Residents questionnaire survey February 2017 David Nicholson DJN - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Ocle Pychard Group NDP Residents’ questionnaire survey February 2017 David Nicholson DJN Planning Ltd.

Residents’ survey November 2016 • 270 questionnaires delivered • 168 residents replied – 33.8% of residents • Headline results tonight – much more detail in the Results and Comment Listings reports • 23 open and closed questions on housing, traffic, jobs and economy, the environment and community services • 6 questions about respondents

Vision Agreed, supported or no comment 42 Social and services 22 Location of development 8 Economy 3 Environment 8 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 No. of respondents N=76 (45%) • Many expressions of agreement/no comment • Social aspects – housing to meet needs of younger generation and families • Burley Gate favoured as location for development • Economy – support for farming and business

Distributing new housing Not answered, 3, 2% Distribute more equally, 51, 30% Focus on Burley Gate, 114, 68% • Support to focus new housing at Burley Gate, linked to existing services • Less popular – distribute housing more equally between Burley Gate, Ocle Pychard and Ullingswick

Providing new homes • Favoured approaches - single new dwellings between existing (57%), or smaller schemes each for several new homes (56%) • Less support for a larger housing development: 28% in favour, 40% against.

Housing – size and type • Preference for 2 or 3 bed homes (65% and 78%) above larger houses (23%) • Private ownership favoured tenure (76%) • Adaptable/easy access popular (57%) • Self-build and live/work housing (42% and 44%) • Sheltered accommodation: 35% for, 27% against • Limited support for social housing (24% for, 42% against); shared ownership preferred (37% for)

Where should houses be built? Burley Gate 16 Burley Gate - opposite school 12 Ocle Pychard/Monkton 18 Ullingswick 18 Criteria identified 15 No or no opinion 21 0 5 10 15 20 25 No. of comments N=87 (52%) • Many comments favouring Burley Gate, especially opposite school: “to help sustain a thriving school, shop and village life” • Various other locations identified at Ocle Pychard, Monkton and Ullingswick • Support for development to be adjacent to main roads and linked to bus services, and for infill in the villages.

Where should houses not be built? Specific locations 33 Heritage 5 Flooding and drainage 14 Farmland and … 22 Highways and access 31 No comment/no … 7 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 No. of comments N=83 (49%) • Locations in descending order: Ullingswick (16); Ocle Pychard (10); Felton (4); Burley Gate (3); Lyvers Ocle (2); Kymin (1). • Avoid increasing traffic on country lanes • Protect farmland and woodland • Avoid heritage areas and increasing flood risk

Other comments on housing Need more housing - local needs 39 Balance of provision 5 Services and infrastructure 9 Links to employment 6 Design and eco 9 No 23 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 No. of comments N=86 (51%) • Support for starter and smaller affordable homes for young people and families • Better balance of provision – variety of housing • Housing at Burley Gate would be linked to services and bolster their viability • Design – new housing to be in keeping: “no neo -Georgian adventures”

Traffic, transport and access Areas for improvement • Top priority: road, hedge, ditch and drain maintenance and roads • Other priorities: road safety, pedestrian and cyclist safety • Interventions such as reducing traffic speed or traffic calming: qualified support • Least important: improvements for pedestrians and cyclists

Other comments on transport Capacity of rural lanes 14 Farm and HGV traffic 11 Reductions in traffic speed/calming 13 Maintenance 10 Public transport 12 Walkers, cyclists and horse riders 13 Other 5 No comment 12 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 No. of comments N=82 (49%) • Many comments on capacity of rural lanes • Speed reductions in the villages – A465 @Monkton • Need for better pedestrian facilities and public transport improvements • Tractors, horse boxes and HGVs

Jobs and the economy Types of employment to be encouraged • Top priorities: agriculture (83%) and forestry (67%) • Other priorities: tourism, leisure and crafts, offices and small businesses • Also supported: food and drink, livery/stabling, cafe • Least popular: intensive livestock units and polytunnels – 64% and 62% opposed

Providing for jobs • Top priority: broadband (91%) • Home-working, live-work, conversion of rural buildings and extending existing premises all well supported • Less favoured: protecting existing sites or finding new land for businesses

Locations for employment development Specific locations 14 Burley Gate 6 With main road access 12 Buildings conversions 4 Others 2 No 34 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 No. of comments N=63 (37%) • Range of locations suggested: Monkton, Lowdy Hall Farm, Burley Gate, ex HC smallholdings • Support for development to be adjacent to main roads and for conversion of redundant rural buildings

The environment How should new development respect the environment? • Most important: traffic from new development to be compatible with local roads • Close behind: be in keeping with surroundings and avoid creating noise and light pollution • Least important: use of local materials

The environment How to protect and enhance the environment? • All options well-supported • Most important: protect landscape character • Close behind: identifying features and habitats for protection • Least important: protecting important views (but still very/fairly important to 86%)

Features to be protected Wildlife habitats 8 Views 12 Countryside and landscape 17 Features and areas for protection 14 No 12 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 No. of comments N=60 (36%) • Ocle Pychard Church & Court, Ullingswick, Lower Hope, Three Rivers Ride, woodlands • Views identified eg Holme Oaks to Black Mountains • General comments referring to wildlife habitats, woodlands and copses, hedgerows and meadows

Local renewable energy • Most support for solar panels (65%) and ground source heat pumps (60%) • Mixed opinions on biomass and anaerobic digesters • Little support for wind farms or larger-scale solar farms (opposed by 71% and 51%)

Comments on the environment Environment and development 19 Transport and access 16 Other 9 No 17 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 No. of comments N=56 (33%) • Environment and development: NDP should retain habitats, protect natural beauty, avoid areas of flood risk, and support infill development • Transport: main road access, reduce traffic on lanes, facilities for vulnerable road users and maintenance

Community services Importance in meeting current and future needs • All options well-supported • Top priority: broadband • Close behind: Mobile phone reception, Primary School, Post Office, and pre-school • Also supported: newsletter and the churches

Comments on need for service improvements Bus service 18 Shop, pub, cultural and leisure 17 Village Hall 6 Recreational 9 Other 11 No 17 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 No. of comments N=70 (42%)

Information about you Under-represented groups against 2011 Census: • Females (46% of responses, 51% Census) • All age groups save for the 65-84 group • Full-time employed (19%/32% Census) Over-represented: • 65- 84’s (42%/25% Census) • Retired (43%/22% Census)

Length of residence Q24: length of residence 80 72 70 60 No of respondents 50 46 40 30 26 20 14 10 6 4 0 < 2 years 2-5 years 6-10 years 11-25 years > 25 years No answer Length of residence

Key messages for the NDP • Expressed need is for affordable, starter and smaller housing • Favour smaller sites for housing over larger, and Burley Gate over Ocle Pychard and Ullingswick as locations • Support individual windfall dwellings (planning applications) • Use “Community Actions” to capture aspirations for transport improvements and community facilities • Support specific types of employment and forms of provision such as home working and barn conversions • Environment policies to reflect diversity of landscape and habitats