| Example
of Completed Questionnaire |
| |
Y |
N |
Question
1 – Objectives
Do you agree with the draft objectives?
|
|
x |
Question
2 – Focus of search for sites
Do you agree that the search for sites should be broadly
confined to the west and south of the district closest
to the main suburban areas, rather than the more rural
northeast of the district?
|
|
x |
Question
3 – Phasing of sites
Do you agree with the proposed phasing of pitch provision?
|
|
x |
Question
4 – Scale of sites
Which option do you prefer for the typical scale of
gypsy and traveller sites?
Option 1 sites of 1-5 pitches...
Reasons – although opting for
option 1, in view of the already large number of sites
in the district no further sites should be added |
x |
|
Question
5 – Concentration in Roydon and Nazeing
Which option do you prefer?
Option 1 -No special restriction, sites in this area
considered on their merits.
Reasons – I disagree with the
way this question has been raised – there should
be no more sites in this area.
|
x |
|
Question
6 – The Main Possible Strategies
Option 3 – Wider distribution throughout the district.
Reason – EFDC already has a large
number of sites; concentration in such a small area
will put undue pressure on local communities. Sites
should not only have wider distribution throughout the
district but should have more countrywide distribution.
|
x |
|
Question
7 – Site Search Sequence
Do you agree with the proposed site search sequence?
|
|
x |
Questions
8 – 19
These questions refer to areas we have no local or national
knowledge of and as such we cannot comment
|
|
|
Question
20 – Possible sites in the Roding valley area
Ideally a “No” should be entered against
all sites, however since we have no local knowledge
of the sites not in Abridge, at the very least a “No”
should be entered against 20c “Paddock, Theydon
Garnon”, 20d “Paddock East of Abridge”
and 20e “Former Crowther Nursery Abridge
Reason – Unsuitable areas please see “any
further comments”
|
|
x |
Question
21 – Windfall Sites
Do you agree with the wording of the suggested policy?
Reasons – There are already plenty
of sites in the district – far in excess of most
other counties, no further sites are therefore needed.
|
|
x |
Questions
22 – 24 No response needed
|
|
|
Question
25 – Indicators
Do you agree with the proposed suite of indicators?
Reasons – the wrong set of criteria
has been used to assess (a) the needs of the travelling
community (indeed their own preferences have been ignored)
and (b) the success or otherwise of the consultation
as little or no thought has been given to the suitability
of recommended sites.
|
|
x |
Any
further comments?
The questions in this consultation paper appear to have
been designed specifically to avoid objections, there
being no option in some cases to take a middle approach
(e.g. question 4 the answer “neither” would
be more appropriate) and have been written such that
there is an impression of bias toward accepting the
proposals.
|
|
