We want eco-homes'“ not a whole town

However, it must be where there is demand and existing infrastructure with suitable facilities to support such development from the day the very first resident moves in, not year three or seven or whenever enough private funding has been raised for such crucial facilities.

The YouGov poll also demonstrates the high level of national ignorance about what an eco-town is. Only nine per cent were knowledgeable, with 39 per cent knowing a little and 48 per cent knowing nothing about eco-towns.

It merely demonstrated the aspirations of people for better-quality carbon-zero housing, not a desire for new towns.

The poll only asked six questions, two being where do you live and what is your gender? How can four questions cover the deep implications of large wholesale residential development in rural locations?

Why doesn't the government spend its money asking the communities affected by eco-towns what they think and how they believe their district can be upgraded in terms of genuine quality jobs and genuine affordable quality housing?

People want carbon-zero homes, not new towns that will have a negative impact on their existing communities.

Vicky Newman,

Church Lane, Yapton

ANY AREA you develop can provide housing but you need to think of areas the size of Crawley (population 100,000 plus) before you talk of a major regeneration opportunity.

Ford is at present a new-build of just 5,000 houses, only 2,000 of which will be '˜affordable' (at about 250,000?).

But do we want a town two or three times the size of Arundel plonked down on 750 acres of prime agricultural land? Communities say No, for the simple reason there is nothing to recommend it.

There are not the jobs. Roads, schools and medical facilities are already stretched to breaking point. The one certain thing is houses will be built before improvements will be made. Just imagine the chaos that will ensue when a few thousand extra cars squeeze onto the roads.

Patrick Higgins, Waterford Gardens, Littlehampton

Arun District Council voted to '˜demonstrate to government before the decision on further short-listing of the eco-town proposals there are other more sustainable options for meeting the district's housing needs'.

In a separate report, the chief executive names Bersted, north of Littlehampton (Lyminster-Toddington), Aldingbourne and Barnham.

Ford remains an option in the LDF process whatever happens to the eco-town bid '“ therefore there are five locations in the district on which major housing schemes could be considered.

One of the motivations in writing the FEH eco-town submission was to provide additional leverage with the government for an Arundel bypass. It remains to be seen whether this is successful.

Isn't there now a risk that, in a rush to achieve its desired outcome, Arun will, in essence, make the case for large-scale development in the district without the provision of an Arundel bypass? Is that wise?

Tony Dixon, Chichester