Stand Against Razor's Farm

Signatures 405 total

Page: « ‹ 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, ... 9 › »

1. 101
   Name: Dave Wilkinson on Dec 2, 2012

   Comments:

   Flag
2. 102
   Name: Ed New on Dec 2, 2012

   Comments:

   Flag
3. 103
   Name: D Ball on Dec 2, 2012

   Comments: The traffic through Sherfield Park is dreadful already. Please, no more!

   Flag
4. 104
   Name: Jill Webb on Dec 2, 2012

   Comments: estate roads are already to busy,no facilities avail

   Flag
5. 105
   Name: Mary Burgess on Dec 2, 2012

   Comments:

   Flag
6. 106
   Name: Cheryl Hackney on Dec 2, 2012

   Comments:

   Flag
7. 107
   Name: Marcus Hackney on Dec 2, 2012

   Comments:

   Flag
8. 108
   Name: Anonymous Facebook user on Dec 2, 2012

   Comments:

   Flag
9. 109
   Name: Patrick Murphy on Dec 2, 2012

   Comments: Any proposed development would be completely wrong. No new access roads are planned to be provided, so traffic, to / from the proposed development, will be forced to use Chineham Business Park Roads, Cufaude Lane or Sherfield Park Roads. These roads are already overloaded and in the case of Cufaude Lane, with single track stretches, it will become even more dangerous at am and pm peak, than it is presently. Furthermore, by BDBC allowing development of Razors Farm, the strategic "gap" between Basingstoke Town and the rest of the Borough will be lost. The BDBC draft SHLAA also lists Upper Cufaude Farm as a potential dvelopment. This latter site is immediately adjacent to Razors Farm and is owned by Hampshire County Council. It is is listed in the SHLAA as having potential for 350 homes. This site, when added to Razors Farm numbers, would give a total of 830 new homes in this very rural part of our Borough. I petition BDBC to refuse planning permission for development of Razors Farm.

   Flag
10. 110
    Name: Gary Murphy on Dec 2, 2012

    Comments: Any proposed development would be completely wrong. No new access roads are planned to be provided, so traffic, to / from the proposed development, will be forced to use Chineham Business Park Roads, Cufaude Lane or Sherfield Park Roads. These roads are already overloaded and in the case of Cufaude Lane, with single track stretches, it will become even more dangerous at am and pm peak, than it is presently. Furthermore, by BDBC allowing development of Razors Farm, the strategic "gap" between Basingstoke Town and the rest of the Borough will be lost. The BDBC draft SHLAA also lists Upper Cufaude Farm as a potential dvelopment. This latter site is immediately adjacent to Razors Farm and is owned by Hampshire County Council. It is is listed in the SHLAA as having potential for 350 homes. This site, when added to Razors Farm numbers, would give a total of 830 new homes in this very rural part of our Borough. I petition BDBC to refuse planning permission for development of Razors Farm.

    Flag
11. 111
    Name: Daniel Murphy on Dec 2, 2012

    Comments: Any proposed development would be completely wrong. No new access roads are planned to be provided, so traffic, to / from the proposed development, will be forced to use Chineham Business Park Roads, Cufaude Lane or Sherfield Park Roads. These roads are already overloaded and in the case of Cufaude Lane, with single track stretches, it will become even more dangerous at am and pm peak, than it is presently. Furthermore, by BDBC allowing development of Razors Farm, the strategic "gap" between Basingstoke Town and the rest of the Borough will be lost. The BDBC draft SHLAA also lists Upper Cufaude Farm as a potential dvelopment. This latter site is immediately adjacent to Razors Farm and is owned by Hampshire County Council. It is is listed in the SHLAA as having potential for 350 homes. This site, when added to Razors Farm numbers, would give a total of 830 new homes in this very rural part of our Borough. I petition BDBC to refuse planning permission for development of Razors Farm.

    Flag
12. 112
    Name: Joy Murphy on Dec 2, 2012

    Comments: Any proposed development would be completely wrong. No new access roads are planned to be provided, so traffic, to / from the proposed development, will be forced to use Chineham Business Park Roads, Cufaude Lane or Sherfield Park Roads. These roads are already overloaded and in the case of Cufaude Lane, with single track stretches, it will become even more dangerous at am and pm peak, than it is presently. Furthermore, by BDBC allowing development of Razors Farm, the strategic "gap" between Basingstoke Town and the rest of the Borough will be lost. The BDBC draft SHLAA also lists Upper Cufaude Farm as a potential dvelopment. This latter site is immediately adjacent to Razors Farm and is owned by Hampshire County Council. It is is listed in the SHLAA as having potential for 350 homes. This site, when added to Razors Farm numbers, would give a total of 830 new homes in this very rural part of our Borough. I petition BDBC to refuse planning permission for development of Razors Farm.

    Flag
13. 113
    Name: Keith Oborn on Dec 2, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
14. 114
    Name: Julie McIntosh on Dec 2, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
15. 115
    Name: Steven McIntosh on Dec 2, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
16. 116
    Name: Margaret Towsey on Dec 2, 2012

    Comments: this development must not happen, the local roads cannot cope already. Cufaude lane is part of the national cycle network C23, already it is very busy & dangerous for cyclists. We should be making the roads safer for cyclists, not encouraging more traffic. The infrastructure just will not cope

    Flag
17. 117
    Name: Colin Towsey on Dec 2, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
18. 118
    Name: Harriet Towsey on Dec 2, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
19. 119
    Name: Anonymous on Dec 2, 2012

    Comments: Against

    Flag
20. 120
    Name: Laura Briers on Dec 2, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
21. 121
    Name: Anonymous on Dec 2, 2012

    Comments: Against

    Flag
22. 122
    Name: Anonymous on Dec 2, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
23. 123
    Name: Matt Charlton on Dec 2, 2012

    Comments: Chineham does not have the infrastructure to cope with more houses. on our doorstep

    Flag
24. 124
    Name: Amanda Coackley on Dec 2, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
25. 125
    Name: Clive Hailstone on Dec 2, 2012

    Comments: Any development that results in extra traffic along Cufaude Lane would result in increasingly dangerous driving conditions and gridlock.

    Flag
26. 126
    Name: Kirsten Keegan on Dec 2, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
27. 127
    Name: Anonymous on Dec 2, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
28. 128
    Name: George Matthew on Dec 2, 2012

    Comments: I support this petition and hope the council and local councillors support this petition - I and some other residents have seen the impact of the increasing negative development of Sherfield Park has had such as: - increasing amount of contractors driving large vehicles - some unsafely with no regard for people walking or driving in the area - increased traffic & congestion - harm to the environment - potential for conflict for lack of resources in years to come - never ending building works and contractor site - people who are already living here have to put up with the noise pollution & dangers , hazards of moving vehicles etc... - the loss of a close knit community as the number of people moving in increases

    Flag
29. 129
    Name: Sarah Wayspn on Dec 3, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
30. 130
    Name: Pamela Howe on Dec 3, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
31. 131
    Name: Christine Naughton on Dec 3, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
32. 132
    Name: Phil Winders on Dec 3, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
33. 133
    Name: Mandy Keene on Dec 3, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
34. 134
    Name: James Pollard on Dec 3, 2012

    Comments: Pollardjames@gmail.com We paid a premium price for our property bearing in mind it was a quiet estate with generally only people who live on the estate using the roads. The new access point will result in a huge traffic increase with vehicles using it as a cut through to get to the A33. I am not against the development per se as I understand the requirement for new housing. however I am strongly against the new access point. Please reconsider the proposed arrangements

    Flag
35. 135
    Name: Jackie Riley on Dec 3, 2012

    Comments: I am opposed to any further development affecting green belt land anywhere near the A33 and in particular Sherfield as we have taken the lions share in recent years with catastroohic impact.

    Flag
36. 136
    Name: Tony Simmill on Dec 3, 2012

    Comments: I am opposed to any further development of green belt land and esp on flood plains around the river loddon

    Flag
37. 137
    Name: Jim on Dec 3, 2012

    Comments: please win

    Flag
38. 138
    Name: V.Holt on Dec 3, 2012

    Comments: There is already far to much traffic congestion in Sherfield Park. Through traffic must be stopped at all costs

    Flag
39. 139
    Name: Claire Thompson on Dec 3, 2012

    Comments: We don't need any extra traffic on Sherfield park, we can't cope with what we have at the moment.

    Flag
40. 140
    Name: Sandie Tapping on Dec 3, 2012

    Comments: Chineham does not have the infrastructure to cope with more houses. The Council already own enough land at Manydown for any required expansion of Basingstoke.

    Flag
41. 141
    Name: Antonia Dewhurst on Dec 3, 2012

    Comments: I feel passionately that building more homes right here would affect the lives of everyone who lives in this area very negatively. We need to stand together to stop this being forced upon us.

    Flag
42. 142
    Name: Tony Tapping on Dec 3, 2012

    Comments: The infrastructure is not in place to sustain extra houses and the subsequent traffic that this will bring. There is already council-owned land at Manydown where houses and infrastructure could be built sustainably.

    Flag
43. 143
    Name: Jeanette Fogg on Dec 3, 2012

    Comments: These huge developments should be dropped and houses that are lying empty should be renovated to supply housing. We don't want any more developments that are designed to increase prices of houses so that local people are completely pushed out of the market. This is not providing for the future is bad planning and is prejudicial to indigenous people.

    Flag
44. 144
    Name: Anonymous on Dec 3, 2012

    Comments: It will destroy wildlife habitat and will increase traffic to an unacceptable level in a rural area.

    Flag
45. 145
    Name: Anonymous on Dec 3, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
46. 146
    Name: N West on Dec 3, 2012

    Comments: I do NOT agree to this development on Razors farm going ahead it will cause more problems than good for Sherfield park and Chineham and could even result in SERIOUS accidents being caused if this ridiculous idea goes ahead

    Flag
47. 147
    Name: Ceridwen Griffiths on Dec 3, 2012

    Comments: This development is in the wrong place in an area already overburdened with new housing without the additional infrastructure such as Drs, schools, decent roads. The A33 is already very congested as are the roads through Chineham at rush hour. Build on Many Down a whole new community with appropriate infrastructure.

    Flag
48. 148
    Name: M West on Dec 3, 2012

    Comments: This will cause serious problems with traffic flow as well as serious accidents with cars and even pedestrians!! Its ridiculous

    Flag
49. 149
    Name: Rosy Staines on Dec 3, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
50. 150
    Name: Jeffrey Daly on Dec 3, 2012

    Comments: The traffic on the A33 at Taylors Farm is already at a standstill most mornings of the week and if this estate is built we can look forward to even more traffic joining the A33 but having to drive through Taylors Farm to get to it.

    Flag

Page: « ‹ 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, ... 9 › »