Committee takes stand against plans for 300 Pagham homes
![Illustrative artist's impression of new homes planned for Pagham off Hook Lane](https://www.sussexexpress.co.uk/webimg/legacy_oak_113830909.jpg?crop=3:2,smart&width=640&quality=65&enable=upscale)
![Illustrative artist's impression of new homes planned for Pagham off Hook Lane](/img/placeholder.png)
The application (P/30/19/OUT) for 300 new homes, a primary school and a care home off Hook Lane is a resubmission of an application which was turned down by district councillors in January.
The developer, Hallam Land Management, appealed against the decision, with an enquiry expected to take place in October this year.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide AdAs many as 1,200 homes have been proposed for Pagham in the local plan and 745 have already been approved by Arun District Council.
Pat Dillon (Con) sits as both a town councillor and district councillor and will attend the hearing later this year.
Mr Dillon said ‘they can’t seem to grasp the fact’ that 1,200 houses are going to result in 2,500 vehicles on the road.
Mr Dillon added that there were already traffic safety concerns in parts of Pagham.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide Ad“It’s going to have a horrendous impact on this area. I should imagine that we will be turned down and that they will win their appeal.
“If they do it will cost Arun, and us, the taxpayer, a lot of money.”
Jeanette Warr (Lib Dem) called the prospective impact of the homes ‘so serious’ and said: “It’s unbelievable. To get from A to B at certain times of the day is almost impossible now.”
She called the plans ‘disgraceful’ and said the committee should object on the grounds that, with 745 other homes being approved, a further 300 would a ‘complete over development of the area’.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide AdThe plans were called ‘the straw that broke the camel’s back’ by Steve Goodheart (Ind.)
The committee objected to the plans on the grounds of the effect on traffic and that with 745 homes approved, a further 300 would be a ‘step too far’.
At the time of writing, there have been 23 letters of objection to the application and none in support.