DCSIMG

Same Arun housing sites recommended for approval again

West Bank in Littlehampton, which Arun District Council hopes to regenerate. ENGSUS00120131216145748

West Bank in Littlehampton, which Arun District Council hopes to regenerate. ENGSUS00120131216145748

BARELY two months after councillors decided to reconsider where homes should be built in Arun, the council’s local plan sub-committee is due to recommend the exact same locations.

Back in January, councillors deferred the decision on where 580 homes a year should be built in Arun, up until 2029, on the grounds that sites needed to be considered again because of flooding at winter.

At the full council meeting, where the decision was made, several councillors said Ford should be considered again in spite of a lack of infrastructure.

However, the exact same sites in Arun and the same housing numbers have been recommended for approval at the next local plan sub-committee meeting on March 27.

Those strategic allocations are: 2,000 homes in Barnham, Eastergate and Westergate, 1,000 homes in West Bank, Littlehampton, and 600 in Angmering.

A report prepared ahead of the meeting said a workshop was held on February 27 in which 38 councillors looked at 120 potential development sites and their pros and cons, including information from the new wet spots maps from the draft local flood risk management strategy.

As a result of this, councillors concluded the same locations and housing numbers should be recommended for approval.

The report does consider Ford, Yapton, Pagham and Fontwell for housing, but due to the need for further evidence gathering and public consultation, it said this would put the local plan on hold for at least a year and cost more than £100,000.

The report adds: “If members of this sub-committee determine to use any or all of the Ford/Yapton, Pagham (beyond the 400m Pagham Harbour buffer zone) or an area south of Fontwell as part of this local plan period, then evidence gathering and first stage public consultation will need to be undertaken. This would put the entire plan on hold for at a least a year and would cost in excess of £100,000.”

For the full report, read this week’s Littlehampton Gazette.

 

Comments

 
 

Back to the top of the page