DOCSLIB.ORG

EHDC Part 1 Section 1 Item 4 Land South of Holly Cottage, Item 106

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Item No.: 04 The information, recommendations and advice contained in this report are correct as at the date of preparation, which is more than one week in advance of the Committee meeting. Because of the time constraints some reports may have been prepared in advance of the final date given for consultee responses or neighbour comments. Any changes or necessary updates to the report will be made orally at the Committee meeting. PROPOSAL Outline - residential development of ten x 2 storey dwellings comprising 7 affordable and 3 market price homes, new vehicular access, informal open space, kick about area and landscaping LOCATION: Land South of Holly Cottage, Oakhanger Road, Oakhanger, Bordon REFERENCE : 53588 PARISH: Selborne APPLICANT: c/o Giles Wheeler-Bennettt CONSULTATION 25 June 2014 EXPIRY : APPLICATION EXPIRY : 14 August 2014 COUNCILLORS: Cllr D Ashcroft SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION: REFUSAL This application is included on the agenda as it is a departure from the adopted Local Plan and is being considered under the Interim Housing Policy Statement. Site and Development The application site lies on the eastern side of the village, within a countryside location (Oakhanger does not have a settlement policy boundary) and outside the South Downs National Park. The site is agricultural land used for grazing and has an area of 1.19ha and slopes down from the road by 2.3m to the field ditch on the eastern boundary. The site is bounded by residential property to the south and a commercial site to the north. There is residential development to the west and more agricultural land to the east. The site boundaries consist of a Hawthorn hedge on the frontage and stock fencing and scattered trees to the remainder of the boundaries. The proposed development is for 10 x 2 storey houses, made up of 7 affordable homes and 3 market dwellings. The affordable homes would be 2 bedroomed and the detached market housing would be 1 x 3 bedroomed and 2 x 4 bedroomed dwellings. The application is in outline only with access, layout and scale to be considered. The residential development is approximately 0.48ha; the informal open space 0.45ha and kickabout area 0.26ha. In addition, the balance of land within the applicant’s ownership would be dedicated as an ecology zone and would include the pond close to the road and the marshy area to the north of the site. The residential development is to be face the road, with vehicular access limited to two points; one serves eight dwellings and the other is a shared access for 2 houses. The main access would enter the site via the current field access and would serve rear parking and garages. This is backed by an area for structural landscaping, including a triangular orchard area. The second vehicular access would be shared by 2 market price dwellings and would be further to the north. A footpath is shown inside the hedge, providing access to the front of each property. The footpath adjacent the highway is to be retained. Relevant Planning History None Development Plan Policies and Proposals East Hampshire District Local Plan: Joint Core Strategy (2014) CP1 - Presumption in favour of sustainable development CP2 - Spatial Strategy CP10 - Spatial strategy for housing CP11 - Housing tenure, type and mix CP14 - Affordable housing for rural communities CP18 - Provision of open space, sport and recreation and built facilities CP19 - Development in the countryside CP20 - Landscape CP27 - Pollution CP21 - Biodiversity CP24 - Sustainable construction CP25 - Flood Risk CP26 - Water resources/ water quality CP29 - Design CP31 - Transport CP32 - Infrastructure East Hampshire District Local Plan: Second Review (2006) T2 - Public Transport Provision and Improvement T3 - Pedestrians and Cyclists H14 - Other Housing Outside Settlement Policy Boundaries Planning Policy Constraints and Guidance National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) Village Design Statement - Selborne Village Design Statement - non statutory planning guidance that has been the subject of public consultation and therefore is a material planning consideration. Consultations and Town/Parish Council comments Crime Prevention Design Advisor - Has made detailed comments about the safety of the site but raises no objection to the proposal. EHDC Drainage - The Environment Agency's Flood Map shows a narrow flood plain (Flood Zone 2/3) associated with the Oakhanger Stream and the remainder of the site in Flood Zone 1 (low risk of flooding). However, the flood mapping on the Council's GIS system shows a large area of the site is susceptible to surface water flooding. A FRA has been submitted, dated 19 March 2014, but this is not supported by a geotechnical site investigation. The final paragraph on page 12 states 'there are no records of the site having been previously affected by surface water or groundwater flooding'. This is incorrect. A previous site investigation carried out in August 2011, found a high water table, at 450 - 600mm below ground level. Following the recent very wet winter the water table on site has been observed by local residents as at or above ground level. These observations are supported by photographic evidence. The development will increase surface water run-off and the FRA confirms that the site is not suitable for a SUDS system relying on soakage. The alternative option will be discharged to the Oakhanger Stream, with run-off attenuated to the current greenfield rates. This will require a balancing pond and due to the high water table, any pond will need to be very shallow and will require a large area of the site. This system would need to be carefully designed to ensure flood risk is not transferred elsewhere and the pond will require regular maintenance to ensure storage capacity is maintained. On the basis of the current drainage/flooding information it is not clear that the site is suitable for development and will not increase flood risk elsewhere. I must object pending receipt of additional design details, supported by a geotechnical site investigation. EHDC - Forward Planning - The site appears to fall within Policy CP14 of the Joint Core Strategy - Affordable Housing for Rural Communities. I suggest that the proposal will need to fit the criteria addressed in Policy CP14 to be justified. The site falls within close proximity to an SPA and SAC - Internationally Designated Sites (Policy CP22). Following advice from Natural England, the application does not include a Habitats Regulations Assessment. The applicant has submitted an Ecological Report and para 3.3 states that once development proposals are finalised they will fully consider significant effects on these sites. However, this needs to be done through the HRA as part of the planning application submission. Any Appropriate Assessment will need to consider any potential avoidance and mitigation measures regarding significant effects. EHDC - Landscape - I disagree with the statements in the Design, Access and Planning Statement that the development: • would not harm the overall character, quality, tranquillity and appearance of the countryside; • would not harm the intrinsic local character of the landscape, sense of place or local distinctiveness. The proposal is to build houses on an attractive wet meadow on the edge of a village, close to the South Downs National Park and Shortheath Common SSSI, SAC and LNR, which would impact on the character of the landscape and the appearance of the countryside. The second access point would break through the boundary hedge which is a local landscape feature and the character of the public footpath through the meadow would change from rural to suburban. Drainage would be required to create a usable kickabout area on the meadow and this would change its character and biodiversity. Environment Agency - Having screened the documents with regard to the low risk of the development type and location of the proposal, I can confirm that we have no comments to make. All surface water drainage issues are now dealt with by the relevant Local Authority. Environmental Health - Contaminated Land - Adjacent to Site: Quarry Unknown Filled Land. No objection subject to conditions being imposed on any approval County Highway Officer – No objection in principle to development as proposed but, in the absence of a Road safety Audit, has objected to the scheme as it cannot be shown that the accesses are safe. Should a satisfactory Audit be submitted then Highways have no objection subject to conditions and a contribution towards transport measures. Concern was also raised about discharge of water to the ordinary water course to the east, which would require a separate consent from HCC. Hampshire Fire and Rescue - Makes various comments about the scheme in terms of fire safety but raised no objection to the proposal. Natural England - Internationally and nationally designated sites The application site is within or in close proximity to a European designated site (also commonly referred to as Natura 2000 sites), and therefore has the potential to affect its interest features. European sites are afforded protection under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010, as amended (the ‘Habitats Regulations’). The application site is in close proximity to the Wealden Heaths Phase II Special Protection Area (SPA) and to Shortheath Common Special Area of Conservation (SAC) which are European sites. The sites are also notified at a national level as Broxhead and Kingsley Commons and Shortheath Common Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) respectively. Please see the subsequent sections of this letter for our advice relating to SSSI features. In considering the European site interest, Natural England advises that you, as a competent authority under the provisions of the Habitats Regulations, should have regard for any potential impacts that a plan or project may have The Conservation objectives for each European site explain how the site should be restored and/or maintained and may be helpful in assessing what, if any, potential impacts a plan or project may have.
Recommended publications
  • Fliiiiiim 042719 RIVER QUALITY REPORT Period to End of December 1991 Freshwater Rivers Compliance

    Fliiiiiim 042719 RIVER QUALITY REPORT Period to End of December 1991 Freshwater Rivers Compliance

    RIVER tfD QUALITY 1991 A.H.Place Scientist • Monitoring Services April 1992 Tel: 0734 535423 ENVIRONMENT AGENCY fliiiiiim 042719 RIVER QUALITY REPORT Period to end of December 1991 Freshwater Rivers Compliance During the year to the end of December 1991, 568 sites were routinely monitored to assess the quality of 3,820 Km of river. Table 1 gives details of the 85 sites that failed their RQO's representing 500 Km of river (13% of the total). This is a decrease of 150 Km compared to the position shown in the previous report. Table 2 gives details of the class achieved by all reaches as per previous reports. Table 2 (A) is a matrix showing the total lengths of river in each class against objectives, while Table 2(B) shows this graphically. 78/659/EEC Fisheries Directive compliance There are currently 57 sites on river reaches classified as Salmonid and 121 on those classified as Cyprinid. Table 3 shows the 15 sites which failed to meet the relevant standards. EEC Dangerous Substances Directive Table 4 gives details of the freshwater river sites that fail parameters assessed under the Dangerous Substances Directive. All parameters are assessed as annual averages. The Tideway (Tables 5 and 6) Table 5 details compliance of the three tideway reaches against the quality objectives in the quarter October to December 1991. Part of the middle reach failed to meet its 20 percentile standard for dissolved oxygen. Table 6 details sites failing the EEC Dangerous Substances Directive in the year to December 1991. If you have any comments or questions please give me a ring on the above number.
  • Numerical Modelling of the Impact of Groundwater Abstraction on River Flows ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

    Numerical Modelling of the Impact of Groundwater Abstraction on River Flows ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

    Numerical Modelling of the Impact of Groundwater Abstraction on River Flows Environment Agency Science Report SC030233/SR1 British Geological Survey Report OR/08/017 Publishing Organisation: Environment Agency, Rio House, Waterside Drive, Aztec West, Almondsbury Bristol BS12 4UD Tel: 01454 624400 Fax: 01454 624409 ISBN Number: 978-1-84432-860-4 Product code: SCHO0308BNRV-E-P ©Environment Agency and NERC 2008 This report is the result of work jointly funded by the Environment Agency and the British Geological Survey, Natural Environment Research Council (NERC). All rights reserved. No part of this document may be produced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise without the prior permission of the Environment Agency and the British Geological Survey (NERC). The views expressed in this document are not necessarily those of the Environment Agency. Neither its officers, servants or agents nor those of the NERC accept any liability whatsoever for any loss or damage arising from the interpretation or use of the information, or reliance upon views contained herein. Dissemination status Internal: Released to all Regions External: Publicly available Statement of use This report describes the research into the impact of groundwater abstraction on river flows using numerical flow models. An approach for investigating such impacts is presented. The information within this document is for use by Environment Agency staff and others involved in managing water resources. Research contractor This document was produced under a joint Environment Agency (Science Department and British Geological Survey project by: C R Jackson*, M M Mansour*, A G Hughes* and P J Hulme** * British Geological Survey, Maclean Building, Crowmarsh Gifford, Wallingford, Oxfordshire OX10 8BB ** Environment Agency, Science Department, Olton Court, 10 Warwick Road, Olton Environment Agency’s Project Manager The Environment Agency’s Project Manager for this project was P J Hulme, Science Department.
  • Parish and Path No

    Parish and Path No

    Definitive Statements for the Parish of: Sandleheath ........................................................................................................................ 1 Selborne .............................................................................................................................. 3 Shalden ............................................................................................................................. 13 Shedfield ............................................................................................................................ 15 Sherborne St. John ............................................................................................................ 19 Sherfield English ................................................................................................................ 23 Sherfield on Loddon........................................................................................................... 27 Shipton Bellinger ............................................................................................................... 32 Silchester ........................................................................................................................... 34 Smannell ............................................................................................................................ 38 Soberton ............................................................................................................................ 42 Sopley...............................................................................................................................
  • ANNUAL REVIEW of FISHERIES 1St April 1989/31St March 1990

    ANNUAL REVIEW of FISHERIES 1St April 1989/31St March 1990

    nNRA Thames 186 Pa 6 | ltJL Thames Region ANNUAL REVIEW OF FISHERIES 1st April 1989/31st March 1990. Environment Agency NATIONAL LIBRARY & INFORMATION SERVICE HEAD OFFICE Rio House. Waterside Drive, Aztec West, Almondsbury, Bristol BS32 4UD NATIONAL RIVERS AUTHORITY THAMES REGION Annual Review of Fisheries 1st April 1989 / 31st March .1990 Ctxipiled by N. J. F o u l kes and A. Thomas Kings Meadow House, Kings Meadow Road, Reading, Berks, RG1 8DQ. ENVIRONMENT AGENCY 042310 CONTENTS Page 1. Introduction .......................................... 1 2. The Regional Fisheries Advisory Corrruttee ......... ..... 2 3. Financial Performance ............. .................... 3 4. Review of operational fishery work (a) Fishery Management ................................ 4 (b) Fishery Surveys ................................... 8 (c) Advisory Activity ................................. 13 (d) Emergency Works ................................... 17 5. Operational Investigations.............................. 21 6. Salmon Rehabilitation Programme ......... ........... ... 23 7. Fish Rearing .......................................... 27 8. Enforcement of the Salmon and Freshwater Fisheries Act 1975 and Thames Fishery Byelaws ............................. 29 9. Staff ................................................ 34 Appendix 1: Members of the Fisheries Advisory. Cormnittee.... 35 Appendix 2: Members of the full-time and part-time staff and Honorary Water Bailiffs................... 37 Appendix 3: Fish stocked by NRA, Thames Region............ 40 Appendix
  • The Domestic Buildings of Selborne

    The Domestic Buildings of Selborne

    THE DOMESTIC BUILDINGS OF SELBORNE By GWYN I. MEIRION-JONES 'We abound with poor; many of whom are sober and industrious, and live comfortably in good stone and brick cottages, which are glazed, and have chambers above the stairs: mud buildings we have none.' - Gilbert White, The natural history and antiquities qfSelborne (1789). UNDERTAKEN in 1967 as part of a more extensive study of the settlement of the area (Meirion-Jones 1969), this work is based on the Tithe Map of 1842, which, together with the accompanying Tithe Apportionment (P.R.O., Tithe Map and Apportion­ ment, Selborne) provides an almost complete survey of the landscape of the parish, the boundaries of which had probably remained unaltered from the Dark Ages until the changes of the late nineteenth century brought about a reduction in area. The parish, which became famous as the setting of Gilbert White's pioneer study in natural history (White 1789), lies in the western Weald and falls into four parts, coincident with lithology. From the crest of the east-facing chalk escarpment, where the beech hangers of Selborne Common rise above 650 feet O.D., the parish stretches eastwards across the Upper Greensand (Malmstone) and Gault, down to the sandy wastes of Woolmer Forest. The Settlement Pattern Selborne village occupies a classic scarp-foot site below 'the vast hill of chalk', close to the Malmstone junction. In 1842, as in White's time 50 years before, it con­ sisted of 'one straggling street, three quarters of a mile in length, in a sheltered vale, and running parallel to the hanger' (PI.

  • River Quality July 1991 to June 1992

    RIVER QUALITY JULY 1991 TO JUNE 1992 A.H.PIace Scientist - Monitoring Services October 1992 Tel: 0734 535422 Circulation List Mr. I. M . Adams Environmental Quality Manager Mr. G.W. Phillips Catchment Control Manager Dr. D. A. Stott Water Regulations Manager Dr. J. Haines Scientific Services Manager Mr. I. M. Griffit] Pollution Control Manager Mr. P. Lloyd Area Pollution Control Manager Mr. N. Marshall Area Pollution Control Manager Mr. R. Walker Area Pollution Control Manager Mr. P. Chatfield P.P.O. (HQ) Mr. T. N. Reeder Quality Control & Monitoring Manager Mr. J. Eastwood Principal scientist Quality Regulation Ms. J. Kinniburgh Principal Planner Water Quality Dr. R. A. Sweeting Chief Biologist Dr. D. Tinsley Area Biologist East Mr. J. Steel Area Biologist West Dr. J. Banks Regional Fisheries Manager Mr. J. Reeves Area Fisheries Manager Mr. A. Butterworth Area Fisheries Manager Mr. G. Armstrong Area Fisheries Manager Mr. S. Colclough Area Fisheries Officer Mr. V. Lewis Area Fisheries Officer Mr. S. Killeen Senior Scientist RIVER QUALITY REPORT July 1991 to June 1992 I*. Freshwater Rivers During the year to the end of June 1992, 568 sites were routinely monitored to assess the quality of 3820 km of river. Table 1 gives details of 87 sites which failed their RQO’s representing 493 km of river (12.9% of the total). However, 287 sites, representing 1807 km (47%), achieved water quality better than their objectives. This represents a slight improvement in overall quality since the last report. Table 2 gives details of the class achieved by all reaches. Table 2(a) is a matrix showing the total lengths of river in each class against objectives, while Table 2(b) shows this graphically.
  • East Hampshire District Council Strategic Flood Risk Assessment for Local Development Framework

    East Hampshire District Council Strategic Flood Risk Assessment for Local Development Framework

    East Hampshire District Council Strategic Flood Risk Assessment for Local Development Framework Recommended national precautionary sensitivity ranges for peak rainfall intensities, peak river flows, offshore wind speeds and wave heights (from Table B.2 PPS25) Parameter 1990 2025 2055 2085 to to to to 2025 2055 2085 2115 Peak rainfall intensity +5% +10% +20% +30% Peak river flow +10% +20% Offshore wind speed +5% +10% Extreme wave height +5% +10% East Hampshire District Council Strategic Flood Risk Assessment for Local Development Framework Final April 2008 Halcrow Group Limited Halcrow Group Limited Griffin House 135 High Street Crawley West Sussex RH10 1DQ Tel +44 (0)1293 434500 Fax +44 (0)1293 434599 www.halcrow.com Halcrow Group Limited has prepared this report in accordance with the instructions of their client, Hampshire County Council, for their sole and specific use. Any other persons who use any information contained herein do so at their own risk. © Halcrow Group Limited 2008 East Hampshire District Council Strategic Flood Risk Assessment for Local Development Framework Contents Amendment Record This report has been issued and amended as follows: Issue Revision Description Date Signed 1 1 Draft June 07 AS/BV 2 1 Draft July 07 AS/BV 3 1 Draft April 08 AS/BV 4 1 Final April 08 AS/BV Contents 1 Executive Summary 1 2 Background Information 3 2.1 Terms of Reference 3 2.2 The Study Area 3 2.3 Constraints on Development 3 3 Planning Context 5 3.1 Introduction 5 3.2 The EU Water Framework Directive 5 3.3 National Planning Policy 6 3.4
  • Walk 2 – Rioters' Walk

    Walk 2 – Rioters' Walk

    Walk 2 – Rioters’ Walk On Monday 22nd November 1830, a mob several hundred strong attacked the workhouse in Selborne, Hampshire, turned out the occupants, burned or broke the fittings and furniture, and pulled down the roof. The next day an even larger mob, containing some of the Selborne rioters, did the same to the workhouse at Headley, some seven miles away. The parsons in both villages were also coerced into promising to reduce by half the income they took from tithes. Less than a month later, at a special court hearing in Winchester attended by no less a person than the Duke of Wellington, nine local men were sentenced to transportation (commuted from a death sentence in the case of eight of them), and all but one sailed for Australia in the Spring of 1831 never to return. In this walk we follow the course of the rioters when, on a cold November day, they marched from Selborne to Headley, ransacked a workhouse, and returned. For full story see One Monday in November by John Owen Smith 16 Walk 2 – Rioters’ Walk Selborne to Headley and return Total distance approximately 14 miles/22.5 km The walk starts from the Queens Hotel (the Compasses in 1830) in Selborne going to the Holly Bush in Headley by way of Whitehill and Standford, and returning by way of Kingsley and Oakhanger. Starting point Queens Hotel, Selborne – map reference SU741336. Based on the route thought to have been taken by the rioters who marched from Selborne to Headley and back in November 1830.
  • Native Crayfish Project East Hampshire Rivers Survey

    Native Crayfish Project East Hampshire Rivers Survey

    NATIVE CRAYFISH PROJECT EAST HAMPSHIRE RIVERS SURVEY AND THE 1997 INTERIM REPORT ON THE PROJECT Prepared for The Environment Agency (Southern Region), English Nature (Species Recovery Programme) and The East Hampshire AONB Project Adrian Hutchings, Project Manager Carol Elliott, Project Assistant Dept. of Fish, Game and Wildlife Management, Sparsholt College, Winchester, Hampshire. SO21 2NF February, 1998 Native Crayfish Project Hampshire EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This is an interim report of a long-term study of the native White-clawed or Atlantic Stream crayfish Austropotamobius pallipes Lereboullet in Hampshire. It principally details the findings of the 1997 survey and monitoring effort in selected rivers and streams in Hampshire, with particular attention to those in the north and east of the County. The survey identified the presence of A. pallipes in the River Rother (Arun catchment) and the Lower Test, the latter being discovered in early 1998. This brings the total known native crayfish sites in Hampshire to six. The Candover Brook population is potentially the largest in Hampshire, but the native crayfish on the Rother appear to be widespread. In contrast the populations in the River Anton and possibly the Lower Test appear to be small and highly vulnerable to extinction. In addition monitoring programmes are now in place for three of the four previously known populations of native crayfish. There appears to be little change in the Upper Candover Brook population over the year, remaining healthy and stable, whilst monitoring has only just started in the two other locations. Signal crayfish P. leniusculus have been found in most rivers surveyed in 1997, including the rivers Anton, Southern Wey, Lyde and Whitewater, and some of these populations are substantial.
  • Selborne, Oakhanger & Blackmoor

    Selborne, Oakhanger & Blackmoor

    SELBORNE, OAKHANGER & BLACKMOOR Protecting rural quality and safety from growing traffic volumes For Selborne Parish Council August 2014. Revision 06 Hamilton-Baillie Associates Ltd August 2014. Version 06 For Selborne Parish Council and the residents of Blackmoor, Oakhanger and Selborne Dean House 94 Whiteladies Road Bristol BS8 2QX Tel: 0117 9114221 www.hamilton-baillie.co.uk CONTENTS Introduction 1 Selborne Parish & surroundings 2 The problem 4 Community participation 6 Design principles 7 The villages: Selborne 8 Oakhanger 10 Blackmoor 12 Area-wide proposals 14 Sketch proposals: Selborne 16 Oakhanger 25 Blackmoor 30 Conclusions and next steps 34 Reducing traffic impact in rural villages Introduction The impact of traffic on smaller rural These proposals are not a basis for “solving” the communities, especially close to the edge of major problem of traffic growth in Selborne and its areas of population, is the main source of concern surroundings. Cars, motorcycles and delivery for many parish councils across the country. lorries will continue to remain an inescapable The erosion of village space, and the consequent element of rural life. The economic prosperity reduction in pedestrian and informal activity and associated patterns of transport will continue and movement within and between villages has to add significant pressure to the historic fabric serious implications for the economic and social of this north-east corner of Hampshire. Selborne viability of small communities. Without informal lies on the western perimeter of the new South connections and gathering places, village life can Downs National Park, bringing greater urgency retreat indoors and turn away from streets and to reconcile traffic movement and highway design public spaces.
  • East Hampshire

    East Hampshire

    PAPERS AND PROCEEDINGS 157 MESOLITHIC RESEARCH IN EAST HAMPSHIRE. THE HAMPSHIRE GREENSAND. By. W. F. RANKINE, F.S.A. SCOT. Introductory. HE aim of this contribution is to record the results of a Mesolithic survey of the Hampshire Greensand carried out Tby the writer as a complement to a similar investigation in the adjacent region of West Surrey.1 The Greensand outcrop in East Hampshire forms an irregularly shaped area, some 40 square miles in extent, in the western extremity of the Weald. On its western margin it abuts against the Gault clay on a line curving south-westerly by Kingsley, Hartley Maiiditt, Selborne, Empshott and Petersneld. On the east side it is bounded by Surrey and Sussex. Much of it, incidentally, lies in the Gilbert White country. In the main this Greensand surface is much concealed by heath and conifer, with appreciable intervening tracts of marshy ground, and so it does not lend itself readily to investigation. There is, however, a moderate acreage of arable land at Kingsley and Oakhanger. Thus the kind of surface on which prehistoric relics are sought is limited to a small extent of ploughland, worn trackways on the commons, and chance exposures. However, much of the area is War Department land which has been used as exercising grounds for tanks and heavy vehicles over a long period. Such activity has resulted in stripping the vegetation from large areas of heathland and the subsequent combined action of wind and rain has, in some instances, brought about total surface erosion. Fortunately for research, this destructive action has some com­ pensation in that it has succeeded in disclosing much valuable evidence.
  • Report to the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    Report to the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    The Planning Report to the Secretary of State Inspectorate Temple Quay House 2 The Square for Environment, Food and Temple Quay Bristol BS1 6PN Rural Affairs GTN 1371 8000 by Robert Neil Parry BA DIPTP MRTPI An Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State for Environment, Date: Food and Rural Affairs 31 March 2006 THE SOUTH DOWNS NATIONAL PARK INSPECTOR’S REPORT Volume 1 Inquiry held between 10 November 2003 and 18 March 2005 Inquiry held at The Chatsworth Hotel, Steyne, Worthing, BN11 3DU SOUTH DOWNS NATIONAL PARK VOLUME 1 1. Covering letter to Secretary of State 2. Part 1: In-Principle Report 3. Part 2: Boundary Report 4. Annex A: Landscape Assessor’s main report 5. Annex B: Landscape Assessor’s supplementary report on A3 corridor/Rother Valley 6. Annex C: Governance VOLUME 2 Appendix 1: List of persons appearing at the Inquiry Appendix 2: List of Core Documents/Inquiry Documents Appendix 3: List of Countryside Agency Responses (CARS) Appendix 4: List of Proofs/further statements Appendix 5: List of written representations Appendix 6: List of representations in numeric order. VOLUME 3 1. Maps 1A and 1B showing generalised boundary for a more focussed National Park. 2. Key to A4 Boundary Maps. 3. Bundle of designation order boundary maps including recommended changes. Temple Quay House 2 The Square Temple Quay Bristol BS2 9DJ To the Right Honourable Margaret Becket MP Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Madam South Downs National Park (Designation) Order 2002 East Hampshire Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (Revocation) Order 2002 Sussex Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (Revocation) Order 2002 South Downs National Park (Variation) Order 2004 The attached reports - Part 1 “In-principle Report” and Part 2 “Boundary Report” - relate to the inquiry into the above orders that I conducted at the Chatsworth Hotel, Worthing.