A resounding NO to Gleeson's housing proposals

Exit poll confirms anticipated resounding NO to Gleeson proposals

Malmesbury delivered a 94% resounding NO to Gleeson's housing proposals in the findings of the exit poll at the Gleeson exhibition on 12th and 13th November, which have been presented to the Malmesbury Development Forum (MDF) this afternoon and are as follows:

Summary of Exit Poll

Data correct to 22nd November, with no further replies received to date.

Summary of responses

The MSPWRA* recorded 484 attendees at the exhibition, although we estimate the actual figure could be up to 5% higher due to peaks in people arriving.

There were 479 completed poll forms, which equates to 12.5% of the registered voters in Malmesbury.

94% were against the Gleeson proposal – (449 returns).

4% were in favour of the Gleeson proposal – (19 returns) although 8 of these only gave conditional support based upon improved infrastructure, provision of starter homes or an absolute limit of 200 homes (no further development on this site).

2% declined to provide an indication on the form – (11 returns), some contained comments.

67% (323 returns) of returns provided explanatory comment or comments; 33% (156 returns) did not supply a comment.

Analysing all the poll returns, the breakdown of comments was:-

• 48% (155 returns) expressed concern over the present capacity of the town's infrastructure to accommodate the development, i.e. schools, parking, health care, road traffic, negative impact upon the High Street

• 46% (148 returns) expressed concern over the nature of the development, ie scale, unsatisfactory access to Reeds Farm and along Webb's Way, likely poor quality of the development, no provision for the elderly

• 41% (132 returns) expressed general opposition, ie must never go ahead

• 18% (58 returns) expressed concern over the negative impact on the environment and conservation

• 10% (33 returns) expressed concern over the lack of employment opportunities in the town to service this additional development

• 8% (27 returns) stated there was no local need

• 7% (24 returns) expressed concern over the impact on the community

• 3% (11 returns) commented about alternative uses, sites or negative impact on property values

You can download this as a PDF document here

You can download the exit poll responses 'against' graph here

You can download the exit poll summary graph here