'Family' home should mean garden, too

The proposal for 14 flats providing family accommodation is far from a sensible proposal for this site.

I understand the need for social housing, however, this proposal, which is designed to accommodate 15 children, has no secure outside space for them to play, no space to hang out washing (not very green!) and the accommodation that is proposed for three and four-person family units is confined, to say the least.

The proposal is overbearing, stands out and is not in keeping with the area.

The simple solution would be a row of six or seven terraced houses, providing homes with gardens, which is what the family unit needs.

Why can't this be done?

I understand that Worthing Homes would love to build terraced houses, however, due to the land premium, St George's Church, to whom the land was donated for a church around 1911, would not receive so much for this site.

The proposal says how the church wants to utilise the funds raised, but at what cost to the local community?

The church gains financially but the children miss out on a garden, security and what was once considered a normal childhood.

Should the church look at its own profit before the needs of its own community?

Name and address supplied

-------------------------------------

Click here to go back to readers' letters.

Where are you? Add your pin to the Herald's international readers' map by clicking here.

Email the Herald: [email protected]