Number of Surveys undertaken – 24

Numbers do not necessarily add up since not all people answered all the questions.

All answers taken out of individual survey returns

Emphasis on words is taken directly from returns

Is development essential or desirable?

·         Essential   x1

·         Desirable   x2

·         Neither    x10

·         Neither is it required or wanted

·         We now have enough

·         No neither, it is not required at all

·         Not needed at all.

·         Not desirable

·         Undesirable

·         No   x2

·         Not required

·         We do not need any further development.

·         We do not need further development.

How should development take full account of those already in the area into account as well as those who might benefit from the development by moving into the account?

·         If imposed the Parish policies towards development should insist on improved access, infrastructure, quality of life balance for the community.

·         Fully.  We bought here because of the space why should we suffer for profit of a few landowners.

·         Detriment only.

·         Increased housing will put more demand on infrastructure.

·         New roads – ie another way out of Woolwell.  Would need new schools, community centres etc.  We would lose our present recreation sites and views of Dartmoor.

·         The A386 cannot cope now. 

·         Communication.

·         Travel, schools, type of people, benefits etc.

·         By consultations that are well advertised.

·         New development will impact on all our lives; not for the good.

·         By constant consultation both ways with those who live here

·         Respect the existing community by leaving it alone

·         Limit impact of all types

·         Road infrastructure, amenities

·         No benefit as access to work in Plymouth is very congested and of likelihood of improving

·         Consultation

·         Listen to what people are saying

·         Current residents and new residents will face the same issues – poor access, few facilities, not sufficient public transport.

·         Leisure facilities protected, transport, infrastructure.

·         Housing should be affordable for young people in the area ie local conditions/ local people have priority.

How should access to the area be dealt with?  What issues do you see with the A386, for example, its capacity for further traffic and possible further development.

·         As discussed – current situation is unacceptable thus a relief road to Woolwell is essential.

·         A386 must be fully developed before any development and Derriford roundabout flyover in place.

·         No capacity.

·         More capacity or no development

·         There is no capacity for further traffic in its present state.  It would need to be dualed.

·         There is no exit.  More congestion + its at its limit now.  I see total chaos, less ‘green’ area.

·         Not enough capacity as it is.  The George junction can’t cope.

·         The George junction is completely unworkable because of the bottleneck.  The dual carriageway needs to run from the junction right out to Plessey so that the traffic is reduced as 40 extends to 60 so traffic naturally flows away quicker.

·         We need another access because having only one is a major problem.

·         Better access to and from A386 essential now.

·         A bank has been suggested; otherwise we have what is needed

·         Already over capacity far too often

·         Access should be dealt with before development

·         Just a massive increase in traffic

·         Improved access

·         More development is likely to end in total gridlock at busy times.  Woolwell already at risk as only one access road.

·         Even without development access systems need to be addressed through joint work with relevant councils.

·         Another access road desperately needed.

·         Infrastructure must come first before any development.   No point building more houses without facilities eg do not want school/GP surgery over-subscribed.

·         There should be another exit road for emergency.

·         Any further development would lead to gridlock.

·         Minimum of two routes in.  Woolwell needs another access in and out.

What are your thoughts on infrastructure?  How should this properly reflect the impact that the development will have on the surrounding area including, but not limited to, education, community needs and aspirations, road system and public transportation links?

·         As above; it is currently inadequate and requires improvement prior to any further development.

·         There is currently very limited public transport.

·         Bus routes have been cut.  Hospital (Derriford) cannot cope.

·         Digital infrastructure.

·         Again, transport links.

·         School will be oversubscribed.  Doctors surgery cannot take on anymore patients.  Public transport stretched & the loss of the green area used for recreation eg sports activities/dog walking & the sheer pleasure of the views.

·         Schools already full to capacity, roads can’t cope, dr surgery already busy etc, where do these people go.

·         Like any development you start with the foundation infrastructure first then development.  You cannot build anything without good foundations.

·         There is no room for extra school space, doctors full.  Loss of green space for families to use and enjoy.  Too much use of badly planned parking.

·         Each area should be assessed on its own merits

·         All would need increasing and parking

·         As mentioned above – there are so many factors against the development – Sherford will far better service Plymouth

·         Public transport poor – limited from Woolwell and totally useless after 6pm.  No good for evening outings.  Car essential.

·         Infrastructure is not good.  If development does occur this is a piece of work in itself.  

·         If development is an option the infrastructure must be developed.  Drs, roads, schools etc

·         The area should be kept as new as possible as it is.

·         All infrastructure needs massive improvement before development.

How should future consultation be conducted?

·         As inclusive as possible.

·         By listening instead of repeating the same question, because the answer isn’t what you wanted to hear.

·         Openly.

·         Via this type of mechanism.

·         Properly advertised

·         Large roadside notices + leaflets.  More advertising.

·         Meetings.

·         Public meeting that is widely advertised.

·         We should be informed about matters that relate to us in our area.

·         Step by step with all concerned on both sides

·         With more publicity

·         In a public ‘arena’ such as this evening – need to know both Plymouth and South Hams plans

·         By open debate and referendum by local people

·         By leaflet; not everyone has internet

·         Always with those already living here consulted.

·         Face to face meetings, newsletters, information well in advance

·         By public vote/public meetings.

·         Face to face meetings, public meetings, well advertised through leaflets via doors.

·         Meetings/votes.

·         Better publicity of meetings/consultations

How should any development relate to the rural and semi-rural nature of the area; the close proximity of AONBs and AGLV; visual impacts on the area of Dartmoor and surrounding areas?

·         These are vital aspects for consideration and we have a strong case to preserve these.

·         There should be no development.

·         Stop infiltrating nature.

·         Sight lines from the National Park could be jeopardised.

·         Already creeping out into Dartmoor from Plymouth, Roborough was a pretty village once – now getting built up – we are losing our areas of outstanding beauty.

·         There has been enough development recently.

·         In keeping with what is there now.

·         Don’t develop leave areas as they are.

·         Compliment and be in keeping.

·         We can be seen from the moors.

·         The area must not be spoilt by development

·         Should not encroach as believe really no need here for further housing?  Where jobs?

·         Very important

·         No building on park areas ie rugby pitches

·         Development should not be allowed to impact in any way on Dartmoor and surrounding areas.

·         Keep the areas green!  We moved here to be within a rural environment, not a densely populated urban area.

·         Any development should be sensitive to the countryside is one of the main benefits to living in Woolwell.

How should further development relate to existing design, style and nature of the existing buildings in the area?

·         Good quality residential is what attracts people to this area; therefore high density/low cost does not match the unique aspects of Woolwell/Roborough/Bickleigh area.

·         See above.

·         Do not do any more.

·         Not in this area, why not further up the A38 with a new station as on main route + a park and ride into Plymouth along the A38.

·         As above – no high rise buildings.

·         Against any development.

·         No further development is needed. No space.

·         We do not want buildings etc that do not fit the current designs

·         Limit to two floors only.  To sum up not enough infrastructure, jobs, services, money talks too loudly.

·         Preferably very limited and if any – sympathetic to current developments

·         Brick buildings and space.

·         As above.

·         Match existing style and type of housing eg various sizes.

·         Be in keeping ie not high density.

·         Yes it should

Other comments on questionnaires

·         Should be addressed: South Hams with Plymouth; due to the closing of Plymouth airport re jobs and re possible more land for housing development