Minimum of consultation on new campus proposals

I write in response to Cllr Mark Page (Educational transformation, W&V letters November 26) where he attempted to reassure readers about the aims of the proposals and the consultation process.

Unfortunately, there has been very little evidence to support his assertion that the team wants people involved in shaping the plans.

His statement that residents ''living within 1.5 miles of the campus site... have all been provided with information on our plans and given an opportunity to tell us what they think'' is a gross over-statement.

In fact, the open house consultations that were held were, at best, poorly publicised. Residents were given very little notice, and some did not receive any notice at all, a fact acknowledged by Chris Pickles, the project leader, at the recent St John's Wood forum.

The sessions were scheduled for late afternoons which made it prohibitively difficult for people who work to attend. The only reason there is another open session is because of the strong negative reaction the team received at the forum from residents and councillors. The team is in a rush to submit their planning application or risk losing part of the funding, so the December 3 session was hastily organised and residents were only given six days' notice.

Furthermore, while the re-development team has attempted to fulfill the legal consultation requirements with these sessions, nothing of substance has changed in the plans despite the objections of residents and business owners.

Cllr Page maintains the team wants ''local people to be involved from the outset, helping to shape our plans.'' In reality, our views are being completely ignored.

It is likely that the application will be submitted in the coming weeks. If the BSF team won't listen to our objections, perhaps the planning officers will.

Angela Ryker Gallagher

Marlborough Hill, NW8