Public consultation
Planning application 14/13247 ( Sept 2015 )
What is consultation?
Consultation is taking part in decision making, to exert influence.
Paragraph 66 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) states that “Applicants will be expected to work closely with those directly affected by their proposals to evolve designs that take account of the views of the community.”
In business and government, consultation follows a white paper or draft.
Since the first planning submission of December 2014, the developer went to great documented effort to inform us after each of the three finalized designs had been submitted to Planning. But they are wrong to refer to this as consultation. Informing on finalized and submitted plans is not consultation as required by the NPPF. It is merely obligatory, cosmetic tick boxing.
Public consultation has not been effective
We asked to be properly consulted
We have always pushed for open discussion while the design is in progress, not after the submission is made. We invited St George into one of our homes to discuss the plans - we asked them to bring their architect and sketches before making their submission. But they would only come after it was too late to change the design.
Disappointing - we were just another entry for their 'consultation' statistics.
Residents were ignored and mislead
In the consultation period leading up to the first planning submission, when asked for any further factors St George should consider before submitting a planning application, the three most cited matters from residents were: height, transport, and architecture.
The shock inclusion therefore of 13 and 21 storey buildings in the submission clearly demonstrated that the residents’ views had not been taken into consideration; “Reduction in height along Wheatfield Way, Brook Street and Ashdown Road” will not be achieved with high-rise buildings. It should be noted that none of the documentation (neither consultations nor exhibitions) made explicit mention of the possibility of a 21 storey building, and because of this significant exclusion we believe residents have been mislead.
Residents were not well informed or even notified
We continue to note the large proportion of residents and visitors we are reaching, who remain unaware of the proposed scale and impact of the proposed scheme. Their main surprise and alarm is the scale, height and bulk.
We also noted a significant number of us did not receive the April and September brochures by post.
The brochures were not informative on the scale and impact of the proposed scheme. They instead emphasized the non controversial public space around the Old Post Office building while being less informative on the scheme as a whole. If they weren't so biased and mis-representative - many more people would have been aware of the need to oppose this.
Back to where we started
With the three submitted designs, we have been taken on a costly and cynical ride back to something seemingly not far from where we started. We see this as a wasteful abuse of the process that should not be tolerated; it demonstrates how not to do consultation - using tactics that should not be rewarded.
We have always pushed for open discussion while the design is in progress, not after the submission is made. We invited St George into one of our homes to discuss the plans - we asked them to bring their architect and sketches before making their submission. But they would only come after it was too late to change the design.
Disappointing - we were just another entry for their 'consultation' statistics.
Residents were ignored and mislead
In the consultation period leading up to the first planning submission, when asked for any further factors St George should consider before submitting a planning application, the three most cited matters from residents were: height, transport, and architecture.
The shock inclusion therefore of 13 and 21 storey buildings in the submission clearly demonstrated that the residents’ views had not been taken into consideration; “Reduction in height along Wheatfield Way, Brook Street and Ashdown Road” will not be achieved with high-rise buildings. It should be noted that none of the documentation (neither consultations nor exhibitions) made explicit mention of the possibility of a 21 storey building, and because of this significant exclusion we believe residents have been mislead.
Residents were not well informed or even notified
We continue to note the large proportion of residents and visitors we are reaching, who remain unaware of the proposed scale and impact of the proposed scheme. Their main surprise and alarm is the scale, height and bulk.
We also noted a significant number of us did not receive the April and September brochures by post.
The brochures were not informative on the scale and impact of the proposed scheme. They instead emphasized the non controversial public space around the Old Post Office building while being less informative on the scheme as a whole. If they weren't so biased and mis-representative - many more people would have been aware of the need to oppose this.
Back to where we started
With the three submitted designs, we have been taken on a costly and cynical ride back to something seemingly not far from where we started. We see this as a wasteful abuse of the process that should not be tolerated; it demonstrates how not to do consultation - using tactics that should not be rewarded.
Page updated on 1 Oct 2015