DOCSLIB.ORG

Local Resident's Submissions to the Chichester District Council Electoral

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Local Resident's Submissions to the Chichester District Council Electoral Local resident’s submissions to the Chichester District Council electoral review This PDF document contains submissions from local residents. Some versions of Adobe allow the viewer to move quickly between bookmarks. Mayers, Mishka From: Alastair Alexander Sent: 05 October 2016 11:25 To: reviews Subject: Review of Chichester Wards Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged This is to advise that I believe the proposed Ward to include Bosham, Appledram, Fishbourne and Donnington is not a good combination of communities. Donnington does not have the same community issues as the others. In any case calling it Bosham and Donnington is a complete nonsense. I am in favour of it being called (if it must include these communities) the Harbour Villages Ward. Alastair Alexander Roman Landing 69 Fishbourne Road West CHICHESTER PO19 3JJ 1 Kingsley, Paul From: reviews Sent: 27 September 2016 10:30 To: Kingsley, Paul Subject: FW: Boundaries Elsted, Treyford and DIdling From: Fredericka Arrowsmith Sent: 26 September 2016 10:44 To: Subject: Re: Boundaries Elsted, Treyford and DIdling Dear Sir/Madame, I, too, also would like to express my wish for our Paris – Elsted, Treyford and Didling to remain in the Harting ward, as per the email below, citing the same reasons as Marie‐Claire Arrowsmith. I hope that you will not change the boundary at present which serves and suits our community very well, Yours faithfully, Fredericka Arrowsmith From: Marie‐Claire Arrowsmith Sent: 26 September 2016 10:30 To: [email protected] Cc: Subject: Boundaries Elsted, Treyford and DIdling Dear Sir/Madame I would like to express my wish for our Parish – Elsted, Treyford and Didling to remain in the Harting ward. At present we sit comfortably within this boundary, being well served and represented by the rural ward of Harting. Midhurst is an urban ward which will naturally have different concerns and needs to ours, I believe our interests would become subordinate to those of the town dwellers and therefore we would be less well served by a change of boundary. The school at Harting was enlarged to take the children of Elsted, Treyford and Didling and as a village is a natural destination with a thriving village shop and post office that serves local needs. When people of our parish need to shop it is mainly to Petersfield which guarantees better choice of provisions and parking. We also share the same church ward which further cements our villages sense of community and natural allegiance. I, therefore, sincerely hope that you will not change the present boundary of our ward. 1 Yours faithfully Marie‐Claire Arrowsmith 2 Kingsley, Paul From: reviews Sent: 27 September 2016 10:31 To: Kingsley, Paul Subject: FW: Boundaries Elsted, Treyford and DIdling From: Joe Arrowsmith Sent: 26 September 2016 10:48 To: Subject: Re: Boundaries Elsted, Treyford and DIdling Dear Email Recipient, Please don't move our parish of Treyford, Elsted cum Didling to become part of Midhurst. South Harting do well by us. Thank you Joseph Arrowsmith Sent from my iPhone On 26 Sep 2016, at 10:43, Fredericka Arrowsmith wrote: Dear Sir/Madame, I, too, also would like to express my wish for our Paris – Elsted, Treyford and Didling to remain in the Harting ward, as per the email below, citing the same reasons as Marie‐Claire Arrowsmith. I hope that you will not change the boundary at present which serves and suits our community very well, Yours faithfully, Fredericka Arrowsmith 1 From: Marie‐Claire Arrowsmith Sent: 26 September 2016 10:30 To: [email protected] Cc: Subject: Boundaries Elsted, Treyford and DIdling Dear Sir/Madame I would like to express my wish for our Parish – Elsted, Treyford and Didling to remain in the Harting ward. At present we sit comfortably within this boundary, being well served and represented by the rural ward of Harting. Midhurst is an urban ward which will naturally have different concerns and needs to ours, I believe our interests would become subordinate to those of the town dwellers and therefore we would be less well served by a change of boundary. The school at Harting was enlarged to take the children of Elsted, Treyford and Didling and as a village is a natural destination with a thriving village shop and post office that serves local needs. When people of our parish need to shop it is mainly to Petersfield which guarantees better choice of provisions and parking. We also share the same church ward which further cements our villages sense of community and natural allegiance. I, therefore, sincerely hope that you will not change the present boundary of our ward. Yours faithfully Marie‐Claire Arrowsmith 2 Kingsley, Paul From: reviews Sent: 27 September 2016 10:30 To: Kingsley, Paul Subject: FW: Boundaries Elsted, Treyford and DIdling From: Marie‐Claire Arrowsmith Sent: 26 September 2016 10:30 To: reviews <[email protected]> Cc: Subject: Boundaries Elsted, Treyford and DIdling Dear Sir/Madame I would like to express my wish for our Parish – Elsted, Treyford and Didling to remain in the Harting ward. At present we sit comfortably within this boundary, being well served and represented by the rural ward of Harting. Midhurst is an urban ward which will naturally have different concerns and needs to ours, I believe our interests would become subordinate to those of the town dwellers and therefore we would be less well served by a change of boundary. The school at Harting was enlarged to take the children of Elsted, Treyford and Didling and as a village is a natural destination with a thriving village shop and post office that serves local needs. When people of our parish need to shop it is mainly to Petersfield which guarantees better choice of provisions and parking. We also share the same church ward which further cements our villages sense of community and natural allegiance. I, therefore, sincerely hope that you will not change the present boundary of our ward. Yours faithfully Marie‐Claire Arrowsmith 1 8/23/2016 Local Boundary Commission for England Consultation Portal Chichester District Personal Details: Name: Roger Bannister E­mail: Postcode: Organisation Name: Comment text: I realise that our local representatives work very hard but in these days of financial constraint any scheme that saves money, providing that services are not compromised, is to be welcomed. Uploaded Documents: None Uploaded https://consultation.lgbce.org.uk/node/print/informed­representation/8692 1/1 Mayers, Mishka From: NICHOLAS SHRUBB Sent: 28 September 2016 08:31 To: reviews Subject: Proposed changes to Fishbourne Village Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Dear Sirs I have been a resident of Fishbourne Village since 1983 and have seen a number of changes during that time. Many of them have been positive but I am of the opinion that the proposed changes to amalgamate the villages of Fishbourne, Bosham, Donnington & Apuldram into one ward is not. I wish to raise an objection on 2 grounds. Firstly it is in contrast to our Neighbourhood plan and secondly I am fearful that the new ward may create a concept to others, particularly Developers and the Local Authority, that we are one planning unit. In recent years all four villages have had more than their share of housing development and it is very costly and time consuming to continually be fighting to hold on to the feeling of being one village community and preserving our agricultural land for future generations. Yours faithfully Marion Coombes-Shrubb (Mrs) 1 Mayers, Mishka From: Hand Sent: 02 October 2016 13:02 To: reviews Subject: Recommendations for Changes in Chichester District Council Wards Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Dear Review Officer (Chichester), I am writing to express my concern at the proposed new ward which will encompass Bosham, Fishbourne, Appledram and Donnington with three District Councillors, and I note your main considerations for an electoral review. Firstly having three councillors for a combined ward of four parishes seems less likely to be capable of "effective and convenient local government". One councillor responsible for a particular area would be more effective than three whose responsibilities are spread across the whole area, however they might be apportioned, presumably at the whim of the individuals concerned. Secondly, the proposed new ward currently entitled Bosham - Donnington does not reflect the actual area. By omitting Fishbourne and Appledram these parishes become of less noticeable importance to Bosham and Donnington. I recognise that Bosham and Donnington are probably named as the east and west extremes of the area but in people's mind they will become the dominant partners with the risk that Fishbourne and Appledram's interests will be under represented, whatever might be said or written down. Thirdly, and perhaps most importantly in the current climate of pressure to build houses wherever land can be bought, developers and planners are likely to perceive the whole new ward as one planning unit with detrimental effects on the availability of local facilities transport etc currently focused on the established settlement pattern. What is needed therefore in the name is something that preserves rather than obliterates the identities of the four individual villages and not one that focusses on just two of them. The name suggested by Fishbourne Parish Council of "Harbour Villages Ward" seems to describe the ward accurately and avoids the danger of the area beng perceived as one entity. Finally, a small historical note - Fishbourne suffered for years from being split between Bosham and Chichester at parish level, and after a long struggle achieved first a neighbourhood council and then a parish council in its own right. This was in the 1980s after which time it has been able to develop many community facilities and a community identity.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Chichester Harbour Management Plan (2009-14) First Review
    www.conservancy.co.uk May 2009 Map 1:ChichesterHarbourAONB Reproduced from or based upon 2008 Ordnance Survey material with permission of the Controller of HMSO © Crown Copyright reserved. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings. West Sussex County Council Licence No. 100023447. Contents Acknowledgements.......................................................................................2 Foreword.......................................................................................................2 Chichester Harbour and the AONB Management Plan ................................3 Part 1 - Background......................................................................................6 1. Special Qualities of Chichester Harbour AONB...................................6 2. The Vision for Chichester Harbour AONB ...........................................15 3. Managing Chichester Harbour AONB..................................................16 Part 2 - Policies and Actions .........................................................................21 1. The Role of the Harbour Authority .......................................................21 2. The Land and Seascape......................................................................25 3. Nature Conservation............................................................................30 4. Farming and the Farmed Landscape...................................................34 5. The Historic Environment ....................................................................38
    [Show full text]
  • To Tread Lightly on the Earth and Reduce the Environmental Load in My Local Community
    Sidlesham Litter Pickers – the results of litter picking around my village in West Sussex, UK Conference for Global Transformation 2021, Landmark Education – Measuring Accomplishment by Gayle Palmer My global commitment: To tread lightly on the Earth and reduce the environmental load in my local community. Sidlesham is the largest Parish in West Sussex and wholly rural 17.53 km2 (6.77 sq mi). It is on the Manhood Peninsula, five kilometres (3 miles) south of Chichester in the Chichester District of West Sussex, England. It has a population of under 2,000 in just 448 households. It has one main road going through it from Chichester to the small town of Selsey and various small lanes which cross the Peninsula. Primarily agricultural, it also has a large horticultural use and it bounded by two harbours (both SSSI’s, AONB’s (Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty) and of National importance for their flora and fauna). In 46AD the Romans landed in Pagham Harbour and the Saxon Aella landed along the Keynor rife near the site of the present village school in 477AD. St Wilfred is considered to have landed in Pagham Harbour at Church Norton. Street End Lane follows the line of a Roman Road and there are the remains of a Roman villa at Bird Pond. Sidlesham is recorded in the Domesday Book and the Normans built part of the present church in 1200AD. https://www.sidlesham.org/about/sidlesham-history/ I began litter picking in 2017 after my standard poodle had several cut paws, in March 2018 I started to measure what I collected as the amounts were shocking! To keep track I started the Facebook group #SidleshamLitterPickers.
    [Show full text]
  • Boundary Commission England Recommendations for Review of Wards of Chichester District Council
    BOUNDARY COMMISSION ENGLAND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR REVIEW OF WARDS OF CHICHESTER DISTRICT COUNCIL Response from FISHBOURNE PARISH COUNCIL on the Boundary Commission’s three main considerations. 1. Electoral Equality achieved by Draft recommendations: Boundary Commission Recommendation: Bosham, Fishbourne, Appledram and Donnington to form a 3 member ward entitled Bosham & Donnington Ward. Electorate Electors per Variance Electorate Electors per Variance (2015) Councillor from (2021) Councillor from (2015) average (2021) average 7,924 2,641 3% 8,355 2,785 1% COMMENT: The proposal meets the consideration of improving electoral equality. 2. Reflection of Community Identity. COMMENT: There is serious concern about the unintended damage that would be caused by the choice of name for the new ward. Though “Bosham and Donnington” has the advantage of marking the geographical extremes of the new ward, it omits two of the village names and this could have damaging (though unintended) outcomes. Whatever rule is applied to naming of new wards has to have room for some flexibility. This is where local knowledge has such an important part to play. In this particular case, combining the names of four separate villages under the name of two of them conflicts both with the Fishbourne Neighbourhood Plan and with the CDC's own local plan both of which stress the need for the preservation of the individual villages and of the neighbouring AONB. This is vital not only because of the quality of life in the separate villages but also because we are fighting to prevent major developers from building on the strategic gaps between villages and destroying for ever the charm and attraction of the coastal villages and their popularity as a tourist area.
    [Show full text]
  • Funds Received Between 01 April 2018 and 31 March 2019
    S106 Appendix 5 - Income Received Bewteen 1 April 2018 to 31 March 2019 Ward App No Address Obligation Type Amount Date Received Received Chichester 17/03136/FUL 19 Southgate, Chichester, PO19 1ES Recreation Disturbance Chichester 4,833.00 10/04/2018 Central Chichester 18/00051/FUL 56, 56A And 56B East Street, Chichester, Recreation Disturbance Chichester 974.00 12/07/2018 Central West Sussex, PO19 1JG Chichester 18/00341/FUL 51B South Street, Chichester, West Recreation Disturbance Chichester 461.00 01/05/2018 Central Sussex, PO19 1DS Chichester 18/01038/FUL The Barn, Little London, Chichester, West Recreation Disturbance Chichester 487.00 20/06/2018 Central Sussex, PO19 1PL Chichester 18/01188/FUL 25 West Street, Chichester, PO19 1QW Recreation Disturbance Chichester 880.00 31/10/2018 Central Chichester 18/01761/FUL 19 Southgate, Chichester, PO19 1ES Recreation Disturbance Chichester 4,083.00 29/11/2018 Central Chichester 18/02600/FUL 81 North Street, Chichester, PO19 1LQ Recreation Disturbance Chichester 487.00 21/01/2019 Central Chichester 18/02948/FUL Purchases Restaurant, 31 North Street, Recreation Disturbance Chichester 487.00 06/03/2019 Central Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 1LX Chichester 19/00246/PA3O 26 Chapel Street, Chichester, West Recreation Disturbance Chichester 974.00 11/03/2019 Central Sussex, PO19 1DL Chichester East 16/02038/FUL 117 The Hornet, Chichester, West Sussex, Affordable Housing Commuted Sum 267,602.64 15/10/2018 PO19 7JP Chichester 10/03490/FUL Roussillon Barracks, Chichester Harbour 21,632.16 15/10/2018
    [Show full text]
  • The Real Natives
    ‘Real Natives’ A Study of the History of Oyster Fishing in Chichester Harbour for the Sussex Inshore Fisheries and Conservation Authority Dr Ian Friel MA, PhD, FSA © Ian Friel 2020 Oysters - a once-common food Poor food for friars ‘Give me then of thy gold, to make our cloister’, Quoth he, ‘for many a mussel and many an oyster ‘When other men have been full well at ease ‘Hath been our food, our cloister for to raise’ Geoffrey Chaucer, The Summoner’s Tale, c 1387-88 A Chichester bet In 1813 a man named Martin from Dell Quay Mill and another named Fogden from Donnington met at Chalkright’s fishmonger shop in South Street, Chichester, to settle a bet as to who could eat the most oysters: ‘in a short time each swallowed four hundred large ones’ until Martin called for a halt. Fogden agreed, as long as Martin paid for the oysters. They then went to the King’s Head for a glass of brandy, followed by an eel pie supper at Martin’s house. Ipswich Journal, 11 December 1813, p 1 The London Oyster Season opens: Billingsgate Fishmarket, August 1835: ‘At an early hour a scene of unusual bustle and confusion was apparent. Not less than 5,000 persons were in waiting to be served with the ‘real natives’, while the streets in the vicinity were blocked up with every species of locomotive vehicle to convey the oysters to the various quarters of the metropolis. There were no less than fifty sail of vessels in front of Billingsgate laden with oysters, chiefly from the Kentish coast.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction
    Introduction Location of the AONB The Chichester Harbour Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (the AONB) is located in the counties of West Sussex and Hampshire on the southern coast of England (Fig 1). The AONB forms an irregular area, its boundary following a number of roads and other features, including the harbour mouth, to enclose some 74 sq km. The western boundary of the AONB is marked by the B2179 through West Wittering, along the A286 to Dell Quay where the boundary continues north up Appledram Lane to meet the Chichester By Pass. The A259 constitutes the long northern boundary of the AONB. The boundary turns south down Bath Road, heading west along the coast to rejoin the A259, then turning south at Langstone and crossing the Langstone Bridge. The eastern boundary follows field boundaries and minor roads down the east coast of Hayling Island. The ‘corners’ of this irregular area are marked by the NGRs 472680 105845, 474475 97505, 484020 100890, and 484230 104605. The area encompasses a number of small picturesque harbour villages, including Itchenor, Dell Quay, Bosham, Bosham Hoe, Chidham, West Thorney and parts of West Wittering, Fishbourne, Nutbourne, and Prinsted, as well as the major ‘arms’ of Chichester Harbour itself – Emsworth Channel, Thorney Channel, Chichester Channel and Bosham Channel. It includes a broad range of landscapes and seascapes providing continuity from inland areas through marginal land and intertidal ranges to underwater sites in the channels. The Harbour is a recognised archaeological and historical resource as well as a valued natural environment. Status of the AONB The status of the AONB was designated by order on 7 July 1963, and this was confirmed by order on 4 February 1964.
    [Show full text]
  • Current Animal Licences Held 5 February 2020
    CHICHESTER DISTRICT COUNCIL - Current Animal Licences Held 5th February 2020 Animal Boarding Animal Boarding (1 to 25 animals) Parish: Linchmere Ward: Fernhurst Date of Issue : 27-Sep-19 Trading As : Chums Address : Woodend Cottage Gillhams Lane Linchmere Haslemere West Email [email protected] Business Tel Animal Boarding (26 to 75 animals) Animal Boarding (75+ animals) Parish: Linch Ward: Fernhurst Date of Issue : 4-Jan-2019 Trading As : Just Cats Address : Just Cats Iron Hill Farm Hollycombe Lane Linch Liphook West Email [email protected] Business Tel Parish: Westbourne Ward: Westbourne Date of Issue : 21-Dec-18 Trading As : Amberley Kennels Ltd Address : Amberley Kennels Limited Woodmancote Lane Woodmancote Email [email protected] Business Tel Home Boarding (up to 6 animals) Parish: Special Code For BLPUs Outside CDC Area Ward: Special Code For BLPUs Outside District Date of Issue : 12-Jul-19 Trading As : Scamps and Champs Address : 80 Longfield Avenue Fareham PO14 1JR Email [email protected] Business Tel Parish: Midhurst Ward: Midhurst Date of Issue : 16-Jan-19 Trading As : Dog Vision Address : 19 Elmleigh Midhurst West Sussex GU29 9EZ Email [email protected] Business Tel Parish: East Wittering And Bracklesham Ward: The Witterings Date of Issue : 02-Jan-19 Trading As : Lisa's Dog Walking And Boarding Address : 4 Bracklesham Close Bracklesham Chichester West Sussex Email [email protected] Business Tel Parish: Rogate Ward: Harting Date of Issue : 29-Jan-19 Trading As : Allywags
    [Show full text]
  • NOTICE of ELECTION CHICHESTER DISTRICT COUNCIL 2 MAY 2019 1 Elections Are to Be Held of Councillors for the Following Wards
    NOTICE OF ELECTION CHICHESTER DISTRICT COUNCIL 2 MAY 2019 1 Elections are to be held of Councillors for the following Wards :- Ward Number of Councillors to be elected CHICHESTER CENTRAL 1 CHICHESTER EAST 2 CHICHESTER NORTH 2 CHICHESTER SOUTH 2 CHICHESTER WEST 2 EASEBOURNE (Parishes of Easebourne, Heyshott and Lodsworth) 1 FERNHURST (Parishes of Fernhurst, Lurgashall, Linch, Linchmere and Milland) 2 FITTLEWORTH (Parishes of Barlavington, Bignor, Bury, Duncton, East Lavington, 1 Fittleworth, Graffham, Stopham and Sutton) GOODWOOD (Parishes of Boxgrove, Eartham, East Dean, Singleton, Upwaltham, West Dean 1 and Westhampnett) HARBOUR VILLAGES (Parishes of Appledram, Bosham, Chidham, Donnington and 3 Fishbourne) HARTING (Parishes of Elsted & Treyford, Harting, Nyewood, Rogate and Trotton) 1 LAVANT (Parishes of Funtington and Lavant) 1 LOXWOOD (Parishes of Ebernoe, Kirdford, Loxwood, Northchapel, Plaistow & Ifold and 2 Wisborough Green) MIDHURST (Parishes of Bepton, Cocking, Midhurst, Stedham with Iping (Iping Ward), 2 Stedham with Iping (Stedham Ward), West Lavington and Woolbedding with Redford) NORTH MUNDHAM AND TANGMERE (Parishes of Hunston, Tangmere, North Mundham and 2 Oving) PETWORTH (Parishes of Petworth and Tillington) 1 SELSEY SOUTH (Parish of Selsey South Ward) 2 SIDDLESHAM WITH SELSEY NORTH (Parishes of Siddlesham and Selsey North Ward) 2 SOUTHBOURNE (Parish of Southbourne) 2 THE WITTERINGS (Parishes of Birdham, Earnley, East Wittering, Itchenor and West 3 Wittering) WESTBOURNE (Parishes of Compton, Marden, Stoughton and Westbourne) 1 2. Nomination papers may be obtained from the Elections Office at East Pallant House, Chichester, and must be delivered there on any day after the date of this notice but not later than 4PM on Wednesday, 3 APRIL 2019.
    [Show full text]
  • Chichester Harbour Conservancy Was Created to Manage This Unique Area for Recreation, Nature Conservation and to Protect Its Natural Beauty
    Chichester Harbour Information for Mariners 2021 www.conservancy.co.uk CELEBRATING 50 YEARS This year, brings with it a very special milestone - our 50th anniversary. In 1971 Chichester Harbour Conservancy was created to manage this unique area for recreation, nature conservation and to protect its natural beauty. It is testament to the well thought out statutory arrangements underpinning the organisation, and in particular the strong involvement of Harbour users in its management, that it has been such a successful body. Thanks go in particular to the impressive contribution of Chichester Harbour Federation, and to enlightened Harbour users demonstrating consideration in sharing this fantastic Harbour with a multitude of others and the rich wildlife. We’ve incorporated the 50th anniversary into this year’s plaque, and will also be marking the milestone with some new initiatives through the year. Look out for more information in subsequent issues of Harbour Life. Richard Craven, Director and Harbour Master Contents Senior Deputy Harbour Master's Update 2 Tide Times 2021/22 9 Chichester Harbour Area Map 12 Directory 14 Contacts Chichester Harbour Conservancy Harbour Office, Itchenor, Chichester PO20 7AW Tel. 01243 512301 www.conservancy.co.uk [email protected] Office Hours: Mon –Fri 0900–1700 Sat 0900–1300 (1 Apr–30 Sep) Harbour Patrol Tel. 01243 512301 [email protected] VHF Channel 14 (156.70 mhz) Callsign Chichester Harbour Radio Harbour Office, Emsworth Tel. 01243 376422 (not manned continuously) Mobile 07864 915247 Bosham Quaymaster Tel. 01243 573336 (not manned continuously) Mobile 07918 683584 ChichesterHarbour Education Centre Dell Quay, PO20 7EE @ChichesterHarbo Tel.
    [Show full text]
  • Parking Zone Allocations: Wards in District Or Borough
    Hillside Buckingham Manor Peverel Cokeham Southlands St. Nicolas Mash Barn St. Mary's Southwick Green Eastbrook Marine Widewater Churchill Legend Zone 1 (1) Zone 2 (4) Zone 3 (2) Zone 4 (7) Zone 5 (0) Reproduced from or based upon 2019 Ordnance Survey mapping with permission of the Controller of HMSO © Crown Copyright reserved. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown copyright and may lead to Regional Parking Zone Allocation: Adur District - Appendix C-1 prosecution or civil proceedings West Sussex County Council Licence No. 100023447 1:30,000 ± Arundel & Walberton Angmering & Findon Barnham Ferring Courtwick with Toddington Brookfield Yapton East Preston Felpham East River Beach Rustington West Bersted Rustington East Middleton-on-Sea Hotham Pevensey Orchard Felpham West Pagham Marine Aldwick East Aldwick West Legend Zone 1 (2) Zone 2 (13) Zone 3 (0) Zone 4 (8) Zone 5 (0) Reproduced from or based upon 2019 Ordnance Survey mapping with permission of the Controller of HMSO © Crown Copyright reserved. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown copyright and may lead to Regional Parking Zone Allocation: Arun District - Appendix C-2 prosecution or civil proceedings West Sussex County Council Licence No. 100023447 1:80,000 ± Fernhurst Loxwood Petworth Easebourne Harting Midhurst Fittleworth Westbourne Goodwood Lavant Chichester North Chichester West Chichester East Chichester Central Chichester South Southbourne Harbour Villages North Mundham & Tangmere The Witterings Sidlesham with Selsey North Legend Selsey South Zone 1 (13) Zone 2 (3) Zone 3 (2) Zone 4 (0) Zone 5 (3) Reproduced from or based upon 2019 Ordnance Survey mapping with permission of the Controller of HMSO © Crown Copyright reserved. Regional Parking Zone Allocation Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings West Sussex County Council Licence No.
    [Show full text]
  • Harbour Villages Ward - Liberal Democrats Campaign Team Chichester Local Plan Review 2035 Submissions
    Harbour Villages Ward - Liberal Democrats Campaign Team Chichester Local plan Review 2035 Submissions Our Observations We wish to be called at the time of the Planning Inspection. This plan appears to have been created in a short time and therefore lacks cohesion. Information used in one area is different to that elsewhere. Points made for: Apuldram/Donnington/Bosham/Chidham/Hambrook/Fishbourne make it appear that they have been written in silos. Can you please look at each one and try and line the reasoning up. Our fear is that this document needs significant change for it to be fit and proper and presentable to the Inspector. 3.1 to 3.2 It is our view that an opportunity has been missed to: 1. Look at new opportunities to develop away from existing settlements 2. Look at innovative solution to develop new dwellings. There is no provision for a. Kit built small homes b. Eco style properties built in a rural environment 3. Choose CDC identified sites rather than be lead by developers 3.4 The plan does insufficient to encourage students or young people to come to Chichester or for them to remain to develop careers. In the report “Know your Place” by BBC Chichester scored very badly. Going out and sports facilities scored zero. Busses scored one. 3.5 We do not accept that the wider plan has taken into account the wider range of environmental aspirations. The size and scope of planned development along the East West corridor damages the environment and fails to enhance the social aspirations of the communities.
    [Show full text]
  • Six Harbour Villages
    Six Harbour Villages An attractive walk in the Chichester Harbour Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty walking through the countryside and along the shoreline of six Harbour villages and crossing a channel by ferry. 16km (10 miles) 53m over the whole route 5 hours plus breaks and ferry ride Moderate OS Explorer 120 or use OSmaps app Alternative routes are possible at high tide when some paths may flood Stagecoach 700 Fishbourne Pay and Display/Mipermit app in Itchenor, and start the walk at point 6 or PO20 7AE; alternatives are Bosham pay and See page 2 for the Stagecoach 52/53 and start the display and Chichester Marina’s Visitors’ route details walk at point 8. car park. Itchenor - Bosham Ferry www.itchenorferry.co.uk contactless payment www.alibeckettdesign.co.uk (2020) www.alibeckettdesign.co.uk www.flaticon.com symbols: www.conservancy.co.uk Six Harbour Villages Page 2 Fishbourne Fishbourne Mill Pond Route passes and the Meadows through reed have archaeological beds that flood 6 interest being so near to on high spring Fishbourne Roman Palace Retrace route to head tides Bosham of School Creek and Walk into look for footpath A27 Bosham, if you heading east want a break between two homes Take a break by Cross Taylor’s Lane the oak trees and walk east Cross Park Lane on the shoreline Follow the and continue 3 shoreline route along field edge to Dell Quay 5 At low tide take the path across the 4 causeway in School Creek, if covered by the tide continue on the road ouses - Bos en h ham we et Apuldram b th Turn sharp right a p t along field edge and The route 2 o o shortly sharp left merges onto the F along another edge Dell Quay shoreline road to head towards A286 Fishbourne Channel The route heads 7 up the road, turn oint right into first field.
    [Show full text]