DRAFT NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN v1.4A (Working consultation document)
Sidlesham Neighbourhood Plan
Working Consultation Draft
February 2020
“The green heart of the peninsula.”
PLEASE NOTE THIS IS ONLY AN INITIAL FIRST STAGE OF THE PLAN THAT HAS ASSEMBLED A SERIES OF ISSUES AND TOPICS TO INITIATE DEBATE AMONGST THE THREE CONSULTATIVE GROUPS.
MORE POLICIES, SUPPORTING INFORMATION TOGETHER WITH MAPS, DIAGRAMS AND PHOTOGRAPHS WILL BE ADDED ON A REGULAR BASIS. THIS WILL INCLUDE THE COMMENTS AND INFORMATION COMING BACK FROM THE CONSULTATIVE GROUPS.
Version 1.4A
Contents
Contents 2
Introduction and why Sidlesham needs a plan 6
How the plan was prepared 7
Area covered (plan one) 8
Legal requirements 9
Localism Act 2011 9
Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) 9
Sustainability Assessment (SA) 9
Regulation 14 Neighbourhood Plans (General) Regs 2012 9
Basic Conditions Statement T&C Planning Act 1990 Para. 8 (2) Schedule 4B 9
What the plan aims to achieve 10
Organisation of the plan 11
Vision and delivery plan 12
Objectives and policies 13
Draft proposals and policy plans and maps 14
Delivering the plan 15
Consultation Structure 15
ENVIRONMENT 16
ENVIRONMENT - CLIMATE CHANGE AND SUSTAINABILITY 16
CLIMATE CHANGE - CL1 - Integrated Coastal Zone Management 16
CLIMATE CHANGE - CL2 - Infrastructure Sustainability 17
CLIMATE CHANGE - CL3 - Building Sustainability 17
CLIMATE CHANGE - CL 4 - Sustainability Partnerships 17
CLIMATE CHANGE - CL 5 - Sustainability 17
CLIMATE CHANGE - CL 6 - Sustainability 18
CLIMATE CHANGE - CL 7 - Sustainability 18
CLIMATE CHANGE - CL 8 - Sustainability 19
ENVIRONMENT - LANDSCAPE CHARACTER AND CONSERVATION AREAS 20
Maritime Countryside 20
POLICY LANDSCAPE - LE1 - Maritime Countryside 20
Conservation Areas 20
POLICY LANDSCAPE - LE2 - Conservation Areas 20
POLICY LANDSCAPE - LE3 - ALSD Extensions to Existing Conservation Areas 21
POLICY LANDSCAPE - LE4 - Other ALSD Areas 21
POLICY LANDSCAPE - LE5 - wider open area 21
ENVIRONMENT - ENVIRONMENT AND WILDLIFE CONSERVATION 23
POLICY ENVIRONMENT & CONSERVATION - EN1 - Pagham and Medmerry 23
POLICY ENVIRONMENT & CONSERVATION - EN2 - Land drainage and wetland management 24
POLICY ENVIRONMENT & CONSERVATION - EN3 - Maritime Countryside 24
ENVIRONMENT - TREE AND HEDGE PLANTING 25
POLICY TREES - T1 - ‘Strategic’ tree planting 25
POLICY TREES - T2 - Tree belts, screening and wind breaks 25
POLICY TREES - T3 - Ancient woodland and other statutorily protected areas 25
POLICY TREES - T4 - Hedges 26
ENVIRONMENT - RENEWABLE ENERGY 27
POLICY RENEWABLE ENERGY - RE1 27
POLICY RENEWABLE ENERGY - RE2 27
POLICY RENEWABLE ENERGY - RE3 27
ENVIRONMENT: ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS 29
POLICY ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS - EC1 29
BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT 30
BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT - TOURISM 31
POLICY TOURISM - T1- Resist Static holiday caravans and homes 31
POLICY TOURISM - T2-Tented and Touring Caravan Sites 32
POLICY TOURISM - T3 - Temporary use of land for festival and other entertainment uses. 32
POLICY TOURISM -T4 - Tourist accommodation. 32
POLICY TOURISM - T5 - RSPB Pagham Harbour and Medmerry 32
POLICY TOURISM - T6 - Alternative Access Modes for Tourists 32
BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT - AGRICULTURE 34
POLICY AGRICULTURE - A1 - Protection of high-grade agricultural land 34
POLICY AGRICULTURE - A2 - Industrial Buildings 34
POLICY AGRICULTURE - A3 - Food processing 34
BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT - HORTICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT 36
POLICY HORTICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT - HR1 36
POLICY HORTICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT - HR2 - Satellite HDA’s and Horticultural Development Individual Sites (HDIS) 37
POLICY HORTICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT - HR3 - Water Management and Horticulture 37
POLICY HORTICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT - HR4 - Horticultural Employment and Expertise 37
POLICY HORTICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT - HR5 - Hydroponics and innovative production in horticulture 38
POLICY HORTICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT - HR6 - Water conservation associated with horticulture 38
POLICY HORTICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT - HR7 - Polytunnel and other field structures 38
PLANNING AND INFRASTRUCTURE 39
PLANNING AND INFRASTRUCTURE - TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAY INFRASTRUCTURE 39
POLICY TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAY - TH1 39
POLICY TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAY - TH2 40
POLICY TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAY - TH3 40
The Greenway 40
POLICY TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAY - TH4 41
POLICY TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAY - TH5 41
PLANNING AND INFRASTRUCTURE - HOUSING DEVELOPMENT 42
POLICY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT - H1 - Social Housing 42
POLICY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT - H2 - Right to buy 42
POLICY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT - H3 - Building Conversions 43
POLICY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT - H4 - Replacement Buildings 43
POLICY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT - H5 - New Build 43
POLICY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT - H6 - Design 43
POLICY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT - H7 - Adoption of Sustainable Building Code 44
GYPSY / TRAVELLER AND SHOWMEN 44
POLICY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT - H8 44
COMMUNITY FACILITIES AND WELLBEING 45
COMMUNITY FACILITIES 45
POLICY COMMUNITY - C1 - Meeting future need 45
POLICY COMMUNITY - C2 - Community Built Facilities
THE PUBLIC REALM 46
Appendices 47
Groups and organisations to be consulted 47
Introduction and why Sidlesham needs a plan
This plan is about inevitable change and the development that will be associated with it and how it can be managed for the best outcomes for the whole community.
Sidlesham is the biggest parish on the Manhood Peninsulaand is located centrally within it.
What happens in adjoining parishes impacts upon Sidlesham and to a similar extent Sidlesham influences them.This is particularly evident with an issue like land drainage where rifes and ditches are often physically connected.Where as an issue such as housing with no physical connection impacts from the increased traffic it may generate and the extra demands it places on services.There is an interdependence of all parishes on the Manhood and to the City of Chichester itself.Organisations such as the Manhood Peninsula Partnership (MPP) and Manhood Wildlife and Heritage Group (MWHG) form a strong basis for local collaboration and support.
The Chichester District Local Plan (CDLP) (currently in preparation and expected to be published in July 2020) forms the strategic overview for the whole Manhood and the context for the Manhood in relation to the rest of the District and adjoining areas including the South Downs National Park.It contains what might best be termed “upper tier policies” whilst this plan will have local lower tier policies.These policies ,upper and local, must work together and there is a statutory requirement that the Neighbourhood Plan (NP) should be compatible and compliant with the CDLP.
Whilst the final version of the CDLP is not at present available it is evident from the last publication -The Preferred Option - that a range of issues will be in the final plan and it is from these issues that the NP has developed its policies.
The level of detail shown in the Preferred Option policies that extend to the parish necessitates further more local policies in a number of areas that reflect more fully local issues and opportunities.
The policies within the plan are at present draft (February 2020) and are subject to consultation with the community and a range of partners and organisations. They have been developed from an evidence base informed by the Parish Council’s own work in areas such as development control and policy land use planning,from groups such as Sidlesham Traffic Action Group (STAG), Sidlesham Flood and Land Drainage Group (SFLDG) and MWHG.
In 2018 and again in 2019 an Issues Paper - the first ahead of formal submission to Chichester District Council (CDC) for their approval to start a NP and the latter after approval was achieved.These issues papers covered fourteen areas and have been carried forward into this document as in need of a ‘local solution ‘.
Of these issues three have big implications for the plan area - these are housing, horticulture and climate change.Firstly,it is important to note that Sidlesham has no housing allocation as it is deemed ‘unsustainable’ for new housing allocations.
The first two issues are interrelated in that outbuildings primarily on ex Land Settlement Association (LSA) that can under Change of Use legislation be converted to residential, in some instances up to five conversions per holding, often meaning that any horticultural use ceases. Within Sidlesham there are two areas where priority should be given to the development of horticulture- theses are Sidlesham and * HDAs. Because the Change of Use is not within the scope either LP or NP legislation the protection an HDA would normally afford can not be used. Additionally, on horticultural sites outside the HDAs where the important horticultural use might be expected to take precedence it is also being lost.
The NP accepts that such changes will occur as they offer an often attractive proposition for creating additional residential property for a land owner.The concern arises at the potential scale of the conversions.There are over 100 ex LSA holdings many with at least two convertible buildings.If only 50% come forward the plan area might expect around 65-80 properties in a parish where no new housing is deemed as sustainable.These figures exceed allocations made to parishes that are sustainable on the Manhood.
Additionally, where as new development would attract a Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) contribution because many converted buildings under this Change of Use policy are self build they are exempt.As the plan areas infrastructure where CIL would normally have been spent is already severely stressed the extra use the housing places on it without contributing to its improvement,extension or replacement causes further problems.
The plan area needs more housing but it needs social housing to meet identified needs from families that have a proven local connection with the area- the conversions to date create full market properties.
In respect of the third issue- climate change- this is probably the most fundamental challenge to the plan area and in the context of the whole Peninsula the biggest challenge to assumptions about the capacity of the Peninsula to continue to absorb the levels of development,particularly housing, that is currently and in the future expected.
Restricting permanent development within the zones set out in the revised Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM) document currently part of the emerging LP would exclude much of the new housing planned.
For the plan area it would mean only minor extensions to existing property, individual property level measures for flood protection and the acceptance that without substantial alluvial flood and sea flood defences- unlikely given the Environment Agency’s policy that it can't just keep building ‘higher’ and ‘more defences- land will be lost and property may have to move.
A balanced and implementable approach is needed to resolve in a manageable way within the scope of the legislation that backs this plan must be promoted and is the endorsement of why the plan is needed.
How the plan was prepared
The need for a plan was recognised by Parish Council in 2018 following consideration of an ‘issues report’.Following initial discussions discussions with Chichester District Council’s Neighbourhood Planning Support Officer the need for a plan identified by the Parish Council was confirmed and the initial stage of applying for Designated Area Status was approved.
This endorsement by CDC was significant as many other neighbourhood plans had been primarily commissioned because of housing proposed in their areas.At that point all indications were no new housing was proposed for Sidlesham Parish.
A decision was made that all of the parish should form the designated area for the purposes of the neighbourhood plan.An application was made to CDC based on the whole parish together with a statement of compliance, eligibility, and why the geographical area was chosen.
The whole parish was included as although quite divers from areas such as Ham to more populated areas such as Mill Lane all are affected by change and major issues such as climate change.
The Designated Area Application had to be advertised on the CDC consultation web site for 8 weeks and if contested a review would have to be conducted.Unfortunately due to resources issues within CDC no action was taken and it was not for approaching 9 months later that the Application was finally approved.
During this period work on the plan continued with further development of issues and objectives together refining the plan’s overall vision.From the Parish Council’s ongoing work with planning and other issues and opportunities in the Parish a number of early draft policies and advisory statements were developed
The council elections in 2019 caused a halt to starting the development and consultation process until after the new Parish Council confirmed its intention to continue with the plan.
Many issues in respect of development within the Parish and pressure arising on its resources from both internal and external forces confirmed for the Council the need for a plan. Adjoining parishes of Hunston and North Mundham to the north also decided to produce plans whilst Earnely Parish has produced a non statutory parish plan.
Although the development of a plan for Sidlesham has been discussed at the Annual Parish Meetings in both 2018 and 2019 the first neighbourhood plan meeting took place on xxx, when attendees were invited to sign up to be part of a Consultative Group.From that meeting a Plan Steering Group was formed to take forward the next stages.
A subsequent meeting of the Consultative Group was called on the 29th January where the the ‘Consultative Group’ attendees were given a choice of the main topic areas they were interested in- Environment, Community and a Planning and Infrastructure Group. Each group whilst having a “ facilitator” from the Steering Group were encouraged to nominate a coordinator to work with the Group members and arrange a further meeting and /or form an email group to take forward discussion on main topics but also across the plan areas.
The plan itself was in a first draft state at this time (29/1/20) and in an unedited form from a number of written drafts - additionally, more policies and supporting information was to be added.
A key document supported by Google Docs has now been opened into which information and comment from the consultative groups, from meeting with consultees ( see list in Appendices) can be added. The Steering group has read and edit access to the Key Doc whist Consultative Groups have read only but with acomments facility.
Ongoing (as of 10/2/20)
Area covered (plan one)
Need to insert plan as advertised on CDC consultation web site together statement of conformity that will be in appendices.
Legal requirements
Localism Act 2011
TODO
Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA)
TODO
Sustainability Assessment (SA)
TODO
Regulation 14 Neighbourhood Plans (General) Regs 2012
TODO
Basic Conditions Statement T&C Planning Act 1990 Para. 8 (2) Schedule 4B
TODO
What the plan aims to achieve
Firstly, the Plan aims is to provide the Parish with a set of local policies agreed with the Local Planning Authority (LPA) that are compatible and compliant with its policies as contained in an approved Local Plan.
The Neighbourhood Plan Policies should extend and develop the scope of the Local Plan Policies by adding a local informed interpretation of their strategic purpose but without diminishing their purpose and effectiveness.
The NP may however through local interpretation modify a Local Plan Strategic policy otherwise deemed to apply across the whole plan area should such action have been deemed expedient at ‘Examination’ of the NP and subsequently endorsed by the LPA.
Secondly,the Sidlesham NP seeks to ensure that all who live, work ,take their recreation and leisure or travel through the parish in a sustainable way and do not compromise the third aim and guiding and overriding principle of reaching carbon neutral status by xxxx.These aims may be summarised-
“Compatibility leading to sustainability leading to carbon neutrality”
Whilst achieving these aims the plan must ensure that an environment and economy is maintained and enhanced that supports biodiversity,a prosperous and supported community and where well being is at the heart of its communities.
Organisation of the plan
TODO
Vision and delivery plan
TODO
Objectives and policies
See below- ongoing
Draft proposals and policy plans and maps
See within text below and within section of appendices .Ongoing
Delivering the plan- Implementation
TODO
Consultation Structure
Stages in Producing the Neighbourhood Plan
Decision made if a neighbourhood plan is right for the area based on ‘position statement’ and assembled evidence of need- if agreed designated area status sought from Chichester District Council- if agreed by CDC after public consultation work on plan proceeds.
Development of the plan’s vision and objectives- check made if Sustainability Appraisal Scoping Report required - consult community- build evidence- form steering group and consultative groups- issue draft policies and framework of the plan and other supporting information
Continue developing the plan - review and redefine issues and further develop objectives as required -continue to develop draft policies -produce consultative draft plan and consult with community on the plan- commence writing consultation statement - amend plan in response to consultation -formal pre submission consultation version of plan produced - submit plan to Chichester District Council -CDC publishes and consults on the draft- for period of six weeks-plan amended as required.
Independent Examination- independent examiner agreed with CDC- examiner appointed - plan examined and report published and decision statement sent to parish and those making representations-plan amended if required - CDC considers Independent examiner's report and makes recommendations-plan amended if required.
Referendum - CDC coordinates a local referendum on the plan
Final Plan - if referendum indicates majority community support -( more than 50% of a turnout that must be at least 21 people) - the neighbourhood plan is used by CDC and has the same weight as other planning policy in the District- plan becomes basis of Parish Council’s decision making on planning applications and planning policy and advice and guidance to those wishing to undertake development in the Parish
POLICES & PROPOSALS - ENVIRONMENT
CLIMATE CHANGE ,SUSTAINABILITY, FLOOD AND SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT
The resilience of the Peninsula to cope with the impacts of climate change and, in particular, sea level rise are major considerations when considering future sustainability. “ Just a1 degree Celsius average increase would subject much of the Manhood peninsula to extreme flooding, according to projections prepared by peer-reviewed climate scientists. A 2 degree Celsius increase in average temperatures would increase sea level on the south coast by 4.7metres, which would inundate most of the Manhood peninsula and Chichester’s harbour villages.”(Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM) update October 2019)
Recommendations in previous Planning Policy Guidance 25 made very sound advice:
5m above sea level represents a safe zone for permanent buildings
5-4m not so safe or an intermediate zone for a mixture of functions with a movable structure
Below 4m unsafe zone no go zone for permanent buildings.
Medmerry Managed Retreat
The major investment decision to develop the Medmerry Managed Retreat – at the time of the construction the largest managed retreat scheme in Western Europe is a reflection of the vulnerability of the Peninsula. Whilst the threat of a pre Medmerry breakthrough of the sea reaching Pagham Harbour has at least for the immediate future been alleviated the sea still has the intention of making Selsey an island.
Pagham Harbour- Protection From Inundation
One of the most vulnerable areas within the plan area are the land margins of Pagham Harbour on its western and a section of its northern side.Part of the eastern shore has been protected in recent years and tha Pagham Wall provides a substantial defence line.The eastern end of the wall at the Old Salt House is also the major strategic location for the sluices for the Pagham Rife and the River Lavant Flood Alleviation Diversion, whilst the other significant rife, the Bremere, that marks for most of its length in Sidlesham the parish boundary also discharges in the area of the Wall.
From the end of Pagham Wall to Norton Spit the harbour bank is mainly mud and gravel with a walled small section at Sidlesham Quay.
The Environment Agency has undertaken initial feasibility studies into the the impacts of rising sea level and erosion in this mud and gravel section but to date no proposals have been published.This shore is important for overall drainage in Sidlesham as two substantial watercourses and many smaller ditch networks drain into the harbour through the permeable banks and purpose built flap valves.A fully non -permeable barrier would stop up many of the current drainage points and cause water to be retained creating wetland but also possible flooding at a distance inland. There would also be a significant impact on the ecology of the land and wetland magin in this highly significant habitat.
Without some intervention however these banks are vulnerable as are the communities behind them and the issue of the exposure of the ex landfill site over which most of the land element of the RSPB reserve now occupies.The landfill occured at a time of little control and with no barriers to stop leachate and material escaping from the tipped area into the wider environment.Erosion of the banks could expose the tip with potential dire consequences to the harbour.
The NP in recognition of these issues will engage with the EA, RSPB and other relevant agencies to ensure that a protective bank that meets both ecological requirements and coastal flood protection is developed.
CL 9 - Pagham Harbour Western Banks Protection
The NP will in collaboration with responsible agencies seek to ensure that a protective barrier is developed from the western end of Pagham Wall to Norton that meets both ecological and coastal flood protection requirements.
Sidlesham Ferry Causeway
A major line of defence is Sidlesham Ferry causeway -it is the primary access to Selsey and imperative for its future sustainability. It is an old structure and its condition and future maintenance should be considered a priority. A possible proposal by the Environment Agency(EA) to cease its pumping operations at Ferry Corner in favour of a gravity water transfer system west to en;)ast could also place increased pressures on the causeway.
Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM)
The current Local Plan contains Policy S18 Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM). In line with the latest recommendations from major agencies and bodies and the predictions of sea level rise, the NP recommends that these findings are used to update policy S18 and that the following policy is included in the NP:
CL1 - Integrated Coastal Zone Management
No major development should be constructed on the Peninsula on any site less than 5m above sea level.
All development proposals should take account of relevant Surface Water Management Plans and Catchment Flood Management Plans.
There should be no expansion of settlements currently identified in the 2016 East Head to Littlehampton flood risk coastal modelling study to be at risk of tidal events in 2070.
CL2 - Infrastructure Sustainability Sidlesham Ferry Causeway
The NP recommends that the West Sussex County Council as highway authority responsible for Sidlesham Ferry Causeway continues to closely monitor the condition of the causeway with the aim of strengthening the causeway within the provisions of its capital programme within the next 5-10-year period
CL 3- Sustainability- Development Within 5m Zone
That new permanent residential or commercial development will be resisted below the 5M above sea level mark.
That only moveable structures for residential or tourist accommodation or commercial purposes be allowed between the 5M and 4M above sea level mark.
In respect of existing development, the current ability of an owner to replace like for like a building in the below 5M sea level contour should be resisted except in exceptional circumstances and then only with specific agreement with the EA and production of an emergency evacuation plan.
Recent advice from the EA that it cannot continue to keep raising the height to sea and other flood defences, must be a significant factor in future land use within the Parish. Of particular significance are margins of Pagham Harbour. Whilst priority will be given to protect the highway network and key infrastructure and buildings the emphasis of a resilient and sustainable approach will be individual level property protection. (see appendix)
CL 4 - Sustainability- Partnerships
The NP will support and facilitate the development and implementation of the joint SWISH* and FLOW* scheme for flood alleviation, drainage, wetland and biodiversity in the Parish.
*see appendix for details of these organisations and their programmes
CL 5 - Sustainability- Individual Property Level Flood Protection & Resilience
The NP will support information and a scheme of practical support to property owners particularly those within the below 5M zone to initiate an individual property flood and overall resilience protection.
The declaration of a Climate Emergency by CDC has led the way for individual Parishes that have not already done so to consider a similar course of action.Sidlesham declared its climate emergency in 2019.
The NP has as its central premise Sidlesham as the green heart of the Peninsular with the aim of a carbon neutral future.
CL 6 - Sustainability- Renewable Energy and Carbon Neutral Target
The Parish will aim to achieve a carbon neutral position by 20-- .To this end it will support schemes for renewable energy, energy generated from biomass and the reduction of carbon emissions from transport and agriculture / horticulture and from people’s homes.
The Peninsula as a whole suffers from rising sea level and high-water table. The latter is fundamentally influenced by rainfall levels on the chalk hills of the Sussex Downs to the north of the Peninsula as well as rainfall on the Peninsula itself.
Whilst outside the direct scope of the NP the cooperation of the South Downs National Park Authority to attenuate water entering the chalk aquifer by tree planting for instance and other measures to contain groundwater will be encouraged.
Partnerships with other concerned agencies within the Peninsulawill be developed. Thes will include a scheme instigated by the Manhood Peninsula Partnership (MPP)-Surface Water Issues and Solutions (SWISH) and a collaboration with a Heritage Lottery Fund financed project Fixing and Linking Our Wetlands (FLOW) run by Manhood Wildlife and Heritage Group (MWHG).This joint initiative will formulate a local scheme of flood and land drainage,wetland protection and enhancement and overall biodiversity management and will form the basis a sustainability strategy.
The strategy will have at its centre a ”Local Scheme of Management”* that is intended to be delivered at Parish level by Parish Councils in collaboration with Flood Action Groups where present.*see appendix for details
The scheme will identify hierarchy for the drainage network from main river responsibility of the EA - transporter ditches and water courses - collector sub-catchment ditches. A system of reporting issues maintenance and finance accompanies the scheme. It is hoped that by this method regular and essential maintenance of primary drainage will be achieved that is sadly lacking in many parts of the Peninsula at present and responsible for localised flooding being experienced.
Of particular concern are the levels of air pollution emanated by vehicles on the Parish roads and particularly the B2145.
CL 7 - Sustainability- Road Frontage Treeand Hedge Planting
In order to reduce the impact of emissions particularly particulates all property adjacent to the B2145 will be encouraged to ensure that where possible road frontages are planted with hedges and walls and fences backed by vegetation. Properties should not have open frontages to the road except for access and to enable the safe egress from a property. Apart from pollution alleviation there are also factors of the quality of the public real and overall “street scene”. See section on “the Public Realm for details.
During the Dutch Elm disease epidemic of the 1970`s the Parish lost much of its tree cover especially adjacent to roads. A similar and possibly more dramatic can be expected from the outbreak of Ash Die back disease. Additionally, Oak Horse Chestnut and other species are also under threat.
The role of trees in reducing CO2 levels and crucially for the Parish reducing water table levels cannot be overestimated.
Even if no losses were expected it would be expedient to initiate a `strategic level` tree planting scheme it is therefore proposed (Policy S7) that in collaboration with landowners a scheme of tree planting of resilient indigenous species be instigated across the Parish.
CL 8 - Sustainability- Tree Planting
Specific areas where tree planting will be initiated subject to full consultation will include:
B2145 Highway Verge east side of Mill Lane to Enborne Business Park south end.
Highway verge Paddock Straight Watery Lane to Littleton Barn West side of B2145 Selsey Road in concert with provision of Greenway and wildflower areas and flood gardens.
In addition, areas where development including greenhouses intrude into otherwise open countryside views – wide screening tree planting will be supported. Landowners will be actively approached to support large copse like planting areas on their land (this may be in line with changes from CAP to other focus for agricultural support under a UK based scheme)
Please Note- the above section is to be re-ordered and further sections added on flood and surface water management linked to policy CL4.
ENVIRONMENT - LANDSCAPE CHARACTER AND CONSERVATION AREAS
Maritime Countryside
The Parish has the largest land area on the Manhood and abuts to other parishes. It is of great significance in the overall character of the Peninsula and the margins of Chichester Harbour Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, Pagham Harbour and constitutes one of only two countryside/coast open gaps still present on the West Sussex coast offering open coast backed by farmland and important areas of ecological importance resulting in a maritime countryside.
Also abuts Medmerry (Easton Lane and Ham)
Defining and preserving its “maritime countryside character” presents issues as it is not made up of a single element but the coming together of many factors. The NP will seek to further define the area and its significance seeking, where appropriate, further designations and protections.
POLICY LANDSCAPE - LE1 - Maritime Countryside
The NP will, with partners, define the boundaries of the area classified as maritime countryside and, through existing and proposed legislation, seek special measures to protect its character and biodiversity.
Conservation Areas
The Sidlesham ‘Village Plan’ contained information and much analysis of the vernacular architecture and fabric such as flint and clunch walls and will be an important background document. Other documents, such as the Conservation Area Character Appraisal and Management Proposals (2006) will also be important background. At two locations, a number of buildings and fabric come together in a ‘concentration’ that is quite distinctive. These distinctive areas have been recognised in two designated conservation areas:
Sidlesham Quay Conservation Area
Sidlesham Church Conservation Area
POLICY LANDSCAPE - LE2 - Conservation Areas
The NP will seek to continue the protection of Sidlesham Church and Sidlesham Quay Conservation and further enhance the quality of their environments. The proposed extensions to the two areas, as suggested in the 2006 appraisal will also be recommended for implementation.
Apart from the extensions above, the NP recommends further areas adjoining the Conservation Areas as meriting protection as Areas of Local Significance/Distinctiveness (ALSD). These are set out in Policy LE3.
POLICY LANDSCAPE - LE3 - ALSD Extensions to Existing Conservation Areas
Two areas exhibiting as areas of local significance/distinctiveness (ALSD) are adjoining the existing Conservation Areas. These are:
south and west of Anchor Bend and Old Police House shown in Plan…..
west of Mill Lane and eastern Keynor Lane, shown in Plan …..
Other areas are:
Junction and south of Highleigh Road with Rotten Row and Mapsons Lane, shown in Plan…..
Junction Lockgate Road and Mapsons Lane including Mapson Farmhouse, shown in Plan…..
POLICY LANDSCAPE - LE4 - Other ALSD Areas
The NP recommends the following Other Areas:
Junction and south of Highleigh Road with Rotten Row and Mapsons Lane, shown in Plan…..
Junction Lockgate Road and Mapsons Lane including Mapson Farm House, shown in Plan…..
POLICY LANDSCAPE - LE5 - wider open area
The open areas identified are as follows:
Part of the landscape character of the plan area is the interspersing of the open countryside often with long views with individual or groups of buildings. The ‘gaps’ in development are particularly important along highways. The protection of the gaps, many seen as development opportunities because of their access from the adjoining road is of great importance to stop ribbon development.
The open areas often offer views into the open countryside and in many instances these are typical and highly characteristic long views across the Peninsula countryside.
The Plan identifies the significant open areas that should be protected and wider panoramas.
These are:
Sidlesham Common, map ---
Corner junction of Selsey Road with Rotten Row, map …
East side Selsey Road between Old Police House and Swan Cottage
West side Selsey Road between …… and West Wyndes
East side of Selsey Road ….. to …..
East side Selsey Road, area around Littleton Cottage to Pond Tail Cottage
Corner of Keynor Lane with Selsey Road
Areas of panoramic views, west side of Selsey Road between …… and Lockgate Road
Rotten Row south and north side beyond ……
B2145 Selsey Road west between Littleton Barn to ……
Rookery Lane, south of Pondtail Cottage, East.
These areas are shown on map ….. to ……
ENVIRONMENT - ENVIRONMENT AND WILDLIFE CONSERVATION
The plan area has two of the most significant areas of wildlife and biodiversity significance within the Peninsula with Pagham Harbour and Medmerry.
Pagham Harbour (629ha) is designated a Special Protection Area (SPA), RAMSAR site, SSSI, Marine Conservation Zone (MCZ) and a Local Nature Reserve (LNR). It has statutorily designation protection zone around the actual site boundary where any development has to pay a mitigation offset charge for potential disturbance to the designated area. The funding employs an officer and other initiatives. The site is managed by the RSPB.
Medmerry is currently the largest managed retreat scheme in Western Europe and reprints a significant change in policy by the Environment Agency away from annual replenishment works to Medmerry Beach to an acceptance that through a combination of climate change, sea level rise traditional methods of protective intervention to sea flooding were no longer sustainable.
Medmerry covers 1213 ac (505 ha) and has increasing significance for bird life and marine invertebrates, fish and mammals. It is also managed by RSPB and is ‘an anticipated candidate for SPA designation within the next 5 to 10 years. It will then have its own protection zone that will overlap with that at Pagham and of the Chichester Harbour AONB to the west.
These overlapping zones indicate how sensitive these areas are to development pressures and potential overuses by visitors for instance. Whilst the mitigation charge can go some way to offset pressure the resultant damage is hard to reverse.
The plan in recognition of this situation seeks to limit unnecessary development and manage tourist and general visitor pressure.
POLICY ENVIRONMENT & CONSERVATION - EN1 - Pagham and Medmerry
Within the current protection areas for Pagham Harbour ( Chichester Harbour AONB) and the anticipated area for Medmerry development will be limited to small scale extensions to existing properties; direct like for like replacement of existing buildings; all new and where practice existing tourist development will be subject to management plan assessment including environmental impact and carrying capacity studies. All development will continue to be subject to a mitigation payment subject to regular review.
Outside these statutorily protected areas there are other smaller areas of wildlife and biodiversity importance. Work undertaken as part of a Heritage Lottery Fund project managed by the Manhood Wildlife & Heritage Group entitled Fixing and Linking Our Wetlands (FLOW) has identified the importance of the plan area ditch, pond and wetland areas for biodiversity along with overall flood protection and water conservation. The work of FLOW represents a unique record of this wetland resource and its vulnerability to climate change and the resultant potential loss its impact will have on the environmental quality and character of the plan area. The area represents one of the few remaining undeveloped open coastal areas on the South Coast and its character is formed by its wetlands, its relationship to the open coast creating a particular “maritime countryside”.
Within the plan area but linking to adjoining parishes existing wetland features will be identified and recorded and a ’Scheme of Local Management of Land Drainage and Wetlands’ will be implemented based on the FLOW initiative and work by the Manhood Peninsula Partnership(MPP)through their initiative Surface Water Issues and Solutions (SWISh).
POLICY ENVIRONMENT & CONSERVATION - EN2 - Land drainage and wetland management
All ditches, waterways, ponds and wetlands as identified within a publicly held data base (Parish Council) shall be protected from development and use contrary to their proper protection for drainage and the support and sustainability of their wildlife and biodiversity.
This will be achieved through a-scheme of information and enforcement directed at riparian owner and other responsible bodies.
POLICY ENVIRONMENT & CONSERVATION - EN3 - Maritime Countryside
The plan area exhibits an increasingly scarce landscape type in the crowded SE of open coast and even more scarce open countryside adjoining the coast. Within the NP this is defined as ‘Maritime Countryside ‘. This unique resource is under threat from encroachment and from increasingly large scale industrial agricultural production.
The NP will actively resist development and activity that threatens this countryside and will seek its protection under existing and proposed environmental, wildlife and agricultural legislation.
The NP will, with partners, define the boundaries of the area classified as maritime countryside and through existing and proposed legislation seek special measures to protect It character and biodiversity.
ENVIRONMENT - TREE AND HEDGE PLANTING
The plan area has progressively lost a great amount of tree cover with the first major loss of Elm to Dutch Elm Disease in the 1970’s. The current issues with Ash Dieback Disease could further significantly diminish the number of trees in the plan area. There is in addition concern that as sea levels rise the saline to freshwater gradient in land closest to the coast will see deep rooted trees die as their roots become saturated by saltwater.
Apart from the impacts of the above issues measures to alleviate some of the effects of climate change point to the value of tree planting. Changes to the way agriculture is subsidised in the future will see payments for “public goods” such as tree planting for carbon capture and as part of natural flood alleviation.
The NP advocates tree planting for all these reasons but additionally for landscape and environment reasons – it therefore promotes the following policies-
POLICY TREES - T1 - ‘Strategic’ tree planting
The NP will identify potential areas for ‘strategic level’ tree planting to create coppice and small woodland. These will be a combination of public and private land. Plan ‘x’ indicates some possible locations. Additionally, in order to combat some emissions from vehicles especially on the B2201 / B2145 there will be an emphasis on roadside tree and hedge planting.
POLICY TREES - T2 - Tree belts, screening and wind breaks
The generally flat landscape of the Peninsula makes large structures very conspicuous and often visible from a distance and from many directions. The NP will encourage all such structures to develop tree screening belts and also in open exposed locations planting of wind breaks.
Cooperation with adjoining land owners to an intrusive structure will be sought to facilitate the development of the screening and wind break belts.
POLICY TREES - T3 - Ancient woodland and other statutorily protected areas
The NP will work with owners and managers of these areas to ensure their continued protection and where practical seek to introduce “buffer zones” around the areas to ensure they are fully protected.
POLICY TREES - T4 - Hedges
Whilst the practicality of large fields to facilitate the efficient operation of large farm machinery is appreciated where possible reinstatement of lost hedges and tree lines and the planting of new areas will be actively encouraged. Changes in agricultural subsidy may promote this.
Where hedges are replanted or new hedges planted multiple use of indigenous species to mirror as close as possible ancient hedge diversity will be encouraged. Hedges will also be used to develop biodiversity corridors especially to connect areas that are currently isolated.
ENVIRONMENT - RENEWABLE ENERGY
The Parish already has a significant area occupied by solar farms in the south of the Parish Solar Field.
In seeking to achieve a zero-carbon target by -------- the NP supports renewable energy but considers the visual impact in particular groups of wind turbine pylon would be visually intrusive in the generally flat and open landscape of the Parish.
Additionally, the protection of seaward views particularly into the Eastern Solent towards the IOW and north towards Chichester Cathedral Spire are significant and should be protected.
POLICY RENEWABLE ENERGY - RE1
The introduction of individual or groups of wind turbine pylons will be resisted due to the visual intrusion they create in the generally flat and open countryside of the Plan area.
POLICY RENEWABLE ENERGY - RE2
Solar and photovoltaic panels will be generally supported on buildings but within conservation areas and areas of local significance panels will generally be located on roofs and other buildings not directly visible from public highways/footpaths.
Similarly, panels on grade 1 and 2 listed buildings will need special treatment or avoided.
New buildings and large extensions should have integrated panels rather than retrofitted panels.
All new buildings for habitation should conform to BREAM standard for insulation and energy consumption, water consumption. This would include conversions of x square metres or over.
The plan area already has a relatively large area of field based photovoltaic panels in the south of the parish. These panels are mainly on low grade land in flood zones 2/3.The NP fully supports the need for renewable energy but is concerned that because of the ‘high light’ characteristics of the Peninsula with well over the average days of sunshine that these panels will start to dominate the area. The following policy is proposed-
POLICY RENEWABLE ENERGY - RE3
Field based photovoltaic panels
Large groups of panels (see appendix for definition of numbers) will only be located within the below 5m zone, will be on low grade agricultural land and adequately screened from the highway, public rights of way and from any adjoining property.
In areas adjoining or close to Pagham Harbour/ Medmerry particular attention will be paid to ensuring biodiversity is maintained within sites and in terms of connectivity between the reserves and the surrounding countryside. A scheme indicating a biodiversity plan should accompany any applications.
Small groups of panels should also have regard to the above provisions.
ENVIRONMENT: ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS
POLICY ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS - EC1
Advances in electronic communication such as the roll out of 5G and in the ever-increasing range of electronic intelligent devices will dominate the future of the Parish. Advantages will be increased potential for home working, the development of small local businesses but with worldwide reach. Connection to a high-speed internet will be crucial for future development.
It is not at present clear what infrastructure will be required for the provision of high quality fast communications networks but the NP accepts that in order to make the provision structures will need to be placed within the public realm and on private land/buildings.
BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT
The plan area has four areas where businesses are currently concentrated. These are:
Jury Lane B2201 Donnington Road
Junction Locksacre Rd with Street End Rd B2145
Enborne Business Park Selsey Road B2145
EX LSA Packing Shed Chalk and Cow Lane
In addition, there are isolated sites involved in support of horticultural production, horticulture itself and diverse range of small business interests.
The plan does not envisage the major expansion or introduction of a new medium to large business enterprise into the plan area. It does, however, see an increase in development of home-based businesses and of small workshop / studio type development such as those at Ivy Grange, Keynor Lane.
As a contribution to a zero-carbon target the reduction in the need for commuting out of the plan area can make a contribution.
A major concern however is the increasing level of commuter traffic passing through the Parish particularly on the B2145 / B2201 being generated by Selsey.
BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT - TOURISM
Tourism is important to the economy of the Peninsula. It generates £x per annum and offers employment for “x” residents. The impacts of tourism are, however, problematic as illustrated by the severe traffic congestion experienced from day tripper use of East Head / West Wittering Beach.
Selsey, Bracklesham and The Witterings have some of the highest concentrations of caravans within the SE and the country as a whole. Many caravan sites are now occupied by what are best described as mobile homes where occupation is by the same people throughout the period sites can be occupied. These sites represent an equivalent of permanent housing for a good proportion of the year placing demands on services and infrastructure that are regularly often discount when assessments are made of overall demand.
The impacts of tourism on the Peninsula’s ‘fragile‘ transportation network are very apparent, the A286 and B2145 are increasingly congested and increasingly east / west crossroads are used as ‘rat run’ cut through routes. The ability of the Peninsula’s infrastructure and its landscapes and environment to absorb ever increasing levels of tourism must be assessed in a balanced and constructive manner. Of particular concern to the NP will be the future management of Pagham Harbour Reserve and the increasingly ecologically significant Medmerry.
The overall ‘carrying capacity ‘of the area to cope with tourism levels set against issues such as why people chose to come to the area- if it becomes so built up and congested through increased housing in coastal communities there will be little difference from where visitors live.
The informality, the rural maritime landscapes and undeveloped open coast are for many visitors its primary attraction.
Dominance of tourism, especially day visitors can create a relatively low wage part time economy. This can lead to social and economic problems especially when combined with seasonal horticultural employment. The NP will try to encourage diversification of employment opportunities for appropriate small-scale businesses, including home-based work.
Set against this context, the NP will seek to achieve a balance between the important economic benefits of tourism for the Peninsula and its often-detrimental impacts on residents and those that work in the area. To achieve this the plan will resist any development of static holiday caravans/homes within the plan.
POLICY TOURISM - T1 - Resist Static holiday caravans and homes
This restriction will extend to individual caravans not used in connection with local employment.
Note: such caravans shall only be given temporary consent and only renewed where specific circumstances are met – see Policy x.
POLICY TOURISM - T2 -Tented and Touring Caravan Sites
The NP will resist the further development of tented and touring caravan sites on agricultural and horticultural land except where such sites are permitted and limited through organisations such as the Caravan Club, Caravan & Camping Club.
POLICY TOURISM - T3 - Temporary use of land for festival and other entertainment uses.
The NP will have a general presumption against the use of land in the plan area except where the organisation is local (to be defined) and if of an acceptable scale and of limited duration. All such events would need to provide an impact study report and particularly their impact on access.
POLICY TOURISM -T4 - Tourist accommodation.
The NP will have a presumption against the use of the plan area’s existing and any new housing stock solely for the use by tourist visitors where such property could provide a viable property to meet local housing need.
Conversion of existing buildings within the curtilage of an existing residential property or as part of an agreed farm diversification will generally be supported. In flood zones 2/3 the use shall only be supported where specific measures are put in place to ensure occupants of any accommodation have an agreed escape plan to a place of safety in the event of flood.
Any converted, extended or new building shall remain as part of the curtilage of the associated residential building and not sub divided to form a separate dwelling.
POLICY TOURISM - T5 - RSPB Pagham Harbour and Medmerry
The NP recognises the environmental significance of these sites both nationally and internationally but is concerned that their attraction to visitors will significantly increase traffic and congestion in the plan area roads particularly the B2145. The plan would wish by working with the RSPB to ensure an acceptable limit on car parking and the promotion of the site is developed in order to ensure there is no detrimental impact especially now with the additional attraction of Medmerry.
POLICY TOURISM - T6 - Alternative Access Modes for Tourists
Increasingly in summer months the levels of car borne tourist access has become unacceptable set against the capacity of the Peninsula’s road network. To avoid a continuation of this unacceptable situation the NP will seek to work with partners to develop a visitor transport strategy possibly involving park and ride off the Peninsula, increased seasonal public transport combined with provision of good advanced signage and information.
Provision of cycle routes linking the plan area and footpaths to disperse concentrations of visitors away from ‘honeypots’ will be sought with partners.
BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT - AGRICULTURE
The Agriculture Bill (Jan 2020) sets out a landmark and radicle change as to how farmers and land managers will be rewarded with public money for “ public goods” – such as better air and water quality , higher animal welfare standards, improved access to the countryside or measures to reduce flooding.
A major element of the legislation is to reach the commitment to net zero emissions by 2050 while at the same time helping boost farmers’ productivity.
The current payment scheme of Direct Payments based on the amount of land farmed will be replaced over a transition period from 2021 for seven years.
Whilst the outcomes of the proposed legislation are not clear at present the NP has sought to develop approaches that are based on the Bill’s main themes and that support the NP objectives on areas such as climate change, water conservation and overall environmental protection and enhancement, but always with maintaining an awareness of the needs of agricultural production.
The NP sets out the following policies.
POLICY AGRICULTURE - A1 - Protection of high-grade agricultural land
The NP will seek to ensure with responsible agencies and partners that high grade agricultural land (Grade I, II and good quality III) will be protected from development and not degraded by poor agricultural practise.
POLICY AGRICULTURE - A2 - Industrial Buildings
Very large industrial type buildings will be resisted especially where visible from the public highway of right of way or are intrusive in areas of “long open views” or close to existing residential development.
Large concentrations of structures for agriculture resembling an industrial environment will generally be rested in favour of smaller dispersed units. Consideration of the relatively poor access within the plan area is seen as a major limiting factor for the development of such concentrations both in terms of employees, delivery to and from the site by commercial vehicles.
POLICY AGRICULTURE - A3 - Food processing
The NP will support the development of farm buildings necessary for the conduct of agricultural production, it will however resist onsite food processing except where it is part of the necessary preparation of produced grown on the on the site or adjoining land for onward transfer into the market.
Note: These Policies also apply to horticulture.
BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT - HORTICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT
(Local Plan ref: paras 7.88- 7.99, policy DM15)
Horticulture remains the primary employer within the Parish with x full time equivalent employees on x holdings.
The distribution of horticultural sites is based on the original LSA estates. However, many individual premises are now rented/ leased to larger nursery businesses operating from a number of sites rather than sole proprietors.
There has been much fragmentation of the horticultural holdings since the dissolution of the LSA in 1983 and the subsequent break-up of the successor organisations, such as Sidlesham Growers.
Policy DM15 of the Local Plan recognises the importance of retaining the Horticultural Development Area (HDAs) within Sidlesham as a focus for “smaller scale” horticultural development. The NP endorses this approach but is concerned that within HDAs other non-horticultural development has been and is being allowed to occur. Additionally, whilst the original HDA boundaries are still relevant the NP has also identified other often more significant areas of horticultural glass that should also be recognised and protected as being major contributors to horticulture in the parish. Policy HR2 addresses this issue.
Whilst the winter run off of excess water remains an issue within the parish due to the high-water table, water conservation is also of importance. Areas of glass represent very high concentrations of water run-off. Discharge is often rapid and can cause inundation of ditch systems that can cause localise flooding and in a number of areas infiltrate the foul drainage systems and surcharge the pumping stations. Conversely, horticulture is a very heavy consumer of water especially in summer months. Increasingly, many areas of glass have associated reservoirs and other systems of water conservation. The NP recognises this need but also that there may not be suitable space within a site to accommodate, for instance, a reservoir. Policy HR7 seeks to address this issue.
POLICY HORTICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT - HR1
That within HDAs and other significant areas of horticultural development designated Horticultural Development Individual Sites (HDIS) that development not directly related to the use of the land for horticulture is not supported.
POLICY HORTICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT - HR2 - Satellite HDA’s and Horticultural Development Individual Sites (HDIS)
That in addition to the HDAs the following HDISs are designated and similarly protected.
Chartswood Nursery, Sidlesham Common
X
X
X
X
X
POLICY HORTICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT - HR3 - Water Management and Horticulture
That where possible existing, new and replacement glass has systems to retain and reuse water and that if this is not possible within a site to construct attenuation systems/reservoir and other storage, that land adjacent to large areas of glass are set aside for the purposes of water storage and conservation.
The Parish’s long involvement with horticulture has developed a high level of expertise and knowledge that the NP recognises as a major asset that should be retained. It is not clear what the position is on ‘succession’ within the industry and whether there is a continuation within families and / or employees.
POLICY HORTICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT - HR4 - Horticultural Employment and Expertise
The NP will seek to ensure that where possible the retention and development of knowledge of horticultural production is retained - this may be by accommodation for succession and resisting the loss of horticultural infrastructure.
In addition, establishment of links with bodies such as Brinsbury College that provide further and higher education opportunities will be sought to possibly establish a base within the parish.
It is appreciated that horticultural production has and is undergoing major changes such as hydroponics and that the business structures have moved to large scale automated production methods characterise the industry. To meet the specific demands of hydroponics the NP will.
POLICY HORTICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT - HR5 - Hydroponics and innovative production in horticulture
The NP will be supporting terms of buildings and resources needed for their development.
Hydroponic production moves horticulture away from dependence on the soil and places demands on water resources. As already stated, much water is lost from run off in winter months. Often little space exists within areas of glass houses to install reservoirs at ground level. The NP supports the development of water capture and retention systems, ground water storage and attenuation. It also recognises that particularly through storage and attenuation current inundation of water courses and foul drainage systems will be reduced and calling on stored water in summer especially in periods of drought conditions will conserve this natural resource.
POLICY HORTICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT - HR6 - Water conservation associated with horticulture
The NP will support ground level and sub-ground level rain and ground water storage associated with horticultural production.
Areas of open fields are an important characteristic of the Plan area. Intensive horticulture/ agricultural production can bring factory like structures into these open fields and severely impact upon their visual quality.
In order to limit this impact, the NP proposes that.
POLICY HORTICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT - HR7 - Polytunnel and other field structures
Whilst recognising the economics and the need for structures such as poly tunnels that where these and other potentially intrusive structures are installed that they are screened from view particularly in sensitive areas that offer ‘ long open views’ and where in proximity to existing dwellings.
Additionally, that when not in use the structures are removed or that at least their coverings are removed.
Equestrian Development
Equestrian activities and facilities are very prominent land uses on the Peninsula and particularly within the plan area.A number of ex LSA holdings have been developed for horse keeping on a private basis and there is at least one well established business at Zara Stud in Highleigh.
The plan is concerned to keep uses such as agricultural and horticultural area in these uses and avoid their conversion to ‘horseculture’ and its attendant proliferation of field stable/loose boxes and the mosaic of small fenced paddocks and other paraphernalia that multiple horse keeping in often fairly confined areas often creates.
Put something in here about soil erosion / compaction / loss of biodiversity caused by over intensive horse grazing?
Policy ED 1 - Equestrian Development - resisting horesculture
The NP will resist the conversion of agricultural and horticultural land to ‘horseculture’ especially where this proposed in open and or sensitive landscape areas.
As the plan area’s roads suffer increasing levels of traffic especially from large commercial vehicles and as a ‘rat run’ there is an inherent conflict between horses on roads and vehicles.Whilst It is essential to respect horse riders right to use the highway it is expedient not to cause increased conflict and danger by promoting development where the only means of exercising horses is on the highway.
Policy ED 2 - Equestrian Development -Land to support commercial and private horse keeping.
The NP will only support equestrian development where there is proof that secured by agreement as necessary that access to land not requiring extensive use of the public highway is available to exercise and graze horses.
The NP will also not support equestrian development that involves the use of public footpaths even where such paths are used to gain access to a bridleway
The NP is concerned to ensure that where horses are grazed that such use does not lead to the overgrazing , compaction of the soil and general degrading of the biodiversity of the area.The NP would seek through a condition on any planning consent that the British Horse Society (BHS) recommended standard of one hectare per two horse is adopted as a standard.
Policy ED 3 - Equestrian Development -Number of horses per Hectare
The NP will seek the adoption of the BHS recommended standard of two horses a hectare to avoid overgrazing and deterioration of the area in that use.
The use of land by specific groups mainly gypsy and travellers for horse keeping as part of their itinerant lifestyle shall be covered by the above policies ED 1 to 3 .
PLANNING AND INFRASTRUCTURE
PLANNING AND INFRASTRUCTURE - TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAYS
The Parish Council, working with its partner, Sidlesham Traffic Action Group (STAG) has sought to manage traffic that passes through the Parish. Two Traffic Regulation Orders (TRO`s) have been achieved to limit traffic speed on the B2145/B2201, Lockgate Road / Mapsons Lane ,Rotten Row and Keynor Lane.
A traffic management plan (TMP) for the B2145 corridor was submitted to West Sussex Highways suggesting a number of physical alterations to the road network, signage and greater enforcement amongst other improvements to enable pedestrian,vehicle and cyclist safety.
The TMP is appended to this NP.
Traffic levels within the Parish and particularly vehicle speed and impact of heavy articulated lorries and large farm vehicles cause high pollution levels in air quality and noise.Additionally, there is danger and inconvenience to residents and other users of the Parish, dislocation of communities for instance for those on the east of the B2145 from the west – crossing or entering the B2145 is often virtually impossible at increasingly prolonged periods of the day due to traffic flows in both north and south directions (daytime use is approx. 7 to 1 southbound to north on B2145).
The Parish is continually impacted by land use within Selsey. As the town continues to grow, the inadequacy of the B2145 to sustain it becomes ever more pressing. As far back as 1973 a planning inspector refused an application for a touring caravan site at Green Lawns in Selsey stating that the B2145 had exceeded its safe carrying capacity.
The Parish Council has, over a decade or more sought to manage traffic on the B2145 with Traffic Regulation Orders (TRO) to reduce speed limits. Lack of enforcement has resulted in low level of adherence by many drivers. The NP will actively seek to ensure greater adherence through signage/ speed recording and built measures in collaboration with the Highway Authority (WSCC), Sussex Police and other agencies. The disruption, danger and blatant disregard for safety and the law must be challenged. A B2145 safety and traffic management plan has been produced and will be updated as part of the Plan process.
POLICY TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAY - TH1
The NP therefore firmly rejects proposals that would increase the carrying capacity of the B2145 or its junctions in the Parish.
Whilst the A27 junctions at Whyke and Stockbridge have a major impact on the Parish and the interconnectivity of the Peninsula with Chichester City any improvement to these junctions must also have an overall traffic management strategy for connecting roads and their hinterlands. Improved junctions onto the Peninsula would otherwise more readily allow traffic to enter and result in more rapid congestion. However leaving the Peninsula would be improved.
POLICY TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAY - TH2
The NP supports the improvement of the A27 junctions at Stockbridge A286 and Whyke B2145. Such improvements should ideally be achieved by the provision of a strategic Northern Route and any improvements should be accompanied by a wider strategy for management of linkway roads and their hinterlands.
POLICY TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAY - TH3
The NP recommends that a joint Traffic Management and Environmental Action Plan be developed with Hunston and North Mundham Parish and Selsey Town Council to improve the B2145. This Plan forming the basis of a formal proposal to West Sussex County Council.
The basis of the improvements being to control vehicle speed reduce pollution seeking zero carbon profile whilst maintaining the essential rural and open character of the road. These proposals to be based on `Traffic in Villages Safety and Civility’ for rural roads see appendix
(we have a draft B2145 corridor traffic management and safety improvement plan produced a couple of years ago that needs bringing up to date)
Site specific Transport and Highway proposal:
Pegasus Type Crossing B2145 at Pagham Harbour
RSPB Reserve to Medmerry
Panda type crossing and bus pull-in at B2145 north of Manhood Lane
Mini roundabout at junction of B2201 / B2145 at Sidlesham Common. Speed restrictions on B2201 and B2145 of 30mph north of roundabout.
The Greenway
This proposal is for a cycleway linking Chichester to Selsey following as much as possible the route of the B2145 but offers a safe off-road dedicated route for cyclists. The route will have the dual function of use by commuters and as a recreational route. In respect of the latter it will link to Sustrans national route 88 at Pagham Harbour and the cycle link into Medmerry - both of these are within the Parish.
In its function as a commuter route it is important that the most direct route between Chichester and Selsey is achieved. At present (date Jan 2020) negotiations are ongoing with landowners but it is likely that some minor deviations from a direct route will have to be accepted.
It is now most probable that the route will be formally adopted by WSCC as highway authority, but its type of route designation has yet to be determined. Map ----- shows the current route details.
The NP recognises the importance of the route in the following policy.
POLICY TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAY - TH4
The proposed route of the Chichester to Selsey Greenway Cycle Route will be protected from development or uses that may prejudice its completion.
The Greenway is hoped to pass through Sidlesham Memorial Recreation Ground, and it is proposed to establish and access node (see appendix) where individuals may start/finish their cycling and where a bike hire scheme may be established.
POLICY TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAY - TH5
The NP will seek to establish an access node to the Greenway and through a franchise a cycle hire scheme at Sidlesham Recreation Ground.
PLANNING AND INFRASTRUCTURE - HOUSING DEVELOPMENT
Whilst the LP does not currently allocate housing to the Parish on grounds of lack of sustainability across the Parish there is an expectation that additional housing will be achieved by ‘windfall sites.
Such sites would normally be expected to provide a relatively small percentage of overall housing provision and definitely not challenge assumptions made about the sustainability of an area’s appropriateness for housing provision.
As with other parishes on the Peninsula, Sidlesham has people on a waiting list for social housing- many are local families with a priority to be rehoused and have, a long-standing local connection.
POLICY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT - H1 - Social Housing
The NP recognises the dilemma that no new housing policy presents for the provision of social housing and will actively seek to secure a permanent “local social housing occupation condition” on all new housing and that new units are of a suitable size, design and cost bracket for social tenant occupation.
POLICY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT - H2 - Right to buy
In addition, the NP will seek to remove ‘the right to buy’ from any new social housing built.
The anomaly of the ex-Land Settlement Association (LSA) estates presents a particular and pressing problem- there are estimated to over 100 ex LSA holdings in the Parish each with at least one existing “agricultural/ horticultural outbuilding. In 2013 legislation supporting ‘change of use’ for the conversion of such agricultural/ horticultural buildings was approved by Central Government. The legislation is, and will continue, to allow development of new housing potentially leading to high levels of housing (80plus units), often concentrated in a small area, where the LP would have deemed housing inappropriate for sustainability reasons alone.
Whilst new social housing would be beneficial to the Parish accompanied by necessary infrastructure the change of use derived housing invariably makes no contribution to either the social housing stock or a financial contribution such as Community Infrastructure Levey (CIL) for new or improved supporting infrastructure.
As a Parish with relatively limited financial resources and identified need for social/ non-market housing there is a particular and pressing problem. We do therefore have a housing issue that our plan needs to address. This situation alone places a need for the management of housing development within the NP.
In respect of the existing agricultural/horticultural buildings mentioned above they are submitted under the General Permitted Development Order (GPDO) Prior Consent Procedure.
POLICY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT - H3 - Building Conversions
In such cases the NP will seek to ensure that a full structural survey analysis and feasibility study and ideally a concurrent building regulations application is made to ensure the proposed structure for conversion meets the limitations for the degree of adaptation and modification prescribed. This provision should always be part of any consideration of a building for conversion under Class ‘Q’ of the GPDO.
POLICY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT - H4 - Replacement Buildings
The NP will continue to support the like for like replacement of buildings. The replacement property shall occupy the same floor area as the existing demolished building and shall be on the same location within a site unless it can be shown that relocation offers a better visual solution or better overall use of a site.
H4A - In addition, where possible existing materials should be recovered and used where a vernacular building is concerned and where a similar replacement building is proposed.
New build on previously undeveloped sites will, given the restrictive policies in the plan area, be unusual. Invariably, such builds will be confined to cases where for instance the need for a permanent dwelling has been proven in order to operate a horticultural holding- Invariably in such cases use of a residential caravan to service the site would have occurred on a temporary consent to ensure viability of the holding and the need for round the clock supervision of the horticultural production is needed.
Other sites will possibly be secured on appeal; as part of a redevelopment from another use (Brown Field Site).
POLICY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT - H5 - New Build
Where new build is proposed the scale and overall massing of a building will be of concern in order that sites are not over developed by a large building.
POLICY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT - H6 - Design
Where a new build is in a location where existing vernacular style buildings are also located the new build should seek to follow the same’ building design code’. This will especially be the case within existing Conservation Areas and also in areas designated Areas of Local Significance / Distinctiveness.
Where a site is ‘isolated’ either by tree/ hedge screening or away from other buildings innovative modern design that allows for the latest energy conservation and materials to be utilised will be supported where appropriate.
POLICY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT - H7 - Adoption of Sustainable Building Code
All new build, conversions and extensions shall be expected to fully conform to the latest energy conservation and sustainability codes as set out in the Buildings Research Establishment (BREAAM).
GYPSY / TRAVELLER AND SHOWMEN
The NP recognised the need to provide suitable locations for the needs of these minority groups. It is however concerned that the existing communities within the Parish are extended and become dominant within the local area. It is therefore essential that across the district and along the coastal plain there is an equitable distribution of sites avoiding concentrations.
Legislation has clarified eligibility for gypsy and traveller to be included in overall housing need stating that a nomadic lifestyle must be proven and that those wishing a `settled` lifestyle become like any other individual seeking housing.
POLICY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT - H8
The NP will resist the development of gypsy and traveller sites where provision within 3 miles already exists except where additional provision is by means of a minor small-scale extension to an existing site and a social family need to join existing occupants can be proven.
Consent for the provision of sites should exist on a personal permission basis and should cease once the occupant no longer have a nomadic lifestyle.
Creation of permanent dwellings or non-itinerant accommodation will not normally be allowed on existing gypsy traveller sites.
COMMUNITY FACILITIES AND WELLBEING
COMMUNITY FACILITIES
POLICY COMMUNITY - C1 - Meeting future need
The NP seeks to ensure that communities within the Parish have adequate and appropriate community facilities to meet future needs.
Currently there are five venues that support the community’s needs for a range of activities
These are:
Parish Rooms
Church Hall
Sidlesham Memorial Recreation Ground / Club house
Sidlesham Primary School Community Sports Hall
The Anchor Public House `Barn Annexe`
The future of these venues with the exception of (1) is at present unclear.
The need for a multi-purpose `Community Space` has been evident for many years and has been supported through surveys of residents.
A point could conceivably be reached where the Parish has no large or medium meeting place. It is therefore imperative that a contingency approach is adopted that avoids this possibility.
The creation of a community space either by conversion of an existing space or a new building will undoubtedly be dependent on external funding to support, for instance, a sport based primary use or a community `well-being` use. An integrated approach catering for both these areas would seem a good way forward on at least one site (3) above.
A funder will, however, not support duplication of provision – the community Sport Hall at Sidlesham Primary School for instance was built with lottery funding that specifically required dedication to a particular recognised sport - in this instance it was Badminton and a hall 6m high was specified for the sport. An application to sports based lottery funding (Sports Council) or to the district would not readily support another building specifically designed to accommodate badminton or a sport that requires a similar height within a hall.
POLICY COMMUNITY - C2 - Community Built Facilities
The NP will, therefore, through a review of the current opportunities and constraints enable an approach that:
Supports existing venues
Looks for the development of a multi-use facility of sufficient scale to meet local needs but that does not duplicate existing venue uses.
That is eligible for external funding but may also need the provision of a loan from the Public Works Loan Board supported by a charge on the Parish Precept.
THE PUBLIC REALM
A combination of successive cuts to local authority budgets resulting in deteriorating standards of maintenance of road,verges footpaths and open areas within the public realm.Unfortunately, whether linked to the overall deterioration or from other causes a general lack of involvement and respect elements of the general public, particularly those in vehicles passing through the parish has further accelerated the decline.
Particular problems exist where vehicles park on verges cutting them up or because of narrowness of the roads use the verges to actually drive on.The problems that result are three fold - in wet conditions the soil displaced and broken out from the verges clogs the road gulleys causing them to flood and further saturate the verges and road surface.Mud is spread onto the footways where present making them impassable by pedestrians and often causing them to walk on the road edge with the inherent dangers from road traffic.Lastly, large vehicles that increasingly cross onto verges or directly encroach onto a footway pose a danger to pedestrians.
A great deal of the problem could be solved by a definite boundary between road and verge/footway by the laying of new curbing and the replacement of areas where existing has collapsed or been overwhelmed by changes in road level and general subsidence by vehicles continually passing over.
The NP therefore proposes that initially within the context of the Traffic Management and Road Safety Plan that the Highway Authority be asked as a priority in their forward plan to install and replace curbing , reinstate verges and replace lost verge marker posts and install where appropriate new posts.
Policy Public Realm PR1 Protection of Verges and Footways
The NP will in partnership with the Highway Authority and the Parish Council ensure through physical measures (curbing and verge posts)combined with signage that verges and footways as shown on Plan ‘x’ are protected from incursion by vehicles.
General litter and to lesser extent fly tipping are an increasing problem.Lack of enforcement of controls over both activities has allowed their proliferation.Within the plan area there are particular problem areas these are shown plan ‘xx”but for littering the main cause is from vehicles passing through and particularly using the Esso Paddock Service Station. Whist relatively quiet,un-trafficked roads are susceptible to fly tipping - Rookery lane in vicinity of the southern Water pumping Station and along Easton Lane are particularly problematic.
Policy Public Realm PR2 Litter and Fly Tipping
The NP will through the Parish Council and partners (Keep Britain Tidy , CDC) introduce signage indicating fines for littering and fly tipping and where practicle introduce CCTV or other surveillance methods.
Appendices
Groups and organisations to be consulted
Sussex Growers (13/2/20)
Sidlesham Primary School
Manhood Wildlife & heritage Group
St Marys Parochial Church Council
Sidlesham Traffic Action Group
Sidlesham Community Association
Manhood Peninsula Partnership
Chichester District Council - Community Development
Chichester District Council - Planning - Neighbourhood Plans
Hunston Parish Council
North Mundham Parish Council
Selsey Town Council
Earnley Parish Council
West Sussex County Council - Highways
Environment Agency
Southern Water
Portsmouth Water
National Farmers Union
Note this is version 1.4A -this numbering will only change following a Steering Group Meeting
Currently there are no Steering Group Meetings in the forward diary.
There has been a change to version description to 1.4A from 1.4 due to the deletion of a section /topic the letter in the version description will change whenever such deletions occur therefore the next will be 1.4B
Meetings to date (21/2/20)
Sussex Growers- John Hall- (14/2/20) PSB+RR
Chichester District Planning -Neighbourhood Plans - Valarie Dobson to be confirmed
Ongoing list of changes to document
7/2/20- note added to front page, list of organisations to be consulted updated(PSB)
7/2/20- 1st typing corrections from written draft -Highways and Transportation (PSB)
7/2/20- 1st typing corrections from written draft - Community Facilities(PSB)
7/2/20- 1st typing corrections from written draft, adding of omitted text,removal of duplication Environment-(PSB)
7/2/20 - text completed from quote on ICZM previously omitted (PSB)
8/2/20- Stages of a neighbourhood plan list added replacing public participation diagram superseded by changed legislation.(PSB)
8/2/20- introduction and why plan needed text completed (draft version to be agreed)(PSB)
9/2/20-public realm added with text and policy PR1 protection of verges and PR2 litter and Fly Tipping.(PSB)
9/2/20 1st typing corrections from written draft and addition of missing text plus new text to Environment- climate change and sustainability.(PSB)
10/2/20- text added to ‘How the plan was prepared ‘.(PSB)
10/2/20- text added to ‘The plans aims to achieve‘(PSB)
18/2/20- additions to surrounding text Environment- Pagham Harbour(PSB)
19/2/20- additional text added re Pagham Harbour and editing of policy headings (PSB)
22/2/20- Equestrian Development added (PSB)
24/2/20- Transport and Highways- option for second access road to Selsey deleted (PSB)
