Campaigners fighting to save Narberth’s former primary school for community use appear to have clashed swords with Pembrokeshire County Council.

Following a consultation evening, Friends of Narberth Old School representative, Clr. Mrs. Sue Rees said the consultation was not well-attended and not what those who did attend were expecting. Claims which have since been refuted by the local authority.

“They all said they wanted to see what the proposals were and to be able to have open discussions,” continued Clr. Mrs. Rees.

“Instead, they were given a site plan marked in red to identify the area concerned and a small paragraph from a cabinet meeting, which was supposed to reflect what PCC saw as their ‘vision’ for the site; plenty of words like ‘aesthetically pleasing’ and ‘innovative ideas’ were used.

“There was no mention made of their intention to totally demolish the site as soon as they can, bats allowing, nor of their intention to sell it all off to a developer as soon as the market improves to ‘avoid any capital receipt being further delayed’.

“The people were then asked to fill in a form answering two questions. 1. What do you think of PCC’s ‘vision’ for the future of the site? 2. What would you like to see it used for?

“I think most people asked ‘What vision?’ to the first question, as there was actually no vision at all.

“Most of the people I saw there were representative of the 2,229 who signed our petition and the busiest time in the hall was around 6 pm, when we had told everyone we were going to present the petition to PCC. I think that for that reason, most of the responses to the second question would have been that PCC have failed to produce an acceptable plan for the site and now it is time to give the community a chance.”

Pembrokeshire County Council response

When we contacted Pembrokeshire County Council about the consultation, a spokesman responded to Clr. Mrs. Rees’s comments in detail.

The ‘consultation’ was not well-attended and not what those who did attend were expecting: It was very well-attended. More than 100 people registered their attendance at the event, and many additional visitors attended who chose not to register. We have received a large number of completed response forms.

They all said they wanted to see what the proposals were and to be able to have open discussions: We are at the early stage of a process with regard to the old school site at Narberth. This means that at this stage, we are seeking the views of the community. In fact, the council does not intend to put specific proposals forward for the use of the site - instead, it will consider the views of the community to inform the future marketing of the site. Of the handful of people who stated that they wanted to see proposals, most were satisfied with this explanation.

There was ample opportunity to have open discussions - indeed the whole event was designed to give people as much chance as possible to talk about the site directly with officers.

Four senior officers were in attendance over the course of the event - the community regeneration manager, strategic property manager, head of property and director of development - and all were available to discuss issues with members of the public.

It was felt that this would provide a more open forum for discussion rather than a formal event where members of the public question senior officers - where a minority of people can sometimes dominate proceedings.

Many people took the chance to talk with us, and the vast majority of discussions were constructive, positive and friendly, with lots of different views expressed.

Instead, they were given a site plan marked in red to identify the area concerned and a small paragraph from a cabinet meeting, which was supposed to reflect what PCC saw as their ‘vision’ for the site; plenty of words like ‘aesthetically pleasing’ and ‘innovative ideas’ were used: The vision for the site was accurately presented, and the intention was to prompt ideas and suggestions from the community.

There was no mention made of their intention to totally demolish the site as soon as they can, bats allowing, nor of their intention to sell it all off to a developer as soon as the market improves to ‘avoid any capital receipt being further delayed’.  

Demolition is not a given, although it has been approved by cabinet. This is because a series of delays - as a result of the need for specific surveys - has meant that, subject to what proposals are received, if the preferred bidder is proposing to retain the Victorian school building, clearly council will consider this.

Find out about planning applications that affect you by visiting the Public Notice Portal.

The people were then asked to fill in a form answering two questions. 1. What do you think of PCC’s ‘vision’ for the future of the site? 2. What would you like to see it used for? I think most people asked ‘What vision?’ to the first question, as there was actually no vision at all. Most of the people I saw there were representative of the 2,229 who signed our petition and the busiest time in the hall was around 6 pm, when we had told everyone we were going to present the petition to PCC. I think that for that reason, most of the responses to the second question would have been that PCC have failed to produce an acceptable plan for the site and now it is time to give the community a chance: We have not yet analysed the responses. We would not presume to predict the community’s views. Once the forms have been analysed, a report will be presented to the next meeting of the strategic asset management group, which is due to take place in April. Following this, the council will undertake a marketing exercise for the site. The views expressed by the community will help inform the marketing exercise. Once the site is marketed, any interested developers - including community groups - will be able to put forward their proposals for the site.