Q-P2.1: Are there any areas where equality and inclusivity in planning needs further attention?
No comment
No answer given
Listen to the locals in the affected areas not the so called councillors who are NOT local.
No answer given
More consideration should be given to the needs and aspirations of children and young people.
I am appalled at how difficult it has been to make my point of view. The process is unnecessarily long-winded and impenetrable.
I do not think that there has been a sufficient number of stakeholders engaged in the process. People-focus needs people input. If there is to be a plan focused till 2050, which represents 25 years there needs to be reflection of successes so far. There needs to be further joining up of interested parties. I asked a question about infrastructure and the SWPL could not answer it. On two issues I was referred to the Warwickshire council. Surely if there is to be joined up and cohesive planning then this should be accessible for all. I should not need to approach different sections of the council to get an overall answer. In order to move forward you need to look at successes and failures in meeting the strategic objectives so far. We need peoples input to this. Clearer links needed between the vision and objectives. When I approached the SWPL team for updates on the development thus far they did not know. Some of the questions were referred to Warwickshire County Council teams who should be well connected by now and able to comment on the transport or infrastructure plans.
The JPC is disappointed that the current Issues and Options consultation has been so short and so poorly publicised – a straw poll found that most residents were almost totally unaware of it and had certainly not engaged. The quotes from the community, whilst a welcome inclusion in the document, also suggest that there was very limited public engagement. The wisest comment included was one which suggested that the plan “should not be (so) developer led” – HOW TRUE – previous plans have been “Developers’ Charters” and given the directions and magnitudes of the SWLP so far we are looking at more of the same. It does not have to be like this! A new “local plan” should be an exciting opportunity to shape our locality for years to come, but even the official publicity is lacklustre and understated with formats that are hard to follow, with numerous links to other sites or documents and with no clear path through it is easy to get distracted or lost completely. We are disappointed that there have not been more public engagement events and particularly that there has been minimal engagement with the PC/TC sector, beyond the rather minimal chair briefings, with other councillors specifically excluded. The Issues & Options document smacks very much of a pre-determined format, populated by a development professional with limited local knowledge, all based on a presumption of ever increasing growth as the only way forward.
Yes, the advertising of this consultation process has been appalling at best. There is a heavy reliance on the public being able to access the online process and document, which prevents a number of resident groups from participating. The accessibility of the consultation document has been extremely hard to find and ability to fill in on line with out having to cut and past onto word documents despite registering is not acceptable. Whilst there have been consultation events they have been centred in a hand full of large towns, the smaller towns and villages have had nothing and so have not been adequately consulted.
It has been brought to my attention by a neighbour today, and within a local magazine which also arrived today. That there is a consultation regarding plans to develop the village of Wooton Wawen, with up to potentially 500 residences. It is my understanding that today is the deadline to respond, hence my rushed response. I am rather surprised at the lack of direct communication regarding this matter. As someone directly affected by the proposals, I find myself surprisely uninformed. I don't think that it is appropriate to discover information via a complex website and a report of in excess of a thousand pages. If I were a vulnerable community member less capable of electronic communication, i would have been excluded from this process.
love to but don't have time. Perhaps you could have had more meetings with smaller segments to consider at each meeting. Some of us work full time
It appears to be a rushed process and should have spent more time with a cross section of residents seeking details of their needs for their future lives. From that evidence a more prioritised plan could have evolved rather than some of the generic content in there now which isn't specific to our area, or doesn't appear to me to be. Maybe more attention to getting local buy in is required.
We have to know the names of the people who produced this plan as it seems so skewed against the community of Henley and so lacking in an understanding of the so called amenities of the town. Similarly the stakeholders who were consulted: one can only guess that it is a term used to describe people who own land around Henley and to build on that land would therefore make them even more wealthy. How can they be considered as unbiased advisors for this project? As soon as they had banked their cash they could run for cover leaving the rest of us behind to live in a community which would become totally alien to us. As someone who worked on the Henley NDH plan for nearly 7 years I feel it is a disgrace that the SDC has rubbished and failed to ratify our plan (340 errors claimed) kicking it into the long grass in the hope that its recommendations do not have to be taken into consideration when the SW Local Plan is being pushed through. It makes an absolute travesty of its strap line *Working Together."
I have started reading the various documents associated with the emerging Local Plan, but have found a lot of it impenetrable - and I work in the property industry! Short of giving up hours and hours of time, it is impossible to get to the nub of the various issues - I guess in part because of the size of the overall task in creating a new Local Plan.
The Consultation Process The documents to be consulted about are lengthy and for many people not conversant with the planning and development process, will be extremely difficult to understand and address. I expect therefore that there will be a disproportionatly large response to the Plan made by professionals and the development industry who will be promoting their own interests. I believe that the development of planning policy should be community lead and there needs to be meaningful consultation with much greater direct individual and community engagement.
Yes, the advertising of this consultation process has been appalling at best. There is a heavy reliance on the public being able to access the online process and document, which prevents a number of resident groups from participating. The accessibility of the consultation document has been extremely hard to find and ability to fill in on line with out having to cut and past onto word documents despite registering is not acceptable. Whilst there have been consultation events they have been centred in a hand full of large towns, the smaller towns and villages have had nothing and so have not been adequately consulted.
In summary, we feel that your documents are weak on hard facts which makes it difficult to provide meaningful comment. All the facts that you quote should indicate the reference from where they were evidenced. We further believe that SDC should be making the running in suggesting what’s needed, rather that posing far too many fairly nebulous questions, presumably in the hope that there will be some useful nuggets coming to the fore, or creating a situation where the average reader loses the will to live before reaching the end! We also feel that SDC should have produced this project alone on the basis that SDC decided not to join up with WDC due to disagreements on planning issues. We would also make the observation that this is a lengthy set of documents that obviously took a large number of people a while to compose. Is it therefore reasonable that the consultation is done so quickly? Reviewing planning documents is not something that’s in most peoples’ regular remits whilst making a life and a living for themselves and their families.
No matter what the local community want the Council, will ignore community comments and wishes if it go against the Council.
Yes, the advertising of this consultation process has been appalling at best. There is a heavy reliance on the public being able to access the online process and document, which prevents a number of resident groups from participating. The accessibility of the consultation document has been extremely hard to find and ability to fill in on line with out having to cut and past onto word documents despite registering is not acceptable. Whilst there have been consultation events they have been centred in a hand full of large towns, the smaller towns and villages have had nothing and so have not been adequately consulted.
Supporting Documents: Spatial Growth Strategy Workshop We note from the outcomes public report of the above workshop that ‘the existing new settlement locations of Gaydon/Lighthorne Heath… was frequently chosen for additional growth beyond the current allocations; Gaydon/Lighthorne Heath was selected by 22 groups with an average of 3,400 dwellings.’ We support the Councils’ community engagement programme through the preparation of this Plan, and would urge them to take on board the feedback they have received, which we consider supports in principle the allocation of land adjacent to and to the east of the existing Gaydon/Lighthorne Heath allocation.
I feel that I am answering a degree level paper on sustainability. This should be made easier for the general public to understand and respond to.
The structure of this consultation is such that it is impossible for ordinary mortals to engage. The assumption that all responses will be made via an on-line portal of structured responses, is not inclusive and discourages people from participating in the formation of a plan that will affect the future environment of where they live.
I have registered for the consultation and tried to feedback through your website system but have abandoned the attempt as I have found it too difficult.
The Issues and Options link is not user friendly, in fact it is so large, it makes navigating to specific areas confusing. Why would any council allow the set up such a complicated system when it is supposed to be representing its local residents?
In connection to the comments required from the SWLP questionnaire and documentation, I am having to write via email as we have only been given this information a few days ago - were not aware of anything beforehand, therefore I, and I am positive, every other member of Bearley Village simply do not have the time to go through the hundreds of pages to try and complete the text boxes held within before the deadline 5.00 pm today !!. If this had been distributed properly and in good time, you would have had a much stronger response from residents, but as it stands, nearly every other person I have spoken to in Bearley Village over the weekend have never even heard of this??. It appears that only the Developers, Landowners and Council have the full picture - which is simply not acceptable.
Writing in connection with the SWLP - comments are due by March 6 5pm - please be aware that I and many other residents in Bearley were not made aware of the SWLP and extremely tight TAT. I understand that the Bearley Parish council were only informed and sent c.2000 pages to review and comment with one week notice - leaves a perception of not allowing for feedback in a fair and reasonable way. I also understand there was a developers consultation in 2021 held behind closed doors with no minutes published - meeting was held at The View in Wootton Wawen. Why was this held away from public scrutiny and no minutes published - Please advise. May I ask we are all given fair and reasonable time to digest the plethora of documents, trying to provide feedback via the portal requires a Phd in computer science, like many residents, I work full time, how we are expected to digest 00's of pages, understand all the terminology, without the option to seek clarification before submitting is frankly unreasonable. Please note, I tried to submit feedback using the portal, but the system is not working correctly - please see attached screenshot as an example. Therefore, please accept this email as feedback on the SWLP - having not had the required time to read in detail and large parts and terminology, leaves me extremely frustrated as decisions will be made that will impact 0000's for decades - why are we being given so little time?