Stand Against Razor's Farm

Signatures 406 total

Page: « ‹ 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 › »

1. 201
   Name: Irina Mannan on Dec 4, 2012

   Comments: no more houses!

   Flag
2. 202
   Name: Rachael Cooper on Dec 4, 2012

   Comments: Strongly against destroying more pasture to make way for housing

   Flag
3. 203
   Name: Laura Cox on Dec 4, 2012

   Comments:

   Flag
4. 204
   Name: Emma Burgess on Dec 4, 2012

   Comments: have we not got enough houses in Basingstoke now?!?!?!

   Flag
5. 205
   Name: Mr A Walton on Dec 4, 2012

   Comments:

   Flag
6. 206
   Name: Nicky Kidd on Dec 4, 2012

   Comments:

   Flag
7. 207
   Name: Aaron Scicluna on Dec 4, 2012

   Comments: would have many negative effects

   Flag
8. 208
   Name: Toby Bryant on Dec 4, 2012

   Comments: I live in the nice countryside of Sherfield-on-Loddon and love it. the more and more building don't the more it will be ruined!!

   Flag
9. 209
   Name: Barbara Band on Dec 4, 2012

   Comments: I have no objection to additional houses being built providing the infrastructure to support them is also put in place. The A33 cannot support any further additional traffic. It is already overloaded.

   Flag
10. 210
    Name: Toni Mehta on Dec 4, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
11. 211
    Name: Matthew Howe on Dec 4, 2012

    Comments: I am a resident in Chineham and am extremely against the proposed application. The traffic is already terrible and with no solution to the increase that will occur this would be horrendous. If there is no provision for the increase of medical or educational facilities this is an outrageous proposal of building an extra 480 houses.

    Flag
12. 212
    Name: Philippa Howe on Dec 5, 2012

    Comments: This is an outrageous proposal for a new build in an already over populated area with amenities that barely cover the existing residents. We moved here for the close community, good schools and quiet & safe area for our young children-this is heartbreaking that yet another green area is to be sacrificed & brings no benefit to the local community only more burden than there already is. I strongly oppose this build. Mrs Howe 18 thyme close Cineham

    Flag
13. 213
    Name: Philippa Howe on Dec 5, 2012

    Comments: This is an outrageous proposal for a new build in an already over populated area with amenities that barely cover the existing residents. We moved here for the close community, good schools and quiet & safe area for our young children-this is heartbreaking that yet another green area is to be sacrificed & brings no benefit to the local community only more burden than there already is. I strongly oppose this build. Mrs Howe 18 thyme close Cineham

    Flag
14. 214
    Name: Ilona Herbent on Dec 5, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
15. 215
    Name: Paul Bryant on Dec 5, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
16. 216
    Name: Stephen Wall on Dec 5, 2012

    Comments: I am against the Razor plans. lets get the essentials right first.

    Flag
17. 217
    Name: Mike Thompson on Dec 5, 2012

    Comments: The proposal would create a sterile housing estate without any community facilities (shops, village hall, GP surgery, pub) to give it and the residents a village identity.

    Flag
18. 218
    Name: Natalie Gibbons on Dec 5, 2012

    Comments: yes sign me up, put farming and local countryside first forward not housing developments.

    Flag
19. 219
    Name: Rachel Young on Dec 5, 2012

    Comments: Cufaude Lane is already a notoriously dangerous road, although it is now part of a National Cycle Network. It also has long standing drainage problems near the railway bridge causing traffic to move into the centre of the road, drastically increasing the likelihood of accidents. The traffic load is already so heavy that traffic backs up along the C32 at morning and evening rush hour waiting to enter the lane and can be backed up the complete length of the lane on summer weekend evenings. The industrial park on the lane results in completely inappropriate commerical traffic struggling along this 'tortuous' route. It is totally inappropriate and unsafe to develop around the lane, causing additional traffic load and overwhelming already overloaded local services in Bramley.

    Flag
20. 220
    Name: Ginette Stead on Dec 5, 2012

    Comments: The infrastructure is not in place to support this development, particulary roads and primary schools. Any road survey used to support this application MUST be repeated once Sherfield Park has been opened up onto Cufaude Lane. It is not possible to predict the impact this will have. Already crossing the roads when on the school run is dangerous, many of the footpath crossing points are very close to road turnings making them already dangerous when trying to herd young children across.

    Flag
21. 221
    Name: Diane Marie Marriott on Dec 5, 2012

    Comments: STOP BUILDING MORE UNWANTED HOUSES!!!! Houdreds are empty fill them first!!!!!! Leave the woodland ALONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Flag
22. 222
    Name: Chris Sumner on Dec 5, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
23. 223
    Name: SYLVIA FARNCOMBE-SMITH on Dec 5, 2012

    Comments: too much traffic now shops - parking difficult in Chineham now and the pointsalready raised now

    Flag
24. 224
    Name: Chris Walton on Dec 5, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
25. 225
    Name: A H Batley on Dec 5, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
26. 226
    Name: G P Batley on Dec 5, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
27. 227
    Name: Brian Killingback on Dec 5, 2012

    Comments: Enough is enough. Further housing development next to Sherfield Park and Chineham is an unnecessary concentration of resource depletion such as water and power together with a significant increase in air pollution from motor exhausts and gas emissions.

    Flag
28. 228
    Name: Janet Hargreaves on Dec 5, 2012

    Comments: I think it is an over development of an already diminishing country side without proper infrastructure for the increased population.

    Flag
29. 229
    Name: Heather Hills on Dec 5, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
30. 230
    Name: Dickstiles on Dec 5, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
31. 231
    Name: Rhiannon English on Dec 5, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
32. 232
    Name: Anonymous on Dec 5, 2012

    Comments: stop the nonsense and build houses west of Basingstoke next to Roman Road!

    Flag
33. 233
    Name: DAVID PRINCE on Dec 5, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
34. 234
    Name: Philip S Cooper on Dec 5, 2012

    Comments: Fully defend your position on opposing the planned housing estate.

    Flag
35. 235
    Name: Carole Cowan on Dec 5, 2012

    Comments: The traffic through Chineham has already increased as cars travelling to and from the Business Park. The schools, doctors surgery etc will, I am sure, find the increase in numbers and patients hard to manage.

    Flag
36. 236
    Name: Jo Bailes on Dec 6, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
37. 237
    Name: Dave Cowley on Dec 6, 2012

    Comments: The local infrastructure is not coping with current demands. Adding further homes without investing in the existing infrastructure is naive.

    Flag
38. 238
    Name: Anonymous on Dec 6, 2012

    Comments: The road infrastructure is by no means able to cope with the additional traffic a new development of this size will result in. It is already overburdened by far!

    Flag
39. 239
    Name: Lorraine Simper on Dec 6, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
40. 240
    Name: Ian Blair on Dec 6, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
41. 241
    Name: Sallyanne Gale on Dec 6, 2012

    Comments: i live in thyme close and have trouble at night getting in and out of my road onto hanmore road as the traffic comes out of the business park into chineham as they cannot wait and cut through the houses,it is also terrible in the mornings with them cutting through past two nurseries a school and children who are walking to and from school and catching the bus,we have no traffic calming unlike other villages eg hook,sherfield bramley,it is a disgrace to say that new houses will onlybring a small number of extra cars to our roads they are awful now does it take someone to get killed before the council do something has any of them tried to get out or in from the a33 into chineham

    Flag
42. 242
    Name: Stephen Cussons on Dec 6, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
43. 243
    Name: Alison Haystaff on Dec 6, 2012

    Comments: Enough is enough! There are houses going up everywhere around Basingstoke. There is no infrastucture to support the increase in housing. Soon we will be one large connerbation with Reading, Aldershot, Oakley, Micheldever etc, etc. Why not build a new town somewhere in a rural area. I moved in to Lychpit in the 1980's, the planned school did not materialise until a few years ago, the allocated land having been sold to developers for yet more houses. The A33 from Basingstoke to Reading is a JOKE.

    Flag
44. 244
    Name: Keith And Pilar Owen on Dec 6, 2012

    Comments: Ther is no infraestructure ie surgery, schools, road capacity, etc, etc. There is a need to protect our woodlands and environment.

    Flag
45. 245
    Name: Anonymous on Dec 6, 2012

    Comments: Cufaude Lane is already a rat-run and there are frequent jams on the narrow sections during rush hour. Opening access from Sherfield Park and building further homes can only exacerbate the problem.

    Flag
46. 246
    Name: Jerry Craven on Dec 6, 2012

    Comments: I would be against this development because I think this area has Had more than its fair share of development just lately,there are more than enough better sites to the west of Basingstoke that could be considered.

    Flag
47. 247
    Name: MICK WALSH on Dec 7, 2012

    Comments: New building for housing encroaching nearer and nearer to Bramley, and Bramley is to big for the facilties that are there!!

    Flag
48. 248
    Name: Anonymous on Dec 7, 2012

    Comments: Bramley is unable to take the strain of the additional development within the local area as the village is already crammed on the working day with people using the bviallge for the train station, additionally the road through the village is not built or designed for the additional cars any further housing will cause. The footpath used by the school children ( who have no formal crossing of any kind across the main road to and from the school ./ bus stops for the older children ) are very narrow and dangerous when large vehicles pass the children, additionally they also soak them with water when it rains.

    Flag
49. 249
    Name: Anonymous on Dec 7, 2012

    Comments: This can't be allowed to happen

    Flag
50. 250
    Name: Janet Warner on Dec 7, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag

Page: « ‹ 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 › »