Fight goes on to save green land from development
Labour party leader Sir Keir Starmer and his deputy Angela Rayner have been invited to visit Worthing to hear residents' concerns amid ongoing concerns for the Goring Gap.
Proposalsfora475-homedevelopment at Chatsmore Farm, on the Ferring/worthing border, have been refused by Worthingboroughcouncilandhave even been the subject of a High Court battle. A new public inquiry on plans is scheduled for February, as developer Persimmon continues to push to be allowed to build on the land.
Sir Peter Bottomley – Conservativempforworthingwest –hasnowinvitedsirkeirandms Rayner to the area, following reports the Labour leader had indicatedhewould'bulldoze'local objectionstobuildingproposals – ‘even if local people and local councils had strong objections to a field being covered with houses’.
Sir Peter said: "I welcome a debate on this so that I might put the strong, heartfelt views and concerns of local residents directly to Sir Keir. Perhaps Angela Rayner or Sir Keir Starmer couldcometoheartheheartfelt concerns of constituents with me, joining my assurances and those of the Secretary of State that our fields and green gaps must be protected."
Sir Peter, the father of the House of Commons, has addressedtheissueinparliament.
In October, Michael Gove – the Secretary of State for Levellingup,housingandcommunities – said the UK Government ‘needs to ensure’ that green gaps such as Chatsmore Farm are protected.
"Many constituents have been in contact with renewed concern for the future of Goring Gap, the green lung and natural divide between Goring and Ferring communities,” Sir Peter added. “Constituents and communities are united in opposition to the wanton pursuit toconcreteoverthegoringgap. Residents can have confidence thatiwillcontinuetobeastrong advocate for their views and fight to defend our green gaps.”
Persimmonhomessaidearlierthisyearthatitwas‘naturally disappointed’ with the rejection ofitsplan,adding:“ourgoalwas toprovidenewhomesinanarea ofextremelyhighhousingneed."
Inaugust,thedeveloperadded:“thecouncil’slegalchallenge was successful on the basis of a procedural shortcoming rather than a fundamental judgement on the issue of housing need or principle of development."