Housing need, not demand

The excessive development happening before our eyes and planned in the near future is not being driven by housing need.

What gets built will sell not because of need but because of demand. Demand to own a second home as an investment or to get out of London now that homeworking has become an acceptable alternative to commuting, for example.

The main problem with this approach is that housing policy should and must be driven by housing need. The need in our area is for one, two and threebedroom houses with the emphasis on one and twobedroom houses.

We need to build affordable smaller units so that younger people can get on the housing ladder or move out of their parents’ house. However larger homes are far more lucrative.

The net result is we end up with people moving into the area, which pushes up prices and puts the price out of the reach locals, especially the young.

The councils granting permission either don’t fight developers hard enough to get what we need or they don’t have the power to go up against the huge building firms.

We do not have the infrastructure for many things but especially waste. Look at Chichester Harbour. It is an open sewer. Any further development should involve the developer having to build treatment facilities, including constructive wetland reed beds.

How many new wards are planned for St Richard’s? When will the free school be able to buy land to have decent sports pitches? How about a community hall for Whyke? Is the surgery in Southbourne going to treble in size to allow for the new houses there?

Any new infrastructure should not be paid for by general tax. It should come out of the balance sheet of the developers.

I remain pessimistic because the current government is up to its neck in the building boom and see it as a major driver to get the economy moving again postcovid.

HOWARD SMITH Selsey Road Sidlesham