Analysis of the Questionnaire

Husbands Bosworth Neighbourhood Plan

Questionnaire Analysis

Final Version 19th June 2018

Overview

The Parish of Husbands Bosworth has commenced the preparation of their Neighbourhood Plan.

An important part of this inclusive process is, of course, obtaining the views and aspirations of the community. Key to this has been the development and dissemination of a community questionnaire.

The questionnaire contained 40 questions and is 625 based on important themes established following initial consultation work by the Neighbourhood Plan RESIDENTS Advisory Committee. REPRESENTED

The survey took place between March and April 2018. It was available to complete electronically and as a paper version. The level of response from the community was good, there being 448 responses, representing 625 parishioners. This is a return from over 70 % of those on the electoral register of 891, who reside in 464 households. The analysis that follows is based on the 448 completed returns. 70% This demonstrates a very high level of commitment to OF ELECTORATE the Neighbourhood Plan by community and, in turn, adds strength to the validity of the collected views expressed.

Data taken from 2011 Census for Husbands Bosworth

It should be noted that the following statistics are based on the 448 recorded responses rather than the 625 residents they represented. This is because Survey Monkey (the internet company used by our consultants, Your Locale) calculates only on the number of recorded responses. The Advisory Committee has been assured by the consultancy that this is unlikely to affect the value of the Questionnaire in identifying key areas of importance to the residents of the whole parish, which will in turn provide the basis for the Neighbourhood Plan.

Of those responding, their households included 533 males and 520 females.

How many of each age group live in your household?

0 to 19 126 20 to 39 137 40 to 59 207 60 to 79 204 80+ 52

It is of note that nearly half of all respondents have lived in Husbands Bosworth for fewer than 20 years. Almost a quarter of respondents have lived in the Parish for fewer than 5 years.

340 of those responding are either employed or self-employed, whilst 174 are retired.

Q7 What aspects of living in Husbands Bosworth do you particularly value?

1 LEAST 2 3 4 MOST FAVOURED FAVOURED Rural location 0.69% 3.20% 18.76% 77.35% 3 14 82 338 Village shop, 2.76% 5.29% 22.99% 68.97% Post Office & 12 23 100 300 pubs Doctors’ 3.65% 8.45% 20.32% 67.58% Surgery and 16 37 89 296 Pharmacy Sense of 4.03% 15.88% 35.07% 45.02% community 17 67 148 190 Community 8.08% 27.79% 34.44% 29.69% events 34 117 145 125 Community 8.02% 29.95% 34.67% 27.36% Halls 34 127 147 116 Village activity 9.57% 31.58% 28.95% 29.90% and interest 40 132 121 125 groups Access to good 14.55% 24.18% 31.69% 29.58% transport links 62 103 135 126 Sport & 12.89% 28.16% 31.03% 27.92% recreational 54 118 130 117 facilities Local schools 23.30% 21.12% 25.97% 29.61% and child-care 96 87 107 122 Housing options 18.25% 34.06% 33.58% 14.11% 75 140 138 58 Places of 28.50% 28.74% 23.99% 18.76% worship 120 121 101 79 Residential and 34.28% 29.31% 21.28% 15.13% care homes 145 124 90 64 Local 41.09% 31.68% 19.80% 7.43% employment 166 128 80 30 opportunities

96% of respondents value or especially value the rural location of Husbands Bosworth. Over 91% value the village shop, post office and pubs; over 87% value the doctor’s surgery and pharmacy. Just 27% value local employment opportunities.

Nine comments appear in the appendix, which focus especially on the importance of retaining a small, friendly, picturesque Parish.

Q8 How important are the following to living in Husbands Bosworth?

1 LEAST 2 3 4 MOST FAVOURED FAVOURED Countryside 0.23% 5.72% 21.74% 72.31% character and 1 25 95 316 dispersed farmsteads Open views, wide 0.70% 6.05% 20.47% 72.79% vistas 3 26 88 313 Hedgerows & 0.46% 5.06% 23.22% 71.26% woodland 2 22 101 310 Footpaths, 0.92% 5.52% 21.84% 71.72% permissive paths 4 24 95 312 & bridleways Green spaces 0.00% 8.08% 22.63% 69.28% within the village 0 35 98 300 Green spaces and 0.69% 8.05% 23.68% 67.59% open access land 3 35 103 294 within the parish Open aspect, 1.83% 9.40% 27.29% 61.47% pleasant and 8 41 119 268 ‘welcoming’ village entrances Separation from 5.98% 15.40% 21.61% 57.01% neighbouring 26 67 94 248 communities

Each of the options offered by this question are overwhelmingly considered important by respondents, underlining the importance placed by parishioners on the rural environment of the Parish.

11 comments appear in the appendix the importance of wildlife habitats and footpaths for walking - especially dog walking.

Housing and Development

Q9 In your opinion how important would the following be to any new development?

1 LEAST 2 3 4 MOST IMPORTANT IMPORTANT Starter homes 10.12% 14.32% 29.38% 46.17% 41 58 119 187 Three bedroom 8.03% 18.49% 47.45% 26.03% homes 33 76 195 107 One and two 9.38% 21.63% 38.46% 30.53% bedroom homes 39 90 160 127 Bungalows 14.32% 23.79% 32.52% 29.37% 59 98 134 121 Social, rental, 23.37% 23.37% 22.65% 30.60% shared ownership 97 97 94 127 and low-cost housing Four + bedroom 29.20% 26.52% 29.68% 14.60% homes 120 109 122 60 Flats, apartments 44.88% 26.10% 16.83% 12.20% or maisonettes 184 107 69 50

Starter homes, smaller homes and bungalows are the most favoured by respondents, implying a strong desire to provide for the housing needs of younger families, people trying to access the property ladder and the needs of older people.

Larger homes and flats are the least supported options.

Q10 How strongly would you agree with the following statements regarding new developments?

1 STRONGLY 2 DISAGREE 3 AGREE 4 STRONGLY DISAGREE AGREE New 1.19% 4.28% 27.32% 67.22% developments 5 18 115 283 should always incorporate local style and heritage characteristics Sustainability and 2.12% 2.82% 35.06% 60.00% energy efficient 9 12 149 255 solutions should be encouraged Rural location 3.36% 14.63% 50.12% 31.89% homes/barn 14 61 209 133 conversions should be encouraged New 7.32% 13.66% 41.22% 37.80% developments 30 56 169 155 should be focused on ‘brownfield’ sites New development 8.39% 11.75% 43.88% 35.97% should be situated 35 49 183 150 within, or adjacent to the existing village New development 15.51% 29.36% 33.17% 21.96% should be smaller, 65 123 139 92 garden, ‘back-land’ and infill sites New development 37.11% 27.71% 22.89% 12.29% should be on 154 115 95 51 larger scale developments outside the village envelope New 60.20% 22.85% 12.53% 4.42% developments 245 93 51 18 should be focused on ‘greenfield’ sites

There is clear and strong agreement from respondents for new developments to incorporate local style and heritage characteristics; also for sustainability and energy efficient solutions to be incorporated –favouring traditionally styled homes with modern levels of energy efficiency.

There is less support for, and opposition to, large-scale developments outside the village envelope and on green field sites.

Q11 Please look at the map of the VILLAGE (below) and rate the sites as to their suitability for housing development.

1 VERY 2 3 4 VERY UNSUITABLE UNSUITABLE SUITABLE SUITABLE A 47.46% 25.67% 19.13% 7.75% 196 106 79 32 B 31.33% 23.37% 33.98% 11.33% 130 97 141 47 C 25.97% 17.48% 35.19% 21.36% 107 72 145 88 D 20.29% 22.25% 37.16% 20.29% 83 91 152 83 E 25.73% 18.93% 40.29% 15.05% 106 78 166 62

Development at Site A would be overlooked by existing properties and is generally considered unsuitable for housing development by respondents., Site B is also less favoured. Site E has overall support. However, sites C, D would have the most support for development.

Q12 The Government is promoting the use of 'brownfield' sites for future housing development. On the map of the whole Parish (below) we have marked the existing employment/brownfield sites. Please confirm the suitability of sites A to Q for further commercial development or housing development

(A) Southfields Farm

(D) Meadow House (E) Leicester Road

(F) Highfields

(H) Bosworth Quarry

(G) Kilworth Wharf

(I) Packs Hill (J) Oak Lodge (K) Gliding Centre

(L) Airfield Park

(N) Control Tower Park (M) Old Barn Farm

(O) Wheler Lodge (P) Helicopter Base

(Q) Welford Wharf

This question was less well understood, as shown by the response rate, which may

10 be because some respondents had less knowledge of sites outside the village conurbation. However, sites G and K received the strongest support from respondents for potential commercial development.

Sites O and F received the strongest support from respondents for potential housing development.

A B C D E F G H Commercial 54.72% 50.31% 42.45% 33.33% 34.91% 34.59% 77.36% 72.64% 174 160 135 106 111 110 246 231 Housing 39.10% 42.11% 48.87% 53.01% 54.89% 62.03% 32.71% 22.18% 104 112 130 141 146 165 87 5

I J K L M N O P Q Commercial 47.84% 43.52% 77.78% 66.05% 43.21% 62.96% 34.26% 69.44% 58.33% 155 141 252 214 140 204 111 225 189 Housing 41.70% 47.37% 17.00% 19.03% 49.80% 30.36% 67.61% 21.86% 46.15% 103 117 42 47 123 75 167 54 11

Sustainability

Q14 The wider local area has several energy generating and recycling facilities. How strongly would you support similar developments within the Parish?

1 STRONGLY 2 DISAGREE 3 AGREE 4 STRONGLY DISAGREE AGREE Domestic solar 7.57% 9.69% 48.23% 34.52% energy units 32 41 204 146 Solar energy 23.10% 25.00% 35.95% 15.95% generating parks 97 105 151 67 Single mast wind 29.01% 17.22% 39.15% 14.62% turbines 123 73 166 62 Renewable energy 26.41% 25.67% 34.23% 13.69% generating plants 108 105 140 56 Waste recycling 46.06% 25.06% 20.29% 8.59% plants 193 105 85 36 Multi-mast wind 54.63% 22.57% 14.96% 7.84% farms 230 95 63 33 Landfill and 52.77% 26.99% 15.42% 4.82% reclamation sites 219 112 64 20

There is a clear majority of respondents in support of domestic solar energy generation and a small majority in favour of solar generating parks. Single mast wind turbines also receive overall support but multi-mast wind farms do not. Waste recycling plants and landfill are strongly opposed within the Parish, presumably because of the potential increase in traffic.

Six comments appear in the appendix, which address specific renewable issues.

Transport & Traffic

Q15 How do you rate the following services in relation to Husbands Bosworth?

1 BAD 2 POOR 3 GOOD 4 EXCELLENT Links to the 0.94% 0.47% 40.14% 58.45% motorway and major- 4 2 171 249 route network Access to local service 4.46% 15.73% 63.62% 16.20% centres/towns 19 67 271 69 Access to airports 11.01% 16.39% 63.00% 9.60% 47 70 269 41 Access to rail services 18.20% 25.30% 49.17% 7.33% 77 107 208 31 Access to public 22.17% 45.99% 29.01% 2.83% transport 94 195 123 12

Predictably, in view of the favorable geographic position of our parish respondents rate links to the motorway and major road networks very highly and it therefore follows that links to local service centres and towns, airports and rail services are considered good.

These views contrast with that of access to public transport which is predominantly considered poor or bad

13 comments appear in the appendix, several of which detail and emphasise the poor public transport service and its impact on those with limited access to a car.

Q16 How concerned are you about the following within the Parish?

1 VERY 2 3 4 NOT AT ALL CONCERNED CONCERNED Speeding of 58.45% 26.76% 11.27% 3.52% traffic 249 114 48 15 HGV 56.67% 27.17% 13.58% 2.58% movements 242 116 58 11 Volume of 50.93% 30.61% 14.49% 3.97% traffic 218 131 62 17 Nuisance 43.43% 29.11% 19.01% 8.45% parking 185 124 81 36 Condition of 36.56% 38.21% 21.93% 3.30% roads 155 162 93 14 Condition of 33.88% 35.06% 26.59% 4.47% footway, 144 149 113 19 bridleway & footpaths

Respondents are predominantly concerned or very concerned about each of these transport based issues. Greatest concern is for speeding traffic and HGV movements.

23 comments appear in the appendix. These further emphasise the HGV issue. They also identify specific issues of parking and traffic volume.

Of note is the number of respondents who wish to see the canal towpath maintained to allow greater access.

Business & Employment

The number of home workers in the Parish is slightly higher than the national average. The implications for the Parish of this growing trend may be felt in the nature of housing required and in the number of people active in the Parish during the working day.

Q21 How strongly do you agree with the following statements relating to local employment?

1 STRONGLY 2 DISAGRE 3 AGREE 4 STRONGLY DISAGREE AGREE I would encourage 1.20% 2.40% 50.84% 45.56% the development 5 10 212 190 of traditional rural businesses I would support 1.43% 3.57% 55.71% 39.29% the creation of 6 15 234 165 small and ‘micro- businesses‘ I would support 2.16% 5.04% 65.23% 27.58% the development 9 21 272 115 of employment at existing sites I would support 3.59% 10.53% 61.24% 24.64% the location of 15 44 256 103 employment sites outside the village I would support 6.90% 13.57% 56.19% 23.33% ‘change of use’ 29 57 236 98 and light industrial use of redundant farmsteads I would support 4.56% 19.18% 54.92% 21.34% the creation of 19 80 229 89 new employment sites and opportunities

There is considerable support amongst respondents for new employment that is appropriate in scale and type for the rural setting of the Parish. This creates a strong evidence base for the work of the Theme Groups.

12 comments appear in the appendix, which highlight specific issues and emphasise the need for appropriate business development that does not create additional parking issues or HGV movement. There is also a request that no green field site is used for business development.

Community Facilities

Q22 You may not use all the following facilities, but please rate the importance of the following to the community.

1 VERY LOW 2 3 4 VERY HIGH IMPORTANCE IMPORTANCE The GP surgery 0.23% 1.17% 6.54% 92.06% 1 5 28 394 Village Store 0.70% 1.17% 6.29% 91.84% 3 5 27 394 Post Office 0.70% 0.93% 9.81% 88.55% 3 4 42 379 Pharmacy facilities in the 0.47% 2.83% 8.02% 88.68% village 2 12 34 376 Dog-waste bins 0.94% 3.05% 22.54% 73.47% 4 13 96 313 ATM Cash dispenser 2.36% 6.37% 23.58% 67.69% 10 27 100 287 Bus service 2.33% 7.46% 21.68% 68.53% 10 32 93 294 Canal towpath 1.43% 7.14% 28.33% 63.10% 6 30 119 265 Defibrillator 1.88% 9.65% 29.41% 59.06% 8 41 125 251 Playing Field 2.35% 6.81% 33.33% 57.51% 10 29 142 245 Bus shelters 3.04% 8.20% 30.68% 58.08% 13 35 131 248 Village Hall 1.17% 7.96% 39.34% 51.52% 5 34 168 220 Younger children’s play 4.00% 9.18% 33.41% 53.41% area 17 39 142 227 Village pubs 3.76% 10.82% 34.35% 51.06% 16 46 146 217 Millennium Wood 1.42% 11.08% 41.04% 46.46% community woodland 6 47 174 197 Clubs, activity and interest 3.28% 9.84% 39.34% 47.54% groups 14 42 168 203 Bosworth Bugle community 3.28% 9.37% 43.09% 44.26% newsletter 14 40 184 189 Public benches and bus 3.29% 15.96% 43.19% 37.56% shelters 14 68 184 160

Sports Pavilion 4.69% 14.55% 41.55% 39.20% 20 62 177 167 Cemetery 5.39% 15.69% 37.70% 41.22% 23 67 161 176 Allotments 6.10% 16.20% 40.61% 37.09% 26 69 173 158 Tennis courts 5.65% 20.24% 40.47% 33.65% 24 86 172 143 Skate-park 10.59% 20.47% 35.06% 33.88% 45 87 149 144 Cafés 7.33% 27.42% 36.64% 28.61% 31 116 155 121 Places of worship 15.02% 20.19% 36.15% 28.64% 64 86 154 122 Mobile library 12.83% 29.22% 29.45% 28.50% 54 123 124 120 Www.husbandsbosworth.in 11.92% 25.79% 41.85% 20.44% fo website 49 106 172 84 Parish Council website 14.25% 27.29% 39.37% 19.08% www.husbandsbosworthpc. 59 113 163 79 org.uk Takeaway 14.80% 28.64% 36.52% 20.05% 62 120 153 84 Village Noticeboard 11.08% 35.61% 34.43% 18.87% 47 151 146 80 The Hexagon benefice 21.55% 31.38% 27.63% 19.44% newsletter 92 134 118 83

This question presented respondents with an extensive list of 31 community assets. 30 are considered by respondents to be important. The GP surgery, village store, post office and pharmacy facilities are considered extremely important. The Hexagon benefice newsletter is generally considered of low value, presumably due to the existence of the Bosworth Bugle, the more parish specific newsletter.

15 helpful comments appear in the appendix, which cover issues including dog walking facilities, the scout hut and the canal towpath.

Local Amenities

Q23 How important do you rate the following local facilities?

1 VERY LOW 2 3 4 VERY HIGH IMPORTANCE IMPORTANCE Access to a 9.62% 6.49% 19.95% 63.94% village school 40 27 83 266 Access to local 8.43% 8.67% 26.75% 56.14% upper schools 35 36 111 233 Access to further 7.97% 12.56% 32.13% 47.34% education 33 52 133 196 Access to life- 7.95% 15.90% 37.59% 38.55% long learning 33 66 156 160 facilities Access to pre- 13.77% 13.29% 30.92% 42.03% school and after- 57 55 128 174 school groups Access to child 14.70% 14.46% 30.12% 40.72% care facilities 61 60 125 169

Those responding rate all educational assets and facilities as important overall. Access to the village school is predictably the most important, indicating the good governance and high standards attained, but access to local upper schools is also considered important.

Heritage and the Environment

Q24 Please rate the importance of the following

1 VERY LOW 2 3 4 VERY HIGH IMPORTANCE IMPORTANCE Protection of 0.24% 1.65% 20.71% 77.41% wildlife, flora and 1 7 88 329 fauna Protection of 0.24% 3.29% 19.53% 76.94% important vistas 1 14 83 327 and views Promotion of 0.47% 2.60% 21.28% 75.65% policies that 2 11 90 320 preserve the rural aspect of the parish Protection of 1.42% 4.02% 21.99% 72.58% Listed Buildings 6 17 93 307 and local heritage features Protection of the 0.71% 4.48% 27.83% 66.98% village ‘street- 3 19 118 284 scene’ and roadside boundaries TPO Protection 1.90% 6.89% 23.04% 68.17% and protection of 8 29 97 287 ‘landmark’ trees

This question listed series of measures to protect the Parish environment. At least two thirds of respondents rated each to be of very high importance overall. The protection of heritage and character, the natural world and the rural aspect of the community were particularly favoured.

Policing, Crime and Social Responsibility

Q25 How much are you concerned about the following within the Parish?

1 VERY 2 3 4 VERY UNCONCERNED CONCERNED Dog fouling 3.55% 9.72% 25.59% 61.14% 15 41 108 258 Fly tipping/littering 4.53% 18.14% 31.26% 46.06% 19 76 131 193 Nuisance parking 7.36% 27.79% 24.94% 39.90% 31 117 105 168 Lack of visible police 9.22% 28.13% 30.50% 32.15% presence 39 119 129 136 Noise pollution 10.07% 34.53% 27.34% 28.06% 42 144 114 117 Air pollution 9.31% 32.46% 33.89% 24.34% 39 136 142 102 Street lighting 12.09% 30.33% 31.04% 26.54% 51 128 131 112 Vandalism 11.43% 42.62% 27.14% 18.81% 48 179 114 79 Anti-social behaviour 13.43% 42.69% 24.46% 19.42% 56 178 102 81 Graffiti 15.18% 46.02% 22.41% 16.39% 63 191 93 68

Vandalism, anti-social behaviour and graffiti are not of primary concern for respondents. However, the remaining seven issues are of overall concern. Dog fouling is of greatest concern, with over 86% being concerned or very concerned. Fly tipping and littering (77%) and nuisance parking (65%) also score highly.

What Do We Need?

Q26 Bearing in mind that some of the following would need to be funded directly from the Parish Precept and may incur higher Council Tax charges, would you be willing to pay more for better service in these specific areas?

1 VERY 2 3 4 VERY UNWILLING WILLING More facilities for younger 12.59% 22.52% 39.47% 25.42% people 52 93 163 105 Better bus service 14.49% 25.60% 30.68% 29.23% 60 106 127 121 More frequent roadside & 7.42% 36.36% 37.56% 18.66% public area grass- 31 152 157 78 cutting/litter picking More dog waste bins 16.87% 25.78% 34.46% 22.89% 70 107 143 95 More consideration of 11.89% 34.95% 33.74% 19.42% disability access matters 49 144 139 80 More public open spaces 16.51% 28.71% 35.17% 19.62% 69 120 147 82 More public/off-road parking 17.76% 27.98% 34.06% 20.19% 73 115 140 83 More road-salt bins 17.27% 31.89% 32.13% 18.71% 72 133 134 78 More litter bins 14.76% 35.00% 35.48% 14.76% 62 147 149 62 More defibrillators 16.54% 36.05% 31.11% 16.30% 67 146 126 66 Cleaner road-signs 17.11% 42.17% 23.13% 17.59% 71 175 96 73 Dog-walking/exercising areas 28.23% 26.08% 22.97% 22.73% 118 109 96 95 More adult exercise areas 25.24% 33.74% 27.18% 13.83% 104 139 112 57 Better access to local 27.21% 40.69% 25.25% 6.86% information (web 111 166 103 28 presence/social media) More public benches 25.85% 45.65% 22.22% 6.28% 107 189 92 26 Parish Office/drop-in centre 31.16% 40.10% 20.29% 8.45% 129 166 84 35

Respondents agreed overall that they would be willing to pay additional Parish Precept to fund nine out of fourteen of the options offered in this question. It should be noted that at least 35% of respondents are unwilling to pay an additional precept for any of the options. The most positive response is for more facilities for young people.

30 thoughtful and more specific comments appear in the appendix

Communication

Q32 Any additional comments about communication?

52 comments appear in the appendix – the highest number of responses for any question in this questionnaire. There is great concern expressed about the poor broadband and mobile reception – especially for those parishioners living outside the village.

Q33 Any questions or comments about specific issues relating to this Questionnaire, the Neighbourhood Plan process itself or any aspect of Parish Council business

25 comments appear in the appendix. These cover parking issues, broadband, traffic and the growth of the village.

Summary

A strong response to the Neighbourhood Plan Community Questionnaire has demonstrated a set of clear concerns and preferences amongst the respondents. This offers a good steer to those actively involved in the development of the Husbands Bosworth Neighbourhood Plan, the wider community and the Parish Council.

These results will become an important part of the evidence gathered to inform and develop the Plan.

Appendix

Q7 What aspects of living in Husbands Bosworth do you particularly value?

• Peace and quiet • Size of the village • Rural aspects and preservation of working farms • Need to ensure support for facilities included in planning not just as an afterthought • Rural views • We were drawn to the small scale of the village and its traditional character. • An unspoilt historic village of a size where the sense of community and cooperation can thrive and where it is possible for me as a resident to know everyone at least by sight. If the village is over-developed it will lose this. • Close to work • Very friendly people

Q8 How important are the following to living in Husbands Bosworth?

• Size of village • Good clean paths (walking dogs) • Dog walks • Open views are diminishing • Too few green spaces and open access land in parish • Footpaths need improvement • Retention of the historic boundaries and curtilage of the village. • Local wildlife • That's finished now on Welford Road • Continued efforts to monitor the traffic speeds through the village • The canal, which is good for walking and wildlife, though the towpath could be much better maintained.

Q9 In your opinion how important would the following be to any new development?

• Starter homes of little use to young families when there are no jobs in the village • Smaller detaches properties • Residential caravan site • Council houses x2 • Space between developments • Ensure rural density of properties with green space. Ensure suitable road speed limits • Homes with a country / cottage appearance x2 • Sheltered housing for older people living alone • Balanced mixture dictated by market forces • A mixture • Housing available and affordable for young people to live in area they grew up in • The Leicester and Leicestershire Housing and Economic Need Development Assessment (Jan 2017) identifies that as the population is aging there will be an increase in smaller households (requiring more smaller houses) and it also identifies an increase in the number of young people living at home due to an increasing cost of housing. Any housing development should be addressing these needs. Harborough district is identified as having the highest cost housing (relative to the other districts) in Leicestershire which also indicates

that more social housing, shared cost housing and long term low cost rental options should be a housing priority. • I choose not to answer these questions because I believe that they will be used by developers as a justification for the unsustainable development of Husbands Bosworth. I'm afraid I'm also unable to answer section 10 for the same reason. This questionnaire seems to be seeking my permission for the development of areas outside and adjacent to the boundaries of the village. I need the option of saying that I want "none of the above". • Adequate parking must be included for any future housing projects • Sensibly priced homes would be beneficial • Providing a mixed housing stock to allow new generations to live here • Terraced Housing • Low cost housing is essential for any development. We need starter homes. WE DO NOT NEED 3+ BEDROOM PRIVATE HOUSING IN THIS AREA

Q14 The wider local area has several energy generating and recycling facilities. How strongly would you support similar developments within the Parish?

• Depends on the types of commercial and housing for previous selection • If they can make them small then may change • Alternatives to above • We already get the pollution from the Theddingworth site. We feel that there should be no more waste recycling near the village as we already have many waste lorries passing through to get to the Welford tip • What types of renewable energy generating plants? • Reclamation sites, e.g. Bosworth Quarry - keep for potential environmental value/wildlife habitat/recreation facility

Q15 How do you rate the following services in relation to Husbands Bosworth?

• Excellent links to motorways • Buses no longer go to railway station. Bus timetable cut • No bus to Leicester. Need bypass road for village • Access to city centre by bus • Traffic fumes and congestion increasing • Only good if you have a car • Travelling to and from the village for work/shopping/leisure is more or less impractical by public transport. The bus service is pathetically infrequent. If you can afford to run one or more cars then transport is fine. I note that a

significant minority of villagers does not have cars. • Bus timetable should be extended to early evening • Hospitals poor access • The bus service has decreased significantly, and is now no good for people with appointments or time constraints. • I personally think access to public transport is appalling. I am disappointed that we now have (what I consider to be) an unreliable bus service that calls in the village a very limited number of times each day. It means that villagers like myself, who may have specific access needs and disabilities, are completely restricted from getting out and about in the local area. This has severely impacted on my independence as a young person with a disability. I imagine the same may be said for some older residents with mobility and access needs. In this household we regularly use local rail services, usually via Market Harborough. Although I feel the Harborough/St Pancras/Sheffield route is generally good and accessible, there are no direct links to the station from Bosworth, and in an ideal world, improved public transport would link us more directly with MH station (like the 58 in the old days). • Bus route needs to improve desperately, especially if there are going to be more housing developments • Access through village from Leicester to Northampton on one way system including parked cars both ways and dangerous crossroads is totally unsuitable and not appropriate for new housing and commercial development in this village

Q16 How concerned are you about the following within the Parish?

• I live in a new build property and can feel the movement through the house at night when HGV's drive past • Very concerned about the volume of heavy goods vehicles passing through such a small village and on such a regular basis, in the context of a number of larger arterial roads (i.e. A14, M1) within the area. • Again, crossroads outside Village Hall and opposite Bell unsuitable as a commuter and HGV access. Route through village from Leicester to Northampton unsuitable for HGV traffic. Volume of HGVs on main Lutterworth Road seems to be causing collapse of main sewer. • People driving the wrong way down the one way • Speeding down Bell Lane • Parking on the paths is difficult to pass have to go onto the road especially with a wheelchair or push chair roads around village very dirty • Please no speed cameras x2, Re: HGV movements - loads near to our address • Canal path very poor. Lack of dedicated cycle routes away from main roads • Condition of the canal towpath x3 - could future development within the parish contribute towards the cost of its repair?

• Manhole covers in High Street • Condition of Broad Lane dreadful • Too many cars • The footpaths and particularly the canal towpath are in a terrible state. • Road Signage x2 • Protection of rural rights of way, i.e. green Infrastructure. • HGV's are always mounting the pavement down Bell Lane outside the parked cars outside Brook House. • The volume of traffic on the Welford Road is a serious problem especially when the A14 is shut. The speed of the traffic south of the village is frightening with speeding cars trying to take the "racing line" past Wheler Lodge houses. Lorries can be a problem, but invariably other than an A14 closure they are normally servicing the local businesses & farms. • Parking at Hunters Close/Berridges Lane • Need double yellow lines at top corner of Hunters Close /Berridges Lane • Dog fouling • The main road is ridiculously busy with huge lorries thundering down - they never stop on the school run or slow down and it terrifies me every day. We don't want more houses or cars in our opinion. • There should be a speed limit of 40mph from Mill Lane to the 30mph limit. • Should make footpath accessible to cycles e.g. along road to Theddingworth. • Improved speed regulation on the roads into and out of the village. Weight restriction for traffic coming into the village. Increased use of parking restrictions within the village, in particular Berridges Lane, Bell Lane and Welford Road.

Q21 How strongly do you agree with the following statements relating to local employment?

• Supporting the creation of new employment depends on the business • The questionnaire shows Southfields Farm as an existing brownfield / employment site. The business here was established without planning consent, and has just obtained a certificate of lawfulness (17/01054/FUL). This approval explicitly limits the business to the east of the A5199 (marked on the application in red). There is no approval for commercial / brownfield use to the west of the A5199. The map should only therefore show the site to the east of the main road. Given the speed with which traffic travels along this road, I believe it is important that this boundary is maintained - and commercial activity continues to be limited to the existing site on the east of the main road in line with the planning consent. To develop both sides of the road would lead to parking and pedestrian traffic across a dangerous road. • New employment sites on small scale only • All new developments must have a finite limit to their size and the potential increases in traffic. The A5199 has too much HGV traffic currently

• Although I have said I support employment sites outside the village and the creation of new employment sites this is only assuming that they are on existing sites with buildings, not building on green fields • Providing parking issues addresses • I do not support anything that increases traffic or nuisance parking from certain businesses e.g. Hunters Lodge • Parking already a problem! • We support business that can be conducted from existing buildings and sites not developing new sites. There are lot of historical / beautiful buildings that could be used for employment purposes. The Manor at the Langtons is a great example of this. • Businesses need to have adequate parking • My support would only be on the basis of small-scale developments, not visually overpowering ones. • Where’s the infrastructure for all this?

Q22 You may not use all the following facilities, but please rate the importance of the following to the community.

• Dog restrictions should be lifted perhaps a dog walking area nowhere in the village for dog owners to let them run free • Natural gas pipeline to village • Would traditional village shop Springfields have caused damage noise litter and parking issues • Dog walks • Another cafe would be nice • Dedicated cycle routes off main roads • Youth club • More cycle paths to cycle or walk to surrounding towns and villages • Scout Hall • Unspoiled countryside! • Designated Local Green Spaces need allocating to protect against development in precious green areas. • Canal towpath needs improvement • Please keep Starbucks and Costa out! • Canal towpath needs improvement • VILLAGE SCHOOL? At capacity. Where are all the extra children on these massive developments going to school, primary or secondary?

• Mound needs cleaning off of 30 mph signs • Better road signs to reduce speed to 20mph through village • Unwilling to pay any extra as I feel this is what the council tax is for • Generally, I would be unwilling to pay more for the majority of these services as they should be provided by the relevant local authority out of my not inconsiderable council tax • Pay enough already x2 • Pay too much already! • Make our village attractive please, flower pots/ village green etc. • I think the community could do some of these things • Need village preschool • Better canal towpath. Dedicated cycle paths. Dog fouling!!! • Christmas tree in centre of village • Would pay for litter picking, not grass cutting • Litter picking • Less street lighting to reduce light pollution • There is no reason to pay additional Council Tax for 'dog walking areas' or 'adult exercise areas' provided that the current public access spaces and footpaths are not built over. Similarly, I don't believe that the litter is caused by a lack of litter bins but by careless attitudes to littering. • If the pub goes out of business as seems quite likely I would support creating a licensed village social club probably in the village hall. • Speed camera • Greater ice/snow clearance on A5199 towards & around Armageddon • Think out of the box, easy option ask for more money. Need to look at council in East Hampshire run by Ferris Cowper (Ex Mors employees) alternative ways of spending money. Investing precepts, council tax, reduced and will be likely to reduce to zero. • Road re-surfaced and potholes filled • Recycling area Green/compost recycling • Canal towpath improvement • Footpaths and bridleways round the perimeter of farmland Canal towpath improvement • Public toilets in or near park • In due course, cycle paths and public toilets • Better maintenance and signage of footpaths, bridleways, bridle gates. Better maintenance of pavement widths outside the core village. Co-operation on improvements to canal towpath. More off-road parking could lead to better access for those in wheelchairs (nuisance parking) • Non dog owners should not pay for dog waste bins.

• Improve footpath connectivity, and put new paths in place e.g. to/from Millennium Wood without having to walk on main roadside. Improve canal towpath especially to north-east of village • Improving the bus service should not come from council tax; you need to negotiate with bus companies. Many of these options are completely fine as they are (i.e. dog walking areas / bins / benches /open spaces

Q32 Any additional comments about communication?

• I'm with O2 and have a boost box to make up for the lack of service • There are phone black spots in the village • Broadband high speed unavailable to some providers. BT will not upgrade the cabinet therefore internet connection is very poor for those affected • Mobile phone service is too poor • Mobile reception fluctuates seemingly randomly. I would like the entire UK to be eventually running on superfast broadband consistently • Signal not strong • 30mph on kilowatt road should be extended or a 40mph up the hill • Has got better over the last 4 years • Internet not good at any time of day! • On waiting list for super fast broadband and on EE • Wi-Fi poor • Always poor signal / poor Wi-Fi • Sileby understood to have a fast and effective community system in place • No mobile coverage as I live outside village • Am in a farmhouse in the Parish outside the village. Super-fast broadband is not available. Mobile reception is poor. Would love to see an improvement! • Upgrade mobile connect • Can't have smart meter fitted due to lack of phone signal • The only way to gain acceptable broadband services in the village was to join a waiting list for a subscription to Super - Fast Broadband. We tried a wide range of providers prior to this. Broadband is a necessity of modern life and essential to many people's work (regardless of whether or not they work from home). People in the village who cannot afford Super-Fast broadband are being disadvantaged and any development in the village will place increasing strain on already oversubscribed Broadband services. Additional upgrades and cabinets would be required. • We now pay a lot of money to BT for fibre broadband. We had previously tried almost every broadband provider over an eight year period and the service was awful. We had to wait a very long time for BT to put in the extra capacity but now we have a good service. This means that BT effectively has a monopoly on broadband in the village. I know this is not unique to our village. • No objection to mobile phone masts to improve signal

• Too expensive - superfast/fibre don’t receive advertised rates of speed. • More housing is required especially for your people BUT broadband and telephone service are imperative and need immediate attention. Some villages have paid to upgrade to fast broadband but still have very poor speeds and service • Fix broadband • Vodafone very poor signal in Fernie Court • Coverage at Wharf awful • Broadband takes ages to load • Mobile phone is worse than before. • I have to use my landline at home. There’s hardly ever any coverage. Tried O2 & Vodafone • Mobile service could be better, broadband under heavy local telephone exchange contention and needs upgrading. • As a person who works from home the slow speed of broadband & the poor mobile signal has an impact on my job • Telephone excellent. Broadband variable • This is not communication but more utilities. If the village is to grow it would be nice to be able to be connected to mains gas rather than relying on LPG/oil when renewables are not affordable. • Mobile signal intermittent • Unless broadband upgraded the service will deteriorate with more housing • It is awful I can't use my mobile phone at all and the Wi-Fi always drops out. Please try and improve. • Since signing up to super fast broadband the service is worse than before! • No signal at all at home. • Those of us living outside the immediate village get an abysmally poor broadband service, despite paying higher fees for an allegedly better fibre connection. • Super-Fast Broadband is not available here yet. • Some thought to be given to improving broadband and mobile coverage across the NP area! • Mobile phone service is abysmal with all providers. Cannot make or receive mobile calls at home at all, which is ridiculous/pathetic in this day and age. • Super-fast broadband not available at this address yet • Appalling coverage by mobile phone and Internet services. Lousy customer service regarding this from Sky and B • Super fast is super slow at times, • ‘Super fast’ is like dial-up on the wrong night. • Could be better • Mobile signal so poor can't have smart meter or use my mobile at home • Inadequate spaces in the fibre optic cabinet for such a large village • E.g. Mobile phone signal booster in church tower. This will improve signal and provide income for the church • Patchy coverage throughout the village

Q33 Do you have any questions or comments about specific issues relating to this Questionnaire, the Neighbourhood Plan process itself or any aspect of Parish Council business.

• Remove excess signs obstructing footpath, pavement parking on cherry tree whilst customers use shop. Stop customers parking on pavement • I would personally like to see more local, regular, mental health specific support in the village ongoing and professionally set up / monitored please • The need to keep our village paths, roads, green areas and general areas cleaner. Dog fouling is a problem • We hope that the results of this questionnaire are worthwhile and the committee’s hard word is recognised. We also hope that it's much more worthwhile and actionable than our original village plan which was equally time consuming but vanished without a trace • I moved to a village and I would like to say I still lived in one. If anymore changes take place it would no longer be a village • Since my house was constructed this village has near than doubled in size glued the poor employment prospects and poor public transport links - I cannot see the need for anymore housing development • The size of the village is the most important feature of the village and is the most important part of the village • These should be a design guide adopted by the parish council to advise on design of new consultation sharing details and character of the area • Some questions unclear. Support development on brownfield or specific location. Likewise support protection of listed buildings if of genuine importance • You made a good job of survey. Tried to answer online but title wouldn't respond • This questionnaire lacked space for disagreement in many questions. There were not options to tick stating that development was inappropriate or not suitable at all for suggested sites. This is likely to create a misleading representation of the community's wider views. It was not possible to fill in a response in all areas, as there were not always options representative of alternative views to development. • I would love to cycle to surrounding villages but cycle paths in poor state and roads too narrow so dangerous for cycling. Local listing of 1 Hillcrest Lane. Protection of timber windows and traditional roof materials. Protection of village pub as community asset. Prevent brick frontages being rendered over. • Housing options: Parcels D & E have several benefits including Green Infrastructure potential to link to Millennium Wood, sustainable location close to village amenities & to extend 30mph zone along Kilworth Rd to include Sports Pavilion entrance. • Reduce speed limit upon Welford Road and add speed camera • Lower speed limits entering the village on Welford Road and add a speed

camera. • A very thorough survey. Hope everyone gives it the time and consideration it deserve • Need somewhere in village that has a large sprung floor and other function rooms that could act as a hub for local creatives and small businesses to offer opportunities for local people to stay fit and healthy • I would like a copy of the results. • How about us villagers cleaning village signs? • More care needs to be shown about the state that some of our listed buildings have been allowed to get into. We could find ourselves without them if controls aren’t implemented to save them from gross neglect. • I would like to help with litter picking or similar • Managed to access Survey Monkey on 3rd attempt!! • There is an urgent need for AFFORDABLE housing. If new housing is 3+ bedrooms or barn conversions it will be a complete waste for the village. • Thank you for the time and effort that has gone into producing this - it is much appreciated • Thank you for all your work on this plan