Community Survey

This is now closed. The response was amazing, with just under half of households in the Parish sending in a reply.

What were the results? Not surprisingly, the most strongly supported aspects of St Wenn Parish’s character is its countryside and landscape, local wildlife and biodiversity, and the peace and tranquillity of the area. The local sense of community is also prized. Therefore, people think that it is important for the NDP should include policies to cover these issues. Protection for green spaces, measures to tackle climate change, the size and design of new homes and other buildings and making sure that some affordable housing is available is also supported.

On housing, strongest support is expressed for infill development, with some rounding off and brownfield land development, but the idea of new small estates, conversions of mobile homes to permanent dwellings and the merging of adjoining homes into one larger dwelling is unpopular. As to the type of new homes to be provided, family homes and homes adaptable for the elderly so they do not have to move away in old age receive most support, followed by affordable rented or owner homes to meet local needs. The concept of providing much larger homes to attract businesspeople into the area is not supported. 

People think that 2nd homes restrict the amount of housing available to local people, force up local house beyond reach of local people, and could effect the viability of the local school and community facilities. It is thought that 2nd homeowners may demand that agricultural and other rural businesses are restricted. An overwhelming majority support a restriction on 2nd homes.

Turning to business and tourism, the majority agree that more businesses should be encouraged to set up in the parish. However, whilst agriculture and small workshops are supported, people are much less keen on tourism, with a large number feeling neutral about its benefits.  People who run a business in the Parish think that to support them they need more workshop space, storage and office space. Returning to tourism, people are very opposed to individual mobile homes, holiday villages and touring caravans, although tent sites are less resisted. If such tourism facilities ae to be allowed, they should be only in places where they do no harm to or enhance the landscape and natural environment or disturb existing residents. 

The protection of green spaces is strongly supported, although few additional sites to the list presented were identified.  People support the protection of community facilities such as the playground, village hall and car park, and suggested that the school and Church should also be included. 

Referring to heritage and design, strongly supported candidates for ‘local listing’ are the Church and School, but many people suggested that there were no such candidates. On design matters, control over the number of storeys, height, and size of buildings, relationship with adjoining development and use of local/traditional style materials (eg granite, slate) are seen to be most important.

On climate change, people are in favour of more wind turbines, but only just so. However there is good support for a community energy project, and for measures to ensure that development has a small ‘carbon footprint’. The use of thermally efficient building materials, loft and wall insulation and double glazing, and sensitive fitting of energy efficiency measures in heritage properties is particularly well supported. 

On the issues that are strictly outside the remit of the NDP, support is strongest for lowering speed limits and improvements to public paths, but traffic calming measures are less popular. The biggest environmental concerns are fly-tipping, littering, and dog fouling. General comments made by people focus on the need to balance the natural and heritage qualities of the area which are very important to residents, whilst supporting the ability of the community to enjoy modern ways of lifestyle and access good services, housing and business opportunities. 

The geographical spread of respondents is well balanced, with 35.5% living in the countryside outside villages, and the remainder in the four main settlements. In terms of age range, the majority are 45-64 years old (51.7%), but 35% are 25 to 44 and 6.7% are in the 17 to 24 age range, which is a good spread.

If you want to see full details of the survey results, please click on the link below:

St Wenn NDP Survey Results

The Survey Results, along with the Evidence Base, have helped us to write the St Wenn Neighbourhood Development Plan.

You can see a copy of the original survey form here:

Original Survey Form

7 thoughts on “Community Survey”

  1. The results to the Questionnaire dated February 2020 are recorded as “weighted average”.
    For transparency in addition to this please include the number of people that responded in all sections shown from least important to most important.

  2. Please ignore the above comment relating to the number of replies to the Questionnaire as I am pleased to see, although this was not originally shown, it has now been included in the version presented here. Thank you.

  3. We are advised that if the LDP is submitted to the Council for examination and approved for Referendum, the policies within it will be given significant weight. This is regardless of whether they have been voted for by the Community which with respect despite the reference in the Summary Results to a “very good response in comparison to other Neighbourhood plan areas” does not appear to be so, as the completed returns only represent 18.3% of the population and although it states represent 47.1% of households this cannot be regarded as fact, since in some cases more than one person in a household may have completed it and it could even be completed more than once by the same person as the answers were given anonymously.

    As a Referendum cannot be held until May at the earliest, may I suggest the draft LDP is not submitted to the Council for examination until a Public Meeting is held and the Community is given the opportunity to discuss and debate the policies in more detail and maybe even vote on
    the individual policies some of which have been based on a one-size-fits-all approach. In the meantime the Parish Council and the Community can continue to express their views on any planning applications judged on their own merit or otherwise, something that they will not be able to do on the policies adopted in LDP..

    I await your advice as to whether a Public Meeting can be held prior to the LDP plan being submitted to Cornwall County Council and and if so I would encourage everyone who is able to attend to do so.

    I would also encourage everyone to vote at the Referendum for or against adoption of the LDP, as regardless of how few people vote, the majority vote even if representing only a very small percentage of the community will be a vote as to whether or not the policies within the LDP will be made law.

    I hope further people will use this site to make comments and maybe support mine for a Public Meeting as the only other comments shown are from and Steve Foster/Stephen Besford Foster, the Project Manager/Planning Consultant.

    1. Hello, thanks for your comment

      I have asked the NDP Steering Group Chairman to respond, and will post his response shortly.

      Thank you,

      Steve Besford-Foster.

    2. Hello, Thanks for your comments.

      You are correct that the Council and the local public can still submit views on any planning applications that are submitted to Cornwall Council. However, when those applications are decided, it will be on the basis of national and Cornwall Council planning policies. They are very general planning policies that are not particularly sensitive to local concerns.

      The Parish Council have taken the view that there should be local planning policies that take into account local circumstances so that better planning decisions will be made.

      Neighbourhood Plans provide the opportunity to have such local detail available when planning decisions are made, and unlike individual comments, Neighbourhood Plans become part of the statutory planning framework, and must be taken into account when planning applicatios are decided alongside national and Cornwall Council level policies. The Parish Council and individuals will still have the opportunity to comment on applications, but the aim is that the Neighbourhood Plan will strengthen the consideration of local issues. That is why it is important that there is adequate community involvement in the creation of the Neighbourhood Plan. Rather than a public meeting, good practice is to hold ‘drop-in’ sessions during which one-to-one or group discussions can occur, at times convenient to all. Experience shows that a much deeper understanding of the issues can be obtained from such events.

      Unfortunately Covid prevents ‘drop-in’ sessions or public meetings, from happening. That is why the consultation period has been extended to 9 weeks from the usual 6 weeks.

      There is no ‘hurry’ in moving forward with the Neighbourhood Plan: they take a long time to do so it seems sensible to keep up the momentum by adapting to circumstances. In any case, soon after the Plan is submitted Cornwall Council, another 6 week (minimum) period of consultation will be run, this time managed by CC.


Leave a Reply to Yvonne Rodell Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *