Issues overlooked in favour of building on green fields

We are heartily sick of the invasion of property developers determined to concrete over the area south of the A27.

Apart from the obvious arguments regarding loss of green fields, over-congestion, insufficient amenities etc, which have been eloquently highlighted by other readers, there are two other issues that should be considered.

1) The devaluation of existing properties affected by intensive, intrusive development built right up to the boundaries of these properties.

Although we are told we are ‘not entitled to a view’, a pleasant outlook is taken into consideration when valuing a property and the value is increased accordingly. So, having purchased a property, probably at a premium price to enjoy a ‘pleasant outlook’, when this, and loss of privacy etc, are lost, who bears the cost of the devaluation should the owner decide to move – solely the owner, of course.

There should be a compensation system in place whereby if your property is affected by the result of such development, the property developer and/or the local authority giving the planning permission should reimburse the owner for the subsequent devaluation of their property.

2) The building of ‘affordable housing’ that is not purchased by the people it is intended for, but is targeted by developers to add to their stockpile of properties to let for rent, and at increasingly higher rents, too. For first-time buyers obtaining a reasonable mortgage as well as finding a substantial deposit to secure a property can be a real struggle in the present difficult economic climate.

Therefore, as first-time buyers need all the help they can get, curbing the greed of developers who see reasonably-priced properties as a gift for increasing their wealth rather than a means for young people to get on

the housing ladder, should be a priority of the government, but I doubt whether that will ever happen.

Joan Barham

Barnham Road