Feedback

• 66 respondents gave comments on the plans for King George V Playing Fields either via a feedback form or verbally
• 27% of comments received were regarding issues or suggestions for the wider park and not specifically about the proposal
• The most common theme from comments received that were specifically about the proposal were positive remarks towards the proposal (24%)
• Of all the attendees only 8% were opposed to the scheme
• Attendees from the existing community were also asked to give their opinion on two options of pitch size
• Of the seven responses gathered for this, 86% preferred Option 2 – which was the larger pitch

An asterisk (*) indicates a very small base size, caution should be taken when interpreting the results

Base: Total sample (66)

This table shows that across the general responses
27% of comments were made about the wider park
24% of comments included positive remarks about the proposal
17% of comments were about the pavilion/ café and or toilets
12% of comments surrounded concerns and or questions about the proposal – but these were positive overall
12% of comments surrounded concerns about the loss of open space

Specific comments:

• “Brilliant idea, not before time“
• “The provisional plans seem to be excellent and will continue to be an asset to the community“
• “Really good investment – especially café and toilets. Social enterprise café would be really good“
• “…can you get any other sports on there to get maximum use all year round“
• “Will it affect Mutiny Festival and other events“
• “I would support these proposals as long as there is always some element of common ground for dog walkers“
• “Cycling routes – a proper cycling track needs to be marked out“
• “More litter bins and dogs bins needed”

Base: Total sample (7*) | *caution small base

This table shows that 86% of the 7 respondents preferred option 2 – the larger sized pitch, while 14% preferred option 1 – the smaller sized pitch