ANGMERING residents are to be asked for their views on major housing schemes proposed for the village.
The Save Angmering campaign group is planning an ambitious village-wide survey to seek everyone’s opinion on developments including the Barrats/David Wilson Homes scheme for 301 homes on land north of Worthing Rugby Club, and a further, as yet unannounced scheme, which could see 250 homes on the rugby club site.
The survey follows a two-day drop-in event last month organised by the group drawing up Angmering’s community-led plan, which also gave villagers the opportunity to comment on housing developments, as well as a range of other issues affecting the community.
Confusion surrounded the public’s response at the sessions, following the issue of a statement which appeared to suggest the majority of people were in favour of the Barratts/David Wilson Homes proposals, as reported in last week’s Gazette,
However, the group has asked us to point out that was not the case, and that in fact there was no support for any large-scale housing developments in future.
In a further statement this week, the group said: “Lack of supporting infrastructure and perceived detrimental effects on the rural nature of the community were the most common objections raised.
“However, a very high percentage of those polled supported some limited development in the parish over the plan’s life, provided it was well controlled.”
The housing needs and development working group for the plan said the feedback it received from people visiting the sessions was:
* respondents were almost unanimous in wanting the parish council to control the level and look of future development in the parish;
* 85 per cent felt the level of development over the plan period should be fewer than 250 new homes, with 62 per cent wanting it limited to 100 or fewer; no-one wanted to see 500 or more new homes;
* the low-cost purchase of properties was seen as the preferred option for affordable homes, which people felt should be under the control of the parish council;
* no-one supported the development of greenfield sites, brownfield being the preferred option.
* See next week’s Gazette for more feedback on the plan.