Category Archives: Planning

Proposed land swap involving Bishop Luffa School – give the Council your views

The City Council say there is the potential to swap some parcels of land between the Bishop Luffa School and the West of Chichester development site. This would enable a new extended school for ages 4-18 to be delivered on the West of Chichester Site, adjacent to the newly permitted sports pitches, and the existing school site would then be developed for housing, which would fund the building of the school. Bishop Luffa School are keen for such a land swap to go ahead. The proposal document can be viewed here.

The Council wants to know the views of locals – voting can be done online here or by indicating a preference via the last page in the document – returning it to the Council.

Voting will close on 15 December 2020

Vote on options for the City’s local road network

The Chichester City Council, together with the residents of Chichester, are in the process of preparing a Chichester Neighbourhood Plan. The Plan can include planning policies,
infrastructure projects, and aspirations. They have produced a document Southern Gateway: Road opportunities  Chichester Neighbourhood Plan – Background document which examines how the local road network could be improved in the vicinity of the Southern Gateway redevelopment area. It follows on from public consultation through which residents expressed support for a bridge or underpass across the Basin Road level crossing and for re-routing cars out of the city centre.

The document sets out the existing situation with city centre highway routing and four options: Firstly, the two preferred options for highways changes that CDC is considering making, namely

  • – reducing the southern gyratory to one lane (option 10)
  • – building a new link road through the city centre (option 11)

Secondly, the City Council’s new options

  • – redirecting cars out of the city centre, pedestrianizing Southgate (option 12), and
  • – as above with an underpass at Basin Road level crossing (option 13)

There is also the option to stay as we are (options 0)

The options are out for consultation – to express  a choice or add a comment go to here.

Voting will close on 15 December 2020

The Society’s formal response to Government on planned changes to the planning system

The Society has previously made a response to the proposals via Civic Voice as noted in an earlier post available hereIt has now filed a formal response with the Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government (GCLG) as noted below. (If you wish to view the Government’s consultation document it can be viewed here; the ensuing white paper can be viewed here)

Below is the Chichester Society view on the two planning consultations published by DCLG in August 2020 entitled: Changes to current Planning System and Planning for the Future.  We begin with an introduction which provides some context to our circumstances here in Chichester.

Introduction

Local planning policy is governed by the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). This places upon local planning authorities (LPAs) a duty to deliver sustainable development in their area based upon nationally directed Objectively Assessed Need targets for housing (OAN). The NPPF places what is called a ‘presumption in favour of development’ on all planning applications unless it can be demonstrated that the development would be detrimental based on defined policies.

Development in any LPA area is identified by the production of a Local Plan (LP). This must be a robust and clear document that outlines the planning framework and long-term strategy over a 15-year lifespan. The LP in Chichester was adopted in 2015 with a housing allocation of 435 dwellings per annum.  It needed review before July 2020 for it to have remained valid. The LP must be regularly monitored and updated in order to show that the planning authority have a five-year supply of land to meet the centrally allocated Objectively Assessed Need.

Chichester District Council (CDC) began a Review of the Adopted LP in 2016 in order to demonstrate that they had the land supply to meet the OAN of 12,350 dwellings for the remaining period (2016-2035). This means that the council had to be able to demonstrate that it had sufficient sites allocated to deliver 628 dwellings per year and this became the adopted level in the Review.

CDC is tightly constrained in the area that it can allocate for housing development because the majority of the district is located within the South Downs National Park (SDNP) which is its own LPA and is therefore excluded from the Chichester Local Plan Area. Our District also includes the Chichester Harbour AONB, Pagham Harbour Special Protection Area and Medmerry Compensatory Habitat.  All these are excluded from development. This leaves a very limited area of land for housing allocation and inevitably squeezes development into a limited number of areas within the City, on the East-West corridor from Tangmere to Southbourne and on the Manhood Peninsula which is in the Southern Coastal Plain and is very fertile.

Suitable sites for development are assessed via a Housing and Economic Land Availability Assessment (HELAA). Sites from the HELAA are selected and identified for potential future development.

Local opposition to Highways England proposals for the A27 road improvement resulted in cancellation of their proposals.  This has hindered the Local Plan Review as many of the assumptions around road capacity that informed the initial site allocations and transport capacity work had to be abandoned following the scrapping of the scheme by central government. New rules on nutrient neutrality in the waters of the Solent introduced by Natural England in June 2019 have further added to the delay of the Review.

The LP has now become out of date. Its Review is now behind schedule and as of July 2020, CDC can no longer demonstrate a five-year land supply to deliver housing. This leaves our communities vulnerable to speculative applications to bring forward sites within the HELAA assessment, which are by definition regarded as sustainable.  We now live with an Interim Policy Statement aimed at limiting ‘planning by appeal’.

In August the government proposed changes to existing planning law to come into effect later this autumn.

The first was called Changes to current Planning System. It does not need primary legislation. Of particular concern are the changes to the formula used to establish the OAN.  It is calculated that the new formula will result in an increase in the OAN for the CDC area from 628 to 995 dwellings per annum, a large increase.

Secondly and at the same time, the Government published a Planning White Paper called Planning for the Future the object of which is to ensure that at least 300,000 new dwellings are built in England each year. This does need primary legislation and is the biggest change to planning policy since 1947. It is to be achieved by zoning areas for ‘growth’, ‘renewal’ or ‘protection’.  It proposes public participation at the consultation stage when Local Plans are drafted but reduced public consultation later on when development in ‘growth’ areas comes forward – in fact leading to abandoning the need for outline planning applications altogether in many cases. The proposal is that automatic outline permission is given for new development in “growth” areas and for “beautiful” schemes.

At present it can take 5 to 10 years to create a LP and the White Paper aims to reduce this to just 30 months. LPs will be much shorter (a reduction of 2/3rds in size is envisaged).  The new style LP will be just a ‘core set of standards and requirements for development’.  All this will be achieved by making new LPs subject only to the NPPF ‘sustainability’ test, by abolishing the test of ‘soundness’, abolishing ‘sustainability appraisals’ and abolishing the ‘duty to cooperate’.

Once new style LPs are in place it is proposed to limit the time it takes to determine planning applications to just 8 or 13 weeks and to achieve this, the White Paper is suggesting that LPAs must refund application fees if they exceed these periods.

We have made comments on both consultations.

Comments on ‘Changes to current Planning System’.

Below are the views of the Chichester Society on the first consultation Changes to current Planning System:

“Because of the amount of protected landscape (SDNP & AONB) within the Chichester District so little is left that is capable of development and almost all that there is comprises high grade agricultural land in farming production mainly within the southern coastal plain.  With the need to increase food production, this area has some of the most fertile land in England with long sunshine hours capable of high levels of agricultural output.  To destroy this natural resource and instead to build houses upon it makes no economic sense.

 The housing numbers imposed on any Local Planning Authority area should not be determined by the actual size of the authority area but on the size of those parts which have no physical or environmental limits to development. Therefore, we consider that assessment of housing numbers in any District area should be reduced by the omission of those parts:

  • within a National Park,
  • an AONB,
  • of land liable to flood,
  • of grade 1 & 2 agricultural land,
  • of wildlife corridors
  • and of greenfield land important to the setting of the National Park, AONB or City.

In addition, in Chichester, so much of the demand for housing comes from completely outside the area by the insatiable demand from those elsewhere in England seeking to relocate, many for early retirement. Priority in the allocation of new housing should be given to local residents and young people

Comments on the White Paper ‘Planning for the Future’

The Chichester Society has made comment on the second consultation which is the planning White Paper called Planning for the Future set out below:

  • The White Paper proposes the encouragement of public participation at the consultation stage of Local Plan preparation so as to reduce consultation later on when development in comes forward.

Comment: We oppose the limiting of public engagement. Our experience has been that the standard of design falls once development is applied for. We believe that all development should continue to be the subject of individual planning applications. Public engagement is considered essential if the planning process is to be seen as trusted. Paragraph 2.48 of the White Paper states that peoples’ right to be heard in person will be changed at local plan inquiries. Planning Inspectors will be given the discretion over the form that an objector’s representation might take with the ‘right to be heard’ during a public forum removed. The right to appear and be heard could be replaced with the opportunity for an Inspector to call objectors over the phone or ask for further written comments at the Inspector’s discretion. The issue of limited public involvement  becomes even more important when one considers that the opportunity to engage in the planning application process is also being diminished by the new proposals.

  • Making Local Plans subject only to the NPPF ‘sustainability’ test. Abolishing the test of ‘soundness’, abolishing ‘sustainability appraisals’ and abolishing the ‘duty to cooperate’.

Comment: These tests are seen as essential. We are concerned about funding for essential infrastructure.  The White paper is largely silent on effective mechanisms for achieving infrastructure, housing or flood risk.  The removal of the ‘Duty to Cooperate’ raises concern as how consideration will be given to resolving strategic cross boundary issues such as major infrastructure. 

  • Involve communities in setting design codes in their area for Local Plans.

Comment: The planning system was previously reformed to address concerns that it was not sensitive enough to local needs and this brought about Neighbourhood Plans.  It is particularly unclear how Neighbourhood Plans will fit into the proposed new zonal planning system.  There is no clarity about the scope and power of Neighbourhood Plans in the new system. The current proposals would appear to reduce the role of Neighbourhood Plans to local design guides. 

  • Altering the system such that all land falls within one of 3 planning zones– a ‘growth area’ suitable for substantial development’, a ‘renewal area’ which means an existing built up area which is considered suitable for development or ‘densification’ and finally a ‘protected area’ where more stringent development controls apply.

Comment: We have concern that public support to agree where ‘growth’ is to take place will be difficult, perhaps impossible.

  • Limit the time to determine planning applications to 8 or 13 weeks and to achieve this, to consider making LPAs refund application fees if they exceed these periods.

Comment: Such pressure is only likely to reduce public confidence in the planning system. 

  • Increase land owner / developer contributions when land is given planning permission for development

Comment: Support

  • Replace paper with digital code: interactive maps, modelling and text messaging.

Comment: Support

CPRE Response to Changes to the Planning System

The Campaign to Protect Rural England has responded  to the Government’s proposed changes to the Planning System.

CPRE believes that planning is crucial to empowering local communities and making
sustainable, liveable places. Ensuring everyone has a decent home, that meets their needs
and that they can afford, is essential to that, both in town and country. Equally, it is vital
that new development is planned intelligently; our countryside is precious and fragile and
urgently needs better management in the face of the climate and nature emergencies.
Critical to this is that land is not lost to development unnecessarily. More new homes are
undeniably needed, and there is plenty of scope to use previously developed urban land
to help address this need.

It is their view, however, that the proposals will mainly hinder these aims, principally
through their reliance on centralised prescription and formulae instead of on judgement
and local evidence. They state that the consultation itself is symptomatic of Government’s apparent reluctance for meaningful input. It asks respondents to comment on a wide range of specific details, but doesn’t consult on the policy principles that underpin the proposals, despite these being often the most important points people will wish to address.

The full response from the CPRE can be read here.

The Chichester Society was one of many organisations contributing to this response – it’s response can be found here

 

ChiSoc responds to UK Government Consultation on changes to the planning system

The Chichester Society has submitted a response to two Government documents relating to the planning system.

First the Government has published a consultation document on changes to the planning system a copy of which can be viewed here. The consultation ends at 11:45pm on 1 October 2020. Ways for members of the public to respond can be found here.

Second the Government has also issued a White PaperPlanning for the Future’ which can be found here.

The Chichester Society Executive Committee has submitted the following response:

To Civic Voice

The Chichester Society is making the representations set out below to Government on the two planning Consultations.

  • Changes to current Planning Systems, a consultation paper with proposals to improve the effectiveness of the current system. It will be found on this link:

Our comment:

Whereas under current policies the assessment of how many new dwellings are to be planned for in any given district is subject to a cap, which applies as a limit to the number, the new method will remove that cap. In addition, statistical sources for determining the starting number of new homes will now involve the use of the ‘higher of’ of various statistics. The Chichester District Local Plan 2015 which expired in July this year contained a requirement for 435 dwellings per annum. We understand that the number will increase to 995 dpa or thereabouts as a result of the changes now proposed which we consider excessive.

These changes pay no regard to local circumstance. They treat all parts of England in the same way.  We believe that the individual character of our District areas should be assessed rather than our being handed a formula of “one size fits all”.

Because of the amount of protected landscape (SDNP & AONB) within the Chichester District so little is left that is capable of development and almost all that there is comprises high grade agricultural land in farming production mainly within the southern coastal plain.  With the need to increase food production, this area has some of the most fertile land in England with long sunshine hours capable of high levels of agricultural output.  To destroy this natural resource and instead to build houses upon it makes no economic sense.

The housing numbers imposed on any Local Planning Authority area should not be determined by the actual size of the authority area but on the size of those parts which have no physical or environmental limits to development. Therefore, we consider that assessment of housing number in any District area should be reduced by the omission of  those parts:

  • within a National Park,
  • an AONB,
  • land liable to flood,
  • grade 1 & 2 agricultural land,
  • wildlife corridors
  • and greenfield land important to the setting of the any National Park, AONB or City.

In addition, in Chichester, so much of the demand for housing comes from completely outside the area by the insatiable demand from those elsewhere in England seeking to relocate, many for early retirement. Priority in the allocation of new housing should be given to local residents and young people

 

2          Planning for the Future (The White Paper) will be found on this link:

Our Comment

  • It is proposed to reduce the content of Local Plans. The changes envisage reducing the size of LPs by ‘at least 2/3rds’ by cutting out all lists of ‘policies’ and instead producing a ‘core set of standards and requirements for development’.

Comment: This is a huge task for Local Planning Authorities with limited staff and expertise to create what will need to be site specific sets of ‘standards and requirements for development’ on all areas where ‘growth’ or ‘renewal’ is to be zoned.

  • Encouraging greater public participation at the consultation stage of LPs so as to reduce consultation later on when development in ‘growth’ areas comes forward – in fact leading to abandoning the need for outline planning applications altogether in many cases. The proposal is that automatic outline permission is given for new development in “growth” areas and for “beautiful” schemes.

Comment: We oppose the limiting of public engagement on where new development is to be allocated to that period during the Local Plan preparation. Our experience has been that the standard of design falls once development is applied for. We believe that all development should continue to be the subject of individual planning applications.

  • Making LPs subject only to the NPPF ‘sustainability’ test, abolishing the test of ‘soundness’, abolishing ‘sustainability appraisals’ and abolishing the ‘duty to cooperate’.

Comment: These tests are seen as essential in preventing a ’developers’ charter.

  • Limit content of LPs to that of setting out site or area specific parameters.

Comment: This is a huge task beyond the capacity of most District PLA’s and would need major public engagement to be seen as trusted.

  • Involve communities in setting design codes in their area for LPs.

Comment: Looking at the National Design Guide published in Oct 2019, it says almost nothing about community involvement in setting local design codes which we think it should have done. Communities will want involvement provided they believe they will be listened to.

  • Nationally to set a new infrastructure levy for infrastructure and affordable housing.

Comment: no comment

  • Alter Local Planning Authority (LPA) planning roles to that of appointing a chief officer for ‘design and place making’. The indication is that this may become a ‘statutory appointment’.

Comment: no comment

  • Altering the system such that all land falls within one of 3 planning zones– a ‘growth area’ suitable for substantial development’, a ‘renewal area’ which means an existing built up area which is considered suitable for development or ‘densification’ and finally a ‘protected area’ where more stringent development controls apply.

Comment: We have concern that public support to agree where ‘growth’ is to take place will be difficult, perhaps impossible. We consider allocating land for ‘renewal’ and ‘protection’ will be easier.

  • Limit the time to determine planning applications to 8 or 13 weeks and to achieve this, to consider making LPAs refund application fees if they exceed these periods.

Comment: Such pressure is only likely to reduce public confidence in the planning system.

  • Reduce the time to produce a LP to just 30 months, with the threat of government intervention if exceeded. Give Planning Inspectors holding LP examinations the right to decide who is called to give evidence, the intention being to shorten the process.

Comment: This is a huge task for LPA’s with limited staff and expertise to create what will need to be site specific sets of ‘standards and requirements for development’ on all areas where ‘growth’ or ‘renewal’ is to be zoned.

  • Increase ‘permitted development’ rules

Comment: still under discussion

  • Increase land owner / developer contributions when land is given pp for development

Comment: Support

  • Replace paper with digital code: interactive maps, modelling and text messaging.

Comment: Support

 

Planning application responses – 29 May 2020

The following submissions were approved by the Society’s Executive Committee.
The entries below comprise the planning application number, brief details of the address and the subject of the application and the Society’s response.

You can view the planning application and any associated documents by quoting the application number at the District Council’s website here

20/01082/PLD
4 Alexandra Road, Chichester. Removal of front wall
Requested that this application is disallowed and an enforcement notice served on the applicant

20/01120/DOM
43 Bisopsgate Walk, Chichester. Part 2 storey and part single storey rear extension.
Requested that this application is refused pending a sensible rethink of the roof form.

20/01155/DOM
5 Tregarth Road, Chichester. Single storey rear and side extenson and loft extension and front porch.
Requested that this application is refused

Groundwork proceeds for housing development at Whitehouse Farm

In April 2018 The Chichester District Council approved outline planning application 14/04301/OUT “for the first phase of development for up to 750 homes with
access from Old Broyle Road, temporary access from Clay Lane, a local centre (with
associated employment, retail and community uses), primary school, informal and formal open space (including a Country Park), playing pitches, associated landscaping, utilities and drainage infrastructure with onsite foul sewage package treatment plant or pumping station with connection to Tangmere Waste Water Treatment Works“.

So, what visible progress has been made?

Well, a walk up Centurion Way on 20 April began to make clear – as shown below – the visual and environmental impact that this development will have on Chichester, irrespective of the benefits it will bring to those seeking homes of their own.

Click on the images to enlarge them.

What will disappear as a result of the development?

The first image below is from Google Earth and shows the original natural landscape, pre-development.

Whitehouse Farm area prior to development as seen from Google Earth

The second image shows the local landscape character and context as documented by WYG development consultants acting on behalf of Linden Homes and Miller Homes. It shows what ancient and distinctive features will be lost.

Landscape appraisal Whitehouse Farm development. Sourced from https://www.wyg.com/

The third image shows the site plan from the original application and it is relatively easy to visually overlay this over the natural landscape image.

Plan of development site from original application

 

If you have any comments on this topic please contribute by adding them below.

Sussex Local Nature Partnership’s Natural Capital Investment Strategy is endorsed by the WSCC

The Society has an interest in preservation, protection and improvement in the City of Chichester and its environs and to this extent the natural environment is is an area of concern.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The term natural capital’ describes the parts of the natural environment -‘stocks’ of waters, land, air, species, minerals and oceans – that produce value to people. The capital generates ‘goods’ such as clean air and water, food, energy, wildlife, recreation and protection from hazards.

Locally, in this context, the Sussex Local Nature Partnership (NLP) was established “to work across sectors and organisations to secure the healthiest ecological system possible thereby protecting and enhancing the natural environment and all that it gives us”. Its Memorandum of Understanding of February 2014 brings together a wide range of interested parties from farming, local and national government, agencies, businesses, NGOs and research organisations represented on an Executive Committee “formed in such a way as to encourage conversations and interactions to promote the emergence of ideas, thoughts and interactions which will then lead to actions”.

The major output from the NLP has been the Natural Capital Investment Strategy for Sussex 2019-2024 adopted on October 2019 and published in December that year. This Strategy was endorsed by the County Council on 19th February who see it as providing “an important part of the evidence base for the development of the Local Industrial Strategy, the emerging West Sussex Climate Change and Environment Strategy and the East Sussex equivalent”. The strategy comes into effect at the end a call-in period which ends 28 February unless the call-in procedure is activated.

Declaring a Climate Emergency – what’s this all about?

What does it mean?

Oxford Dictionaries declared “climate emergency” the word of the year for 2019, following a hundred-fold increase in usage that it says demonstrated a “greater immediacy” in the way we talk about the climate. It defined the term as ‘a situation in which urgent action is required to reduce or halt climate change and avoid potentially irreversible environmental damage resulting from it’. However, the term ‘climate emergency’ has been around for some time, certainly before 2009.

What declarations have been made?

The first declaration of a climate emergency would seem to have been made by Darebin in December 2016, a council located in the Northern suburbs of Melbourne following sustained protests by various groups. It passed the motion that ‘Council recognises that we are in a state of climate emergency that requires urgent action by all levels of government, including by local councils’, and it agreed to establish an Energy and Environment Working Group to further develop Council proposals for a Darebin Energy Foundation and a Darebin Nature Trust.

At a UK government level the Scottish Parliament declared a climate emergency on 28 April 2019, making Scotland arguably the first country to do so. This was quickly followed by the National Assembly for Wales on the 29 April and then the Parliament of the United Kingdom for the UK as whole in 1 May.

The UK Government’s current target is to reduce carbon emissions by 80% (compared to 1990 levels) by 2050. This target was recommended by the Committee on Climate Change, the UK’s independent climate advisory body.

It has been documented by CACE (Council Action in the Climate Emergency) that as of November 2019 over 1200 local councils across 25 countries have declared a Climate Emergency.

What actions are being taken?

Declaring a climate emergency is not be an end in itself – plans and resources to address the emergency must follow. Actions need be taken at various levels by Individuals, community groups, businesses, local government, national government and international bodies.

Here at our local level the Chichester District Council approved in January 2020  a Climate Emergency Initial Action Plan which includes minimising emissions from new housing,  reduction in food waste, increased tree planting,  enhancing cycle and walking paths, increased electric vehicle charging points and promoting life style changes.

At the UK national level on 27 June 2019 the UK government amended the Climate Change Act and set a legally binding target to achieve net zero greenhouse gas emissions from across the UK economy by 2050. According to the Committee on Climate Change (the CCC) UK emissions were 44% below 1990 levels in 2018. The first (2008-12) and the second carbon budget (2013-17) have been met and the UK is on track to meet the third (2018-22) carbon budget, but is not on track to meet the fourth, which covers the period 2023-27.

UPDATES FROM THE UK GOVERNMENT

The UK Governement introduced its enhanced Enviroment Bill on 30 January 2020.It includes new powers to stop the exports of polluting plastic waste to developing countries, which could prevent harmful waste from being shipped out of sight whilst boosting the UK’s domestic recycling system.

On 4 February 2020 the government published the final estimates of UK territorial greenhouse gas emissions going back to 1990. A summary of the statistics can be found here.

CLIMATE EMERGENCY SOURCES

A vast and increasing number of organisations and pressure groups have arisen concerned with various aspects of climate change and how it might be addressed – examples of those found are noted below.

We welcome additions to this list and your contributions to the climate emergency debate via your comments below.

350.Group
https://350.org/about/
An international movement of ordinary people working to end the age of fossil fuels and build a world of community-led renewable energy for all.

Campaign against Climate Change
https://www.campaigncc.org/
The UK-based Campaign against Climate Change (CCC) exists to push for the urgent and radical action we need to prevent the catastrophic destabilisation of global climate. It provides a range of resources for councillors and campaigners

Centre for alternative technology
https://www.cat.org.uk/info-resources/zero-carbon-britain/
The Centre for alternative technology (CAT) is an educational charity located in Wales dedicated to researching and communicating positive solutions for environmental change.

Client Earth
https://www.clientearth.org/
ClientEarth is a charity that uses the power of the law to protect the planet and the people who live on it. They have lawyers and environmental experts across the world who are fighting against climate change and to protect nature and the environment.

Climate Coalition
https://www.theclimatecoalition.org/
UK-based body dedicated to action against climate change representing over 130 organisations across the UK, including the Women’s Institute, the National Trust, and the RSPB. The Climate Coalition is the operating name of the Climate Movement a registered charity.

Climate Emergency Declaration and Mobilisation In Action
https://www.cedamia.org/about/
Australian-based Climate Emergency Declaration and Mobilisation In Action (CEDAMIA) campaigns for a Climate Emergency Declaration at all levels of government. They also campaign for state/territory governments to ban new climate-damaging projects via the No More Bad Investments (NMBI) campaigns, and for local councils to implement Climate Emergency plans.

Climate Emergency Declaration
https://climateemergencydeclaration.org/
This site is hosted in Australia by a network of climate emergency action advocates. Its goal is for governments to declare a climate emergency and mobilise society-wide resources at sufficient scale and speed to protect civilisation, the economy, people, species, and ecosystems.

Climate Emergency UK
https://www.climateemergency.uk/
Climate Emergency UK monitors the ‘Climate & Environmental Emergency’ development in the United Kingdom at both local authority and national government level.

Climate Group
https://www.theclimategroup.org/about
An international non-profit, founded in 2004, with offices in London, New Delhi and New York to accelerate climate action by bringing together powerful networks of businesses and governments, to shift global markets and policies, towards this goal.

Committee on Climate Change
https://www.theccc.org.uk/about/
The Committee on Climate Change (the CCC) is an independent, statutory body established under the Climate Change Act 2008. Its purpose is to advise the UK Government and Devolved Administrations on emissions targets and report to Parliament on progress made in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and preparing for climate change.

Council Action in the Climate Emergency
https://www.caceonline.org/blog/dont-use-climate-emergency-in-vain-target-setting-in-the-climate-emergency
CACE (Council Action in the Climate Emergency) based in Australia was created to encourage and support councils adopting a Climate Emergency response. CACE is an initiative of Adrian Whitehead and Bryony Edwards in 2017 in response to their successful campaigning with Darebin Council.

Environmental Defense Fund
https://www.edf.org/our-work
The Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) is a US based organisation focussing on climate, oceans, ecosystems and health.

Extinction Rebellion
https://rebellion.earth/
An international movement that uses non-violent civil disobedience in an attempt to halt mass extinction and minimise the risk of social collapse. Numerous Extinction Rebellion groups actively campaign for the declaration of a climate emergency. There is a local Chichester branch Extinction Rebellion Chichester https://xrchi.uk/

Friends of the Earth
https://friendsoftheearth.uk/climate-change/what-can-I-do-to-stop-climate-change
Part of an international community dedicated to protecting the natural world and the wellbeing of everyone in it. Leads campaigns, provides resources and information, and aims to drive real solutions to the environmental problems.

Global justice now
https://www.globaljustice.org.uk/campaigns/climate-and-energy
Promotes the idea of Energy democracy  – creating an energy system which is democratic, shifts quickly to renewables and keeps electricity affordable for all.

Go Fossil Free
https://gofossilfree.org/
In the UK, it is mainly focused on divestment campaigning — asking public institutions to cut their political, social and financial ties to the fossil fuel industry.

Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment
http://www.lse.ac.uk/GranthamInstitute/
The Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment was established by the London School of Economics and Political Science in 2008 to create a world-leading centre for policy-relevant research and training on climate change and the environment, bringing together international expertise on economics, finance, geography, the environment, international development and political economy.

Greenpeace
https://www.greenpeace.org.uk/challenges/climate-change/
A Campaigning organisation focussing on changing the way we live.

International Energy Agency
https://www.iea.org/about/mission
The International Energy Agency (IEA) is at the heart of global dialogue on energy, providing authoritative analysis, data, policy recommendations, and real-world solutions to help countries provide secure and sustainable energy for all.

Natural Resources Defense Council
https://www.nrdc.org/issues/climate-change
a US-based organisation that tackles the climate crisis at its source: pollution from fossil fuels. They work to reduce dependence on these dirty sources by expanding clean energy across cities, states, and nations and for example, winning court cases that allow the federal government to limit carbon pollution from cars and power plants.

Nature Conservancy
https://www.nature.org/en-us/what-we-do/our-priorities/tackle-climate-change/
Focuses on innovative, science-based solutions that match the urgency of this crisis, such as promoting clean energy and restoring forests from Brazil to Indonesia and working to ensure a clean energy future.

Sandbag
https://sandbag.org.uk/
A non-profit climate change think tank based in London and Brussels. Uses data analysis to build evidence-based climate policy. The London branch focuses on accelerating the global coal phase-out, whilst the Brussels branch covers EU industrial policy and the EU ETS.

Statistical Review of World Energy
https://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/energy-economics/statistical-review-of-world-energy.html
The Statistical Review of World Energy provides energy data for the past 68 years. In addition to the raw data, the Statistical Review also provides a record of key energy developments and events through time.

Town and County Planning Association (TCPA)
https://www.tcpa.org.uk/
Campaigns for the reform of the UK’s planning system to make it more responsive to people’s needs and aspirations and to promote sustainable development. Has produced a  guide to planning for climate change  aimed at local authorities

Transition Chichester
http://www.transitionchichester.org/about/
A group keen to promote and embrace change which helps create a sustainable local environment and a more resilient community.

Tyndall Centre
https://www.tyndall.ac.uk/about
The Tyndall Centre is a partnership of universities bringing together researchers from the social and natural sciences and engineering to develop sustainable responses to climate change.

UK Government
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/climate-change-explained
Explanations and guidance from the UK Government.

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
https://unfccc.int/about-us/about-the-secretariat
Focussing in its early years largely on facilitating the intergovernmental climate change negotiations, the secretariat today supports a complex architecture of bodies that serve to advance the implementation of the Convention, the Kyoto Protocol and the Paris Agreement.

World Wildlife Fund
https://www.wwf.org.uk/what-we-do/area-of-work/climate-change-and-energy
World Wildlife Fund (WWF) is an international campaigning organisation to drive changes in policy and legislation. In the UK it is working to ensure that the UK government is held to account on reducing its carbon emissions. Its focus is on 3 main areas: power, transport and buildings (accounting for 90% of UK emissions).

 

Living with beauty – report of the Building Better, Building Beautiful Commission

The Commission was established as an independent body to advise the UK Government on how to promote and increase the use of high-quality design for new build homes and neighbourhoods. It released its first report ‘Living with Beauty’ on 30 January 2020.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

They stress that beauty must become the natural result of working within our planning system. To achieve this result, they have three aims for the system as a whole –

  • Ask for Beauty
  • Refuse Ugliness
  • Promote Stewardship

They state these aims must be embedded in the planning system and in the culture of development, in such a way as to incentivise beauty and deter ugliness at every point where the choice arises. To do this they make policy proposals in the following areas:

  1. Planning: create a predictable level playing field
  2. Communities: bring the democracy forward
  3. Stewardship: incentivise responsibility to the future
  4. Regeneration: end the scandal of left behind place
  5. Neighbourhoods: create places not just houses
  6. Nature: re-green our towns and cities
  7. Education: promote a wider understanding of placemaking
  8. Management: value planning, count happiness, procure properly

If you have a view on this please you are welcome to add your comments below.

Al fresco dining – at a cost under review

The Chichester Vision, outlined in the District Council’s publication Chichester Tomorrow‘ envisages open spaces, places to rest and pedestrianised areas with space for eating out, art and performance, and other leisure activities.  Those visiting our City often welcome areas to sit outside – whether for a coffee, more formal al fresco dining or because they can’t smoke inside the adjoining establishment.

However, to provide some of these facilities comes at a cost  as it is a legal requirement of West Sussex County Council for businesses to have a licence for tables and chairs positioned on the highway, including pavements – and they have  to adhere to various terms and conditions. The Council has apparently recorded a significant rise in complaints due to the increase in tables and needs to assess each location for its suitability.

As of January 2020 the annual fee for placing tables and chairs on the highway is £520. However, the price is subject to change each financial year and the Council has initiated a consultation which closes on 24 February with a decision due March 2020.

Council announces preferred development bidder for Southern Gateway project

The Council released the following Press Release on 13 January

Date of Release: 13 January 2020 Ref: 3951

Council selects developer to deliver major Chichester regeneration

Chichester District Council has selected its preferred development partner to deliver the Southern Gateway regeneration project.

Once appointed, Henry Boot Developments will work to transform the southern area of Chichester into a vibrant and attractive new quarter, as proposed in the Southern Gateway Masterplan.

“We are incredibly pleased to have reached this pivotal stage in the project,” says Councillor Martyn Bell, Cabinet Member for Growth, Place, and Regeneration. “Selecting a developer signals a key step forward for this major regeneration project.

“A lot of progress has been made in the past year, with the help of our partners West Sussex County Council, Homes England, and Coast to Capital. We started the selection for a developer in May last year, and received interest from some very strong candidates.

“We are confident that Henry Boot Developments is the best choice to take the visions and aims of the Southern Gateway masterplan and make these a reality for the benefit of the community.”

Bob Lanzer, the county council’s Cabinet Member for the Economy, welcomed the selection of a development partner, saying: “This is a big step forward. The Southern Gateway proposals are a key part of the Chichester Growth Deal and developing the site will contribute to the housing needs identified by Chichester District Council.”

The Southern Gateway area comprises of several parcels of land, including:

The bus station and depot;
Basin Road car park;
Law courts;
The former Chichester Police Station playing field;
Former high school buildings; and,
Royal Mail depot buildings.

The project aims to encourage economic growth and create new, better paid jobs by transforming this largely brownfield area. The 30-acre site will be regenerated to feature an estimated:

365 new homes;
20,600 square metres of commercial space including business and retail space and leisure and tourism facilities;
improved transport links and a focus on cycling, walking and public transport; plus,
public space enhancements and landscaping.

The project is predicted to create approximately 1,400 jobs and protect at least 200 existing jobs.

It is also a key project in the Chichester Vision, which aims to boost economic growth in Chichester City Centre. The aim is to help Chichester attract inward investment and stimulate economic growth by making the most of its heritage and culture, while also adapting to better meet the needs of residents, workers, visitors, and students. Priorities are to reduce traffic, support independent businesses and create a more diverse evening culture.

The Southern Gateway project is also part of the One Public Estate West Sussex programme, which aims to reduce revenue costs, improve public services and release land for housing and economic growth.

People can keep up to date on the Southern Gateway project by visiting www.chichester.gov.uk/southerngateway, which includes a variety of frequently asked questions on all areas of the project. People can also find updates in the council’s residents’ magazine ‘initiatives’, and on the council’s social media pages.

ENDS

Neighbourhood Plan launch to seek views

Public Launch for the Plan

A public consultation launch for the Neighbourhood Plan was made by Cllr. Richard Plowman, Mayor of Chichester on 14 October 2019 in the City’s Assembly Rooms, attended by over 100 including residents, members of the public and representatives from a number of local organisations. The presentation can be viewed here and the notes from the meeting here. The boundary of our Parish is viewable here.

Ten fundamental principles were laid down:
  1. The City declared a climate change emergency in June 2019 which must be backed by real and effective action.
  2. The City will be carbon neutral by 2030.
  3. The City Centre to be free of all fossil fuelled powered vehicles, the use of electrical vehicles to be encouraged and all deliveries to be made by electrical vehicle transport.
  4. The City to remain small and compact essentially a large historic market town in a rural setting and to position it to be a Unesco World Heritage site by 2032
  5. The City parks and green open spaces to be protected and enhanced. Re-wilding of derelict areas and use of more trees in the urban areas to produce natural wildlife corridors and public spaces such as squares throughout the City with zoning of areas with different characteristics eg retail, restaurant and evening economy.
  6. The City views are determined by the Cathedral and these views respected and all buildings to be subservient and generally no more than four stories high.
  7. The City economy needs revitalising particularly the City Centre and attracting more visitors to the City
    through Tourism, and the Meetings, Incentive and Conference industry (MICE).
  8. The City to maintain, enforce and expand areas of Conservation and preserve buildings of both historic, social cultural and architecturally.
  9. The plan to be holistic and inclusive for all people of Chichester (elderly, families, young, students, disabled and disadvantaged).
  10. The Neighbourhood Plan will be made by the People for the People of Chichester and will be part of Planning Legislation.
Aims to be achieved

The following were cited:

  1. Large international hotel of 200-250 beds (needs meeting and conference facilities)
  2. Large multi-use events/ performance/ exhibition/ conference hall
  3. Removal of level crossings and replacement with low level underpass
  4. More train and bus services to and from Chichester and metro line to Bognor Regis
    and coast
  5. Concert/ Theatre Hall up to 550 capacity (possibly the Court Building)
  6. Large Nightclub
  7. Central Medical centre
  8. New Crematorium
  9. HiTec village for graduates/millenniums near Station
  10. Zoning of areas in the City for better navigation eg North Street, East Street for Retail
    and service, Central Cross area for banks and jewellers. West Street – Cathedral and
    cultural. South street restaurant, bars and evening economy. Eastgate square and St
    Pancras village
  11. Improved public realm increased pedestrian areas and signage. Cathedral square
  12. Public square for Farmers and special markets e g Christmas/ Ice rink.
  13. Cultural trail linking Galleries and Theatre

 

GET INVOLVED

To elicit views of residents and the public an online survey is being used and can be viewed here. The survey closes at 5pm on Monday 9th December 2019

The City Council has a dedicated website page and a Facebook account to enable progress on the Plan to be followed and views to be expressed.

 

You can also add your comments to this post below

David Johnson, Chair of CPRE talks about its work at our 2019 AGM

BOGNOR IS NOW A MILE NEARER CHICHESTER THAN IT WAS FIFTY YEARS AGO!

Sarah Quail reports on what David Johnson, Vice Chair of the Sussex Branch of the Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE), had to say at Chichester Society’s AGM held 16 October 2019 in the Assembly Rooms.

Yes, we learned this startling fact about Bognor early in David Johnson’s address. I suppose we should not be particularly surprised. Acres of green field are fast disappearing round Bognor and Chichester to satisfy the insatiable demand for more housing across the country. There is no designated green belt along our coastal strip which is constrained by the South Downs National Park to the north and the sea to the south. Only green gaps prevent the coalescence of the different urban areas. These gaps are vital, David Johnson argued, for a whole number of different reasons not least our physical well-being.
CPRE works to protect, promote and enhance our towns and countryside to make them better places to live in, work and enjoy, and to ensure that the countryside is protected for now and for future generations. To these ends, the Sussex Branch is challenging housing need numbers, and the whole notion of what is actually affordable housing. It endeavors to work with local authorities on how we can all make development work without jeopardizing what we hold dear: access to greenery!

He also discussed the impact of our changing weather on the local environment and in this context touched not only on the Medmerry managed realignment scheme but also on the need to cut car journeys by 20 percent. Controversially, he asked why we are discussing new roads for Chichester? Plans for the A27, he suggested, need to be re-examined in the light of climate change exacerbated by petrol and diesel-driven internal combustion engines.

We must also build sensitively on brown field sites before we start driving earth-moving equipment onto green fields. Interestingly, he moved on to discuss the growing lack of public confidence in local authorities’ ability to implement a planning framework now generally regarded as faulty in the light of climate change. De-growth, he argued, was what was required now not more growth.

A Chichester branch of CPRE Sussex has been established recently and details of how to join can be found on their website at www.cpresussex.org.uk. The purpose of CPRE Sussex is to shape the future of this county in a positive way. It is keen, David Johnson said, to be both a town and country organization and it is indeed in all our interests that they take forward these ambitions and continue to campaign on the environmental impact of development across this region.

Benefits from developing South West of Chichester

John Templeton explains why your Society supports these proposals

Although the Local Plan for Chichester District was adopted in 2015 the Government has instructed it must be reviewed to address the ‘Objectively Assessed Need’ for yet more housing. Last winter Chichester District Council (CDC) consulted on revisions to the Local Plan that included a new Strategic Site Allocation for greenfield land south west of Stockbridge, between the Chichester bypass and Chichester Harbour. This has set alarm bells ringing loudly!

The Council’s proposal is to develop about 85 hectares of which around 35 hectares would be for employment uses, plus at least 100 new homes and a country park. Also included is a new road link from the A27 Fishbourne (aka Tesco) roundabout to the A286 Birdham Road, south of Stockbridge. The plan below shows an outline route for this road based on a transport study by Peter Brett Associates commissioned by CDC.

To the surprise of some of our members the Society supported this proposal. Whilst we have long argued that priority for new housing should be on brownfield land within the city itself we can see many benefits that could arise from this new proposal, and which we outline below.

Link road benefits

Firstly, a link road to Stockbridge would not only serve the new developments but would provide an additional link to the towns and villages on the Manhood Peninsular and at the same time reduce congestion and pollution at Stockbridge and the dangerous rat-run of Apuldram Lane.

View across fields from the public footpath east of Apuldram Lane towards the city, some of which could become a country park. Photo: John Templeton

Understanding landscape

Some 15 years ago CDC commissioned a major landscape strategy of all potential development land surrounding the city. It was published in 2005 as The Future Growth of Chichester: Landscape and Visual Amenity Considerations. Areas assessed around the city included fields west of Stockbridge near to Chichester Harbour. Land close to Stockbridge was found to be of poor quality with gappy hedgerows and no views of the cathedral or of the Downs. But to the west, medieval field boundaries still existed with mature trees and hedgerows forming part of the rural setting of both the city and the hamlet of Apuldram, with distant views of the cathedral spire and the Downs beyond.

Rural gap benefits

It is therefore essential that a new link road, well screened with trees and hedgerows, must form the western limit to any extension to Stockbridge, with land to the west retained as a rural gap between the city and the harbour. It should be carefully landscaped as meadows, indeed maybe water meadows because much of it is in a flood-risk area, with the meandering river Lavant (when it flows!) contributing to the proposed wildlife corridor between the Harbour and the Downs. At present the only access to this land is a poorly defined public footpath between the city and the harbour, with a footbridge over the railway to Terminus Road and a highly dangerous crossing of the dual carriageway A27 bypass. This is the shortest walk from the city to the sea, but please don’t risk your life even wearing a high-viz jacket! This route should be upgraded as a footpath/ cycleway with a pedestrian bridge over the bypass, also connecting to the new development (a case for Section 106 Planning gain?).

A new link road to and from Stockbridge would reduce the present excessive use of Apuldram Lane Photo: John Templeton

Housing and employment benefits

As for the development itself, the most obvious location for housing would be towards the southern end, close to Stockbridge to benefit from the shops and community facilities already there, as well as the quarter hour bus service along the Birdham Road. Further north, towards the A27, well designed employment development could take place, which would attract new firms to the city. Creating new employment north of Stockbridge would also enable vacant or underused sites on the city’s industrial estates at Terminus Road and Quarry Lane to be reallocated for much needed affordable housing within walking distance of the city centre.

Agreeing a master plan

Unlike other major greenfield developments underway which could provide no benefits to the existing city, this new proposal for south west Chichester if properly planned will have major benefits. It is however essential that the community is involved in the drawing up of an agreed master plan and that this is adhered to as the development progresses. The devil will be is in the detail!

(This article originally appeared in the September 2019 edition of the Society’s Newsletter)

Chichester’s Southern Gateway – an update

Robin Hamilton updates readers about the Gateway+ development campaign

This is an update on the Gateway + campaign to offer a dynamic alternative to the Southern Gateway proposal by Chichester District Council (CDC). We see the Gateway+ proposal more as a development of the CDC initiative rather than an alternative. The recognition of the need to develop the southern part of Chichester is in no doubt. It is how this opportunity should be grasped is where we differ.

Please support this initative – we welcome comments added to this post
How we came this far

 You may well have seen our previous articles aboutGateway + but in case you didn’t, here is a short synopsisof the history of Gateway+. Early in 2018 a small groupof local residents met to discuss the recently publishedproposals for the Southern Gateway. They felt that CDC’sproposals did not go nearly far enough consideringthis is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to do somethingin Chichester that will be a lasting memory of ourgeneration. After some research into what residents andbusinesses would like to happen in this part of Chichesterthe group organised a presentation in Pallant HouseGallery in June last year. The reception by those who attended, and the general public since then, has beenvery encouraging – particularly from the younger peopleof Chichester!

Outline plans

Since then the Gateway+ proposals have been honed to the outline plans we have today.

Revised layout for the Forum development as proposed by Gateway+. Note that all facilities are within easy walking distance of
each other, the Station and other forms of public transport

In summary, we propose a development that would create an Exhibition/ Conference Hall of 100,000 square feet. This would be capable of holding medium sized exhibitions, concerts and performances seating around 2,500 people. We are naming this cultural centre The Forum to hint at the city’s Roman history. Alongside The Forum we propose a 250-bedroom Forum Hotel while in front of The Forum would be a large open area for temporary stalls and socialising named the Forum Square. Our research shows there is a need for some small business starter units with accommodation above which we suggest could be built to the west called the Forum Village. Gateway+ foresees this might develop into Chichester’s Silicon Valley. Finally, we have learnt that NHS England would like to provide a new medical centre for primary care, and Gateway+ proposes a new building currently called The Forum Lozenge which might be renamed the Forum Medical Centre. Our suggested layout can be understoodin the aerial street plan below.

Aerial perspective of the proposed Forum Quarter created alongside Chichester Station
Chichester Station

We also understand Network Rail would very much like to consider developing the station and create at least one more platform so that they would have the opportunity to run a metro line between Chichester and Bognor, which would be a vital ingredient to reducing traffic along the A27 and A259. Indeed, the University would also very much like this because their two campuses are served by buses at the moment. Our proposal suggests a new station with high level concourse to house the ticket office and shops with escalators down to the platform. This would also serve to link the Forum to the Southern Leisure Park.

Replace the level crossings

Gateway+ proposals also tackle one of the most contentious issues on the south side of Chichester, which are the level crossings. We propose that both crossings should be removed and replaced with a two-way underpass at Basin Road sufficient in height for single decker buses to pass. Some believe this is not possible, but we have consulted at least two engineers who confirm it is indeed technically achievable.

Simplify the road layout

Gateway+ proposals also provide a solution to the currently chaotic road layout which causes appalling delays and serious environmental problems. As part of this revised layout a new Transport Hub would be situated between the Ave de Chartres Car Park and The Forum, where buses, taxis, coaches, and maybe electric mini trams could operate.

Chichester’s changed political context

As you will all now know there has been a seismic shift in CDC’s political balance after the May local elections. The previous Gateway+ proposals were not adequately received by the previous council whose Masterplan is now well out of date and does not deal with the problems faced by Chichester and its inhabitants. Gateway+ now hopes to promote our ideas to the newly elected council members and we have indeed had very supportive comments from many of those now representing us all. We are particularly encouraged by the support of all parties after recent discussions. We are aware that CDC is assessing interest from developers to their Southern Gateway Master Plan based on a development brief sent out in April 2019. We also understand that Council officers are not fixed on the current proposals and if Councillors or any other parties wish to suggest other schemes, they will take these into account. We see the Gateway+ job is to make sure all Councillors are aware of our ideas so they can reach a much bolder proposal for this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to enhance what Chichester has to offer.

Please help Gateway+

We ask you to consider helping in the following ways:

  • Contact your councillor and ask them to support Gateway+
  • Discuss Southern Gateway with your friends and encourage them to do the same thing • Let us have your email address so we can keep you informed.
  • Consider contributing a small amount (say, £10) to our campaign. You can find out details of how to contribute on our website whose address is: http://www.gateway-plus.co.uk/about.

We plan to have a further meeting in the City to update everyone on our campaign. We hope we can count on your support and do get in touch if you wold like more information or would like to get more involved with Gateway+.

We need funds to accelerate our publicity so that we create a groundswell for these ideas. Our intention is to spread the word far and wide so we cannot be ignored by those who will finally make the decision of what is to happen to Chichester’s so-called Southern Gateway.

(This article originally appeared in the September 2019 edition of the Society’s Newsletter)

Objection to Whitehouse Farm Phase 2 Parcel B 91 homes

The Society has objected on 15 July to the plannng application 19/01531/REM – All outstanding Reserved Matters for the erection of 91 dwellings with associated parking, landscaping, informal open space and associated work on Phase 2, Parcel B, pursuant to permission 14/04301/OUT.

The Executive Committee had the following comments on this application and asked the Council to seek modification of these details of the proposal to improve the contribution of this development in the growth of Chichester.

  • We support the local objectors’ concern that no traffic measures are being implemented for improvement in safety or dealing with congestion and air quality on the Old Broyle Road and St Paul’s Road .
  • The implementation of the architectural character studies has been disappointing and is restricted to random sprinkling of brick colours render finish and artificial slate and concrete tile roofs. We couldn’t ascertain what materials and finish are proposed for windows and external doors. Unlike Parcel A there are no chimneys or 2.5 storey features proposed but as for the earlier phase more articulation of facades and attaching of detached houses to form architectural groups would improve place making.
  • Parcel B, like Parcel A, is remote from all community facilities and the current 2 hourly bus service into the City produces a car dependent settlement. This is exacerbated by the lack of permeability out of the site for cyclists and pedestrians.
  • The provision of tandem parking to many houses is a difficult feature in user experience.
  • There needs to be a proposal for landscaping the buffer zone between Parcel B and the retained Whitehouse Farm property to the east.
  • Security for public open spaces should be provided with r-orientating houses to overlook

 

Objections to outstanding Reserved Matters for the erection of 73 residential dwellings Whitehouse Farm

The Chichester Society objected to various matters that arose in the planning application from Miller Homes and Linden Homes concerning the erection of 73 dwellings in Land West of Centurion Way and West of Old Broyle Road.

Proposed character areas

In particular the following objections were made:

  • The overlong access drive to the SANG car parking creates an un-necessary suburban
    element of what is currently a country road out of the City.
  • The provision of tandem parking to most houses is a difficult feature in user experience.
  • The implementation of the architectural character studies has been disappointing in particular with the provision of dummy chimneys, painted brick facades, uPVC windows and that more articulation of facades and attaching of detached houses to form architectural groups would improve place making.
  • This first phase to be built is well screened, but is remote from all community facilities and the current 2 hourly bus service into the City produces a car dependent settlement.
  • The preponderance of culs de sac adds to vehicle journey lengths.
  • The affordable and shared ownership housing is readily identifiable ranged along the side closest to traffic noise rather than scattered throughout the estate.

The reference document in question is the West of Chichester Residential Architectural Design Strategy available to view here as Part 1 and Part 2.

Full details of the planning application 19/01134/REM and of comments made can be viewed on the Council website here.

ChiSoc object to new late venue in Terminus Road

An application was lodged by Mr Kieran Stanley in March relating to the property ‘Feather and Black’ in Terminus Road to create  “a Dinner Dance Show Experience with Live Shows and Late night Music to be enjoyed by all ages and families” designed for all types of celebrity acts. Opening times for restaurant, dining and leisure use envisage from 12:00 (13:00 on Sunday) to 03:00 every day.

The Society’s Executive Committee would welcome the provision of a major venue in Chichester and believe there is an opportunity to provide this in a purpose-built facility within the Southern Gateway Regeneration Area close to a rebuilt City Transport Hub. However they were of the opinion that this Terminus Road property is not suitable for this purpose and would be better utilised for relocating the bus depot and post office to
free up the Southern Gateway site.

Their specific objections were:

  • The hours of operation and the large audience numbers will cause a noise and behavioural nuisance for residents.
  • This property does not offer adequate parking nor acoustic insulation.
  • The proposed use would clash with the recently permitted change of use to a church at the adjacent Ambulance Station.
  • There are not adequate or believable studies submitted regarding fire safety, acoustic performance, and the traffic plan of the proposed use with the large audience numbers.

Full details of the application and of responses from the public can be found here 

Chichester Proposed Parking Management Plan – the Society’s Response

The Chichester proposed parking management plan went out for consultation earlier this year and related to the earlier Roadspace Audit study which can be found here.

The study included various recommendations relating to parking and it to these that the Chichester Society has responded. Members of the Chichester Society’s Executive Committee visited the various displays and discussed the substance of the study. Their response has been submitted and can be found here.