Enough. The area has been through too much already and we don't have the infrastructure to support this.
A
Anonymous
9 years ago
Builders should use brownfield sites before taking the farmland where people can walk and nature/wildlife can exist in peace. We are losing too much of the countryside to developers who are only interested in making money.
E
emma willson
9 years ago
I understand the need for new homes but I don't understand why they are building on fields and on the fields that are the edges of the towns. This will change the look and feel of the area, increase traffic/need for doctors, schools etc and will of course increase the risk of flooding and loss of habitat for wildlife.
J
Jan Behr
9 years ago
No infrastructure, no jobs, high risk of flooding, loss of agricultural land, more profit for developers and buy to let landlords. These extra homes will not help those on council waiting lists which is why we keep being told build build build.
M
Mick Belt
9 years ago
Signing the petition due the impact that the amount of housing proposed will have on the area.
J
Jennifer Keywood
9 years ago
I agree that more houses in Pagham would cause problems with services which are already struggling.
L
Lynsey macdonald
9 years ago
Leave our community alone!!!!
M
Martine Tinker
9 years ago
STOP STOP STOP THE BUILDING NOW.
Too much new housing in the area,
D
Denise Fawke
9 years ago
these people do not live here - we do not have the road structure to sustain anymore traffic. Also flooding is a big issue, building on land that will not drain now, and needs pumps to stop our homes from flooding leads me to believe Damn the people meet the quotas.
Beyond belief it is even being considerd
C
Colaire Travis
9 years ago
Stop building on green belt land at Hook Lane
J
Justin Le-Marechal
9 years ago
I like that I live in a small village with not much traffic. However the traffic in the mornings to get to Chichester is a 15 min delay already with potential to be longer if there is an increase in the number of houses built.
J
James Monaghan
9 years ago
Nor can the infrastructure cope - we don't have enough doctors, dentists, opticians, hospitals, chemists, schools & libraries as it is!
What is it about "NO" that these people don't understand?
C
Chris Benham
9 years ago
We will use our vote against this sprawling development.
A
Adam Shepheard
9 years ago
I am not part of the NIMBY brigade and see the need for new housing, however the infrastructure needs to be sufficiently improved in order to cope with a substantial increase in housing. Local schools are already being pushed to their limits of capacity, and I am sure some beyond, and provision must be made to accomodate any shortfalls. Any increase on the housing provision in the region increases pressure on the local NHS provision and with St Richards already seeing an annual increase in the number of patients between 10 - 12% what will this mean with an increase in residents for whom this will be their local hospital? Many local GP practices and dentists are turning away new clients as they cannot cope with an increase in patient numbers, so again what will the plan be for the healthcare service/provision? As I stated I do support, and fully understand, the need for more housing provision and every area must do their bit to help, however not without the associated infrastructure of roads, schools, GP surgeries, public open spaces, hospitals, nursing homes, shops/businesses/commerce that is needed to support this increase. We should not be naive enough to forget that many of us live on what was open fields once upon a time, in the not too distant past, especially in Rose Green and North Bersted, so the healthy compromise which benefits the entire community and the local area and beyond is the preferred solution. Having said all of this at this juncture I cannot support an increase in housing without the requisite infrastructure and proff that this will improve the community in which I live. Unless any developers are made to include all of the above in their development plans then mere Section 106 contributions will not be sufficient to alleviate the increases in pressure. Local government should not compromise the absolute needs to make the [compulsory] housing increases work with the UK governments housing targets for the region.
E
Eric Msarshall
9 years ago
The road and infrastructure cannot support any more housing devlopment and the significant threat of flooding is of major concern.
J
Jackie Hickland
9 years ago
I strongly object to any new developments in the immediate area of Pagham the roads in and out are busy enough now with a larger population we will come to a standstill!!!!
A
Avril Ambridge
9 years ago
The local amenities & roads are already overcrowded. It's so hard to get a drs appointment, & the schools are oversubscribed. Building on land probe to flooding is ridiculous.
M
Melanie Careless
9 years ago
It seems that the whole of the coastal plain of West Sussex is being built on. There is virtually no green space between our coastal towns. This must stop.
C
Colum Hickland
9 years ago
Pagham can't cope with more delopment
S
Sharon Lewis
9 years ago
Pagham is a village and doesn't need turning into a town. Two new large housing estates up the road is ENOUGH! Spread this madness elswhere.
Enough. The area has been through too much already and we don't have the infrastructure to support this.
Builders should use brownfield sites before taking the farmland where people can walk and nature/wildlife can exist in peace. We are losing too much of the countryside to developers who are only interested in making money.
I understand the need for new homes but I don't understand why they are building on fields and on the fields that are the edges of the towns. This will change the look and feel of the area, increase traffic/need for doctors, schools etc and will of course increase the risk of flooding and loss of habitat for wildlife.
No infrastructure, no jobs, high risk of flooding, loss of agricultural land, more profit for developers and buy to let landlords. These extra homes will not help those on council waiting lists which is why we keep being told build build build.
Signing the petition due the impact that the amount of housing proposed will have on the area.
I agree that more houses in Pagham would cause problems with services which are already struggling.
Leave our community alone!!!!
STOP STOP STOP THE BUILDING NOW. Too much new housing in the area,
these people do not live here - we do not have the road structure to sustain anymore traffic. Also flooding is a big issue, building on land that will not drain now, and needs pumps to stop our homes from flooding leads me to believe Damn the people meet the quotas. Beyond belief it is even being considerd
Stop building on green belt land at Hook Lane
I like that I live in a small village with not much traffic. However the traffic in the mornings to get to Chichester is a 15 min delay already with potential to be longer if there is an increase in the number of houses built.
Nor can the infrastructure cope - we don't have enough doctors, dentists, opticians, hospitals, chemists, schools & libraries as it is! What is it about "NO" that these people don't understand?
We will use our vote against this sprawling development.
I am not part of the NIMBY brigade and see the need for new housing, however the infrastructure needs to be sufficiently improved in order to cope with a substantial increase in housing. Local schools are already being pushed to their limits of capacity, and I am sure some beyond, and provision must be made to accomodate any shortfalls. Any increase on the housing provision in the region increases pressure on the local NHS provision and with St Richards already seeing an annual increase in the number of patients between 10 - 12% what will this mean with an increase in residents for whom this will be their local hospital? Many local GP practices and dentists are turning away new clients as they cannot cope with an increase in patient numbers, so again what will the plan be for the healthcare service/provision? As I stated I do support, and fully understand, the need for more housing provision and every area must do their bit to help, however not without the associated infrastructure of roads, schools, GP surgeries, public open spaces, hospitals, nursing homes, shops/businesses/commerce that is needed to support this increase. We should not be naive enough to forget that many of us live on what was open fields once upon a time, in the not too distant past, especially in Rose Green and North Bersted, so the healthy compromise which benefits the entire community and the local area and beyond is the preferred solution. Having said all of this at this juncture I cannot support an increase in housing without the requisite infrastructure and proff that this will improve the community in which I live. Unless any developers are made to include all of the above in their development plans then mere Section 106 contributions will not be sufficient to alleviate the increases in pressure. Local government should not compromise the absolute needs to make the [compulsory] housing increases work with the UK governments housing targets for the region.
The road and infrastructure cannot support any more housing devlopment and the significant threat of flooding is of major concern.
I strongly object to any new developments in the immediate area of Pagham the roads in and out are busy enough now with a larger population we will come to a standstill!!!!
The local amenities & roads are already overcrowded. It's so hard to get a drs appointment, & the schools are oversubscribed. Building on land probe to flooding is ridiculous.
It seems that the whole of the coastal plain of West Sussex is being built on. There is virtually no green space between our coastal towns. This must stop.
Pagham can't cope with more delopment
Pagham is a village and doesn't need turning into a town. Two new large housing estates up the road is ENOUGH! Spread this madness elswhere.