Funding for improvements to Keats Community Library and Burgh House received the strongest support in our survey about how Camden should spend the proceeds of a new tax. More than 220 people took part: we thank you for doing so.
In our survey, which is intended to help Camden Councillors make decisions, we listed a number of 'ready-to-go' projects and invited you to indicate whether or not you were in favour of spending the new money on them. The proceeds of the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL), a tax on developers, must be spent on projects that help to meet needs for new infrastructure that arise as a result of development.
The best-supported proposal was for the purchase of books and replacement of broken equipment at Keats library, backed by 78% of participants, and opposed by only 8%. One person said the proposal was 'good value, and it is appropriate to show support for the library volunteers'. This was followed by rewiring and structural repairs at Burgh House, supported by 75% and opposed by 9%. One participant commented that Burgh House was 'a valuable community asset'. In both cases, though, some people commented that other sources of finance should be found.
After these came the planting of more trees in Flask Walk and Hampstead Grove, supported by 66%, the opening of the garden area in Oriel Place (63%) and improvements to Holly Hill including restoration of railings (55%).
Residents also have strong opinions about what should not be supported. Use of the CIL money on the purchase of Christmas lighting for Hampstead High Street was opposed by 52%, while spending on a park-and-ride shuttle bus for Hampstead was opposed by 49% (and supported by 30%, the lowest of all the 18 projects).
A proposal to alter the pelican crossing on Heath Street to a zebra crossing also failed to find favour. It was opposed by 39% and supported by 38%, ranking fourth in terms of opposition and 13th in terms of support.
Below is a summary of the survey results. You can find a fuller account both of CIL and about the proposed projects here.
|
Order of lack of support |
Order of strength of support |
Project |
Support |
Don’t Support |
|
|
2 |
Burgh House |
75% |
8.77% |
|
|
6 |
Henderson Court |
54.85% |
15.04% |
|
|
1 |
Keats Library |
77.97% |
8.37% |
|
|
8 |
Lighting South End Green |
50.46% |
22.68% |
|
3 |
17 |
Decorative Lighting High Street |
31.78% |
41.59% |
|
1 |
14 |
Festive lighting High Street |
35.95% |
52.07% |
|
|
9 |
Floral displays, High Street |
46.51% |
26.04% |
|
5 |
16 |
Heritage style bins SEG |
34.89% |
36.75% |
|
|
10 |
Heritage style bins High Street |
45.79% |
32.24% |
|
|
11 |
Benches, High Street |
45.52% |
31.31% |
|
4 |
13 |
Pelican to zebra, Heath Street |
38.07% |
39.37% |
|
|
4 |
Oriel Place Garden |
63.47% |
8.22% |
|
|
12 |
Greenhill Improvements |
45.42% |
16.97% |
|
|
15 |
The Mount improvements |
35.78% |
22.48% |
|
|
5 |
Holly Hill improvements |
55.05% |
12.84% |
|
|
3 |
Tree planting Flask Walk/Hampstead Grove |
66.36% |
15% |
|
|
7 |
Bat and bird survey |
50.92% |
22.48% |
|
2 |
18 |
Park and ride shuttle bus |
30.37% |
48.60% |
|
|
|
|
|
Be the first to comment
Sign in with