Tag Archives: Westhampnett

Development east of Chichester “may damage the future of Rolls Royce”

So says Mr. Torsten Müller-Ötvös,  the chief executive of Rolls Royce Cars, about plans to build on the green fields between Chichester and Rolls Royce’s “Telly Tubby” (sedum roofed) factory at Westhampnett.

In a report in the Chichester Observer, he explains “Rolls Royce will effectively be located within a housing estate that is indistinguishable from any UK urban location; exactly the situation we sought so hard to avoid” when they planned their move into the area.

The Society has its own reservations about this planning application, which is just the latest instance of growing piecemeal destruction of the rural surroundings of the city and the wider district.

In fact, we have rather a lot to say. In our response to planning application 14/01159/OUTEIA, we have commented that this development:

would meet none of the three dimensions to sustainable development as required under the Government’s National Planning Policy Framework: Economic, Social or Environmental;

would adversely impact on the Economy of the Goodwood Estate and the Rolls Royce plant, both of which derive major benefits from the ambience of their settings;

would fail to integrate with, and would indeed overwhelm, the social character of Westhampnett village; and

would destroy the rural environs of Chichester, Westhampnett and Goodwood, and harm the setting of the South Downs National Park.”

We also noted that the Draft Local Plan identifes no need for extra housing at Westhampnett. But permission has nevertheless been given for 100 houses on another nearby site. So Westhampnett is already delivering more than is being asked of it.

For a longer summary, see here. Or to read our submission in full, see here.

Objection to Westhampnett housing development

The Society objected to the large scale housing at Westhampnett. The following is a summary of its submission to the Chichester District Council.

1) This site conflicts with ‘saved policies’ to “protect the rural area” (Policy RE1), protect the identity of settlements (RE6), and to protect the local environment and setting in the landscape (BE11).

2) Any outline planning application here is premature.

3) The site is well beyond the Settlement Policy Area … and can’t even be integrated with the existing village.

4) The site failes no less than six of the criteria set out in Interim Policy Statement on Housing (FAD) of July 2012. Sadly this statement no longer has force, but it’s reasoning remains sound.

5) Any housing here would intrude into views from and into the South Downs National park, and hence would detract from the experience of visitors to the National Park, not to mention local events including the horseracing at the top of the hill and the festivals at the bottom of the hill at Goodwood.

6) The prosed link road into the development would detract from the rural quality of the lane and would also destroy a section of mature hedgerow identified as part of a Bat network.

7) The Draft Local Plan identifes no need for extra housing at Westhampnett. Even so, planning permission has been permitted for 100 houses on another nearby site. So Westhampnett is already delivering more than is being asked of it.