Planning permission refused but they’ll be back for more

Integral to Chandlers’ case is that it has no alternative suitable site. At present, this argument cannot stand, as there is an approved vacant site for three car showrooms at the junction of Mill Lane, Rustington and the A259.

The highways and transport working group of the Joint Eastern Arun Area Committee, under the chairmanship of county councillor Dr James Walsh, without apparent regard for the strategic planning issues involved, is, however, in negotiation with potential developers who wish to use that site for a retail park.

West Sussex County Council has engaged consultants, at public expense, to look into the highways implications. The potential developers have been asked to provide a traffic survey.

These negotiations are, apparently, on the assumption that, if the highways problems are resolved, planning permission will automatically follow. This is erroneous, as there is no extant planning permission for a retail park there. The permission for car showrooms was as a “special case” because of planning gains offered elsewhere. It is not a precedent.

Why have the potential developers been encouraged to proceed with their proposals (with public expenditure incurred), instead of being advised that the Mill Lane site is approved for car showrooms and any other use is untenable?

This failure will seriously jeopardise Arun’s case if Chandlers proceeds with a planning appeal.

K. W. Grimes

Broadmark Avenue

Rustington