjacent to the AONB. we fully endorse all the objections and comments submitted by the Chichester Harbour Conservancy

Object

Representation ID: 2924

Received: 06/02/2019

Respondent: CPRE Sussex

We are similarly (re AL6) concerned about this proposal and its proximity to, and negative impact on, the AONB.

Comments re AL6 and AONB:
- direct and indirect negative impact on protected landscape.
- No evidence is presented of an environmental audit of this area adjacent to the AONB, which is essential before any such proposal can be considered properly.

Object

Representation ID: 2925

Received: 06/02/2019

Respondent: CPRE Sussex

Major development around East Wittering seen as having negative impact on area. There are reassuring words in policy about impact of developments and mitigation, but unclear how these worthy aims can be achieved here. Plan refers to "promoting sustainable transport options". Additional housing in area can only exacerbate transport problems. Short of everyone using the cycleway, it is hard to envisage how this area can cope with yet further residents. Aware many new houses in the area purchased as second homes. Any development here should be strongly slanted towards affordable homes for local people. Policy does not promote that approach.

Comment

Representation ID: 2926

Received: 06/02/2019

Respondent: CPRE Sussex

We are concerned at the lack of any reference here to biodiversity or wildlife which, compared with other policies, suggests it will have no priority in this part of the plan.

Comment

Representation ID: 2927

Received: 06/02/2019

Respondent: CPRE Sussex

We strongly support significant inclusion of affordable housing in the plan, but this is not strong enough as a general policy.

Comment

Representation ID: 2928

Received: 06/02/2019

Respondent: CPRE Sussex

In terms of point 7, it is not enough to simply require an air quality assessment. The policy should also require any necessary air quality management and mitigation measures arising from the development, and identified in the AQ assessment, to be carried out and secured by planning condition or by legal agreement.

Object

Representation ID: 2929

Received: 06/02/2019

Respondent: CPRE Sussex

Policy needs to more closely linked to national policy as set out in NPPF paragraph 172. Policy fails to explain purpose of AONB designation and implications this has for the control of new development. We agree that "The flatness of the landscape makes the AONB particularly vulnerable to visual intrusion from inappropriate development, both within or adjacent to the boundary, which can often be seen from significant distances across inlets, the main harbour channels, or open countryside." And it is therefore right that the District Council will have particular regard to these characteristics in determining development proposals affecting the AONB."

Comment

Representation ID: 2930

Received: 06/02/2019

Respondent: CPRE Sussex

It is hard to relate this policy DM20 (development outside settlement boundaries on the coast) to policy S24 ( policies for development outside settlement boundaries in the countryside) . Please can you explain how S24 and DM24 sit together and whether they provide a consistent approach to the control of development outside settlement boundaries?

Comment

Representation ID: 2931

Received: 06/02/2019

Respondent: CPRE Sussex

This policy restricts development where it has a harmful impact on the wider landscape, but would benefit from an explicit reference to protecting the AONB.