Serious research would show need

The significance of the four scenarios of housebuilding, on which residents are asked to state their preference, has been downplayed. These scenarios – for 362, 447, 548 or 628 dwellings a year – are based on different assumptions about the growth of employment and output in the district.

But the wording of the questionnaire shows that its authors prefer an increase in recent rates of housebuilding to a decrease, and respondents are steered towards the higher options by suggestions that economic growth and employment would be constrained by the two lower scenarios.

Now it seems that the four scenarios are purely illustrative, and Arun is open-minded about the number of homes that should be built. Residents are encouraged to state how many new homes they want, and to ignore the scenarios if they disagree with them.

It is good to know that Arun is open to all suggestions. But residents should have been given more information if they were expected to produce their own estimates of the need for new homes. Or Arun could have provided scenarios based on many more assumptions, especially assumptions that led to lower rates of building than the four published scenarios do.

The big question that the consultation should be trying to answer is whether residents want the population and urban area of Arun to go on growing rapidly, or whether growth should slow or stop.

The population has been increasing at about 1,000 a year for the last 20 years and building has averaged about 490 homes a year. The lowest scenario, 362 dwellings a year, would provide for a stable workforce but would mean an increase of about 400 a year in the population.

The questionnaire does not tell us what increase in population would be associated with any of the scenarios.If we want growth in population to stop, we would have to do some serious research to find out how many homes would be needed. But it would certainly be much less than 362 a year. Arun should provide this figure.

Residents have been poorly served by this consultation process. They should treat the questionnaire with caution and scepticism and use the little space provided on the questionnaire to say what they think the objective of the local plan should be, and to provide their illustrative example of an appropriate rate of building.

David Sawers

chairman, East Preston and Kingston Preservation Society

Seaview Avenue, East Preston