Chapter/Policy ID Representation Summary Representation Change to Plan Type Respondent f. Strategic Site Allocations 68 Strategic Site 331 The identification of strategic locations should have looked back at the Policy S32 should consider all previously identified sites and net ecological gain. Object Mr Paul Sansby [6764] Allocations 'Unconstrained List' of sites considered in previous plans. Housing requirements and sustainability issues have changed over time and these sites were studied and housing capacities estimated in the past. Foe example Site CC175 to the South of Chichester was identified in the 2009 Plan and is now sited next to the new secondary school. This location is sustainable and encourages walking rather than driving to school which affect the A27 at peak times. 69 Strategic Development 70 Design Strategies 71 Policy S32: Design 504 Paragraph 5.18 No mention of use of gray water, design,. Overall appearance should Comment Mrs Glenda Baum [5809] Strategies for Strategic not be red brick boxes with small windows. Lets get modern, architectural that is and Major designed to resist flooding, not just raise houses by 1m which can then cause Development Sites problems to existing lower houses. 71 Policy S32: Design 548 Archaeological Assessments should be presumed to be required for all strategic sites, Comment Mr Robin Kidd [6674] Strategies for Strategic unless there is a clear reason to suppose that archaeological remains have already and Major been destroyed (e.g. at former landfill or gravel extraction sites). The area in Development Sites Chichester District has been one of human occupation for many thousands of years, so everywhere will most likely have significant archaeological remains, unless known to have been already destroyed. Currently only some sites require archaeological assessments. 71 Policy S32: Design 558 Agree with Point 6. Support Sustrans (Mr Ian Sumnall) Strategies for Strategic [6728] and Major Development Sites 71 Policy S32: Design 590 Point 4 of Policy 32. Proper planning to encourage walking, cycling and non‐car Comment Julia Smith [6865] Strategies for Strategic transport. Not lip service. Excellent guidance in WSCC Walking and Cycling Strategy and Major and Dept of Transport guidelines. Development Sites 71 Policy S32: Design 592 The emphasis on sustainable transport is not borne out in practice. The Local Plan will Comment Julia Smith [6865] Strategies for Strategic have more teeth and must specifically support cycle routes within the city and build and Major more, they must protect national cycle route 2 and Centurion Way, and Development Sites enhance these routes to make them safe for people to use. 71 Policy S32: Design 651 Chichester Gate with its unused piazza and tawdry, empty premises is the template of Strengthen the quality and rigour of CDC's planning scrutiny and enforcement Comment Linda Boize [6620] Strategies for Strategic how not to do it. The planned Southern Gateway development will be very visible to processes at all stages. and Major all, residents and visitors. Chichester Gate is a reminder of CDC's failure to deliver its Disallow piecemeal development of different standards occurring as a result of Development Sites aspirations. the main developer selling parcels of land to 'sub‐developers'. Appoint/co‐opt a The Southern Gateway development may follow a similar trajectory, not meeting Design Champion ‐ perhaps an architect who represents good practice, design CDC's flagship project aspirations as developers/builders sacrifice quality to etc, to work with and advise CDC and developers. Use the Design Codes system higher/denser buildings, poor and low cost design and build. to define more accurately design requirements. 71 Policy S32: Design 800 Great in theory. But this never happens at the prelim stage. Local communities are Proper detail must be included in the plan along with proven data before the Object Mrs Fiona Horn [6652] Strategies for Strategic dictated to not allowed to be involved until initial plans have already been instigated. plan can be accepted. and Major This plan lacks any concrete data, even housing numbers are fluid ie AL6 maybe 100 Development Sites houses maybe 200 houses. how can you justify a masterplan with no detail or data on transport infrastructure, schools, doctors etc? Just a glorified wish list ! Unless this is adequately addressed in future iterations I will be raising it with the examiner at the appropriate time. Page 206 of 427 Chapter/Policy ID Representation Summary Representation Change to Plan Type Respondent 71 Policy S32: Design 1134 Points b, e and g are welcomed. Comment British Horse Society (Mrs Strategies for Strategic Tricia Butcher) [757] and Major It is important that leisure and recreational routes, and new prow connect to the Development Sites wider countryside for public benefit, and are not just contained within a development. There are many examples in the county where new routes have been created across or on the fringe of a development, which link to a wider network of recreational routes. 71 Policy S32: Design 1265 Existing settlements area at risk of losing their existing identity and meaning with This policy should be strengthened to ensure protection of existing communities Object North Mundham Parish Strategies for Strategic villages turning into sizeable towns. through appropriate design strategies. Council (Parish Clerk) [1193] and Major Development Sites 71 Policy S32: Design 1305 The masterplan states in section e) provide community facilities and other amenities Support Bosham Football Club (Mr Strategies for Strategic to meet the needs of all the community including access to education and training Neil Redman) [748] and Major facilities, health care, community leisure and recreation facilities as appropriate. Development Sites If it is to be an inclusive facility and meet the S12, S21 and S32 policy. Location will yet to be defined through working with the District Council and Parish Council. Options to be considered. This will then meet the required short fall of identified facilities for the Open Space Pitch Study, DM32. 71 Policy S32: Design 1520 Given the potential impacts of the strategic allocations on the setting of the National Comment Natural England (Mrs Alison Strategies for Strategic Park and AONB, Natural England recommends including a requirement for the Giacomelli) [1178] and Major Masterplan to be informed by a Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment. Development Sites 71 Policy S32: Design 1725 We note and endorse the approach wherein proposals for strategic development Comment Heaver Homes Ltd [7183] Strategies for Strategic should be developed through consultation and iterative dialogue. There is no and Major reference to a requirement that a given Masterplan should be adopted or incapable Development Sites of review once agreed. This pragmatic approach provides the best opportunity of responding to market signals to secure deliverable schemes and early contribution to the OAN. A comprehensive site‐wide design strategy can be prepared and/or taken forward by developers. There should be no requirement for the LPA to manage delivery unless it is clearly evidenced that this is necessary to realise policy obectives. 71 Policy S32: Design 2020 Development that would either involve the loss of playing field or prejudice the use Comment Sport England (Ms Laura Strategies for Strategic of the playing field (for example, housing immediately adjacent to an existing playing Hutson) [1308] and Major field) would be strongly resisted by Sport England. Development Sites 71 Policy S32: Design 2208 We support this policy and specifically requirements for issues such as green Support Environment Agency (Mrs Strategies for Strategic infrastructure and SuDS to be fully considered through a Masterplan. Without this Hannah Hyland) [909] and Major overarching vision for larger sites it is often difficult to provide a comprehensive Development Sites scheme to address key environmental constraints and opportunities. 71 Policy S32: Design 2258 Historic England welcomes and supports clause d of Policy S32; "integrate with the Support Historic England (Mr Martin Strategies for Strategic surrounding built, historic and natural environments" as part of the positive strategy Small) [1083] and Major for the conservation and enjoyment of the historic environment required by Development Sites paragraph 185 of the National Planning Policy Framework. 71 Policy S32: Design 2354 Bullet points b, e & g ‐ the aims of these are welcomed but any new routes are linked Support West Sussex Local Access Strategies for Strategic from new developments to the wider PRoW and access networks Forum (WSLAF) (Graham and Major Elvey) [7280] Development Sites Page 207 of 427 Chapter/Policy ID Representation Summary Representation Change to Plan Type Respondent 71 Policy S32: Design 2392 Agree with this policy Support Mr John Newman [5206] Strategies for Strategic and Major Development Sites 71 Policy S32: Design 2412 We would strongly encourage masterplans and development briefs for each Criteria h ‐ include requirement to state max building heights Comment South Downs National Park Strategies for Strategic allocation to come ahead of applications and demonstrate positive design Authority (Ms Lucy and Major interventions which respond directly to landscape/SDNP sensitivities. We would be Policy to require design strategies to be informed by landscape Howard) [1292] Development Sites happy to be involved in shaping these