Signatures 405 total
Page: « ‹ 1, ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 › »
-
351
Name: Eur Ing M J Rutland on Dec 31, 2012Comments: It will create an unacceptable and potentially dangerous increase in traffic through Sherfield Park (and to a lesser extent through north Chineham and Bramley) It contains no provision for the development of much needed medical or educational facilities The site is more appropriate for the future development of the Chineham railway station and would avoid the consequential loss of woodland on Cufaude Lane.Flag
-
352
Name: Barry Thorn on Dec 31, 2012Comments:Flag
-
353
Name: Susan Thorn on Dec 31, 2012Comments:Flag
-
354
Name: Carolyn Webb on Dec 31, 2012Comments: I have objected on the planning website - with no schools, no doctors surgery, no dental surgery - single lane road under bridge, which floods frequently. Better use of site for railway station 'promised' but not materialised. etc...Flag
-
355
Name: Mrs D Hailstone on Dec 31, 2012Comments: Conjestion, road safety and overloading our rescources and amenities.Flag
-
356
Name: Anonymous on Jan 1, 2013Comments: Stop building to the east of Basingstoke. It is already stretched to capacity. The west of Basingstoke MUST be considered more as an alternative now as North, East and South have already expanded.Flag
-
357
Name: Anonymous on Jan 1, 2013Comments:Flag
-
358
Name: Matt Charlton on Jan 2, 2013Comments:Flag
-
359
Name: David Head on Jan 2, 2013Comments:Flag
-
360
Name: Nicola Tanner on Jan 2, 2013Comments:Flag
-
361
Name: Frank Tanner on Jan 2, 2013Comments:Flag
-
362
Name: Anonymous on Jan 3, 2013Comments:Flag
-
363
Name: Suzi Ifould on Jan 3, 2013Comments:Flag
-
364
Name: Robert Davis on Jan 3, 2013Comments:Flag
-
365
Name: Steve Ellis on Jan 3, 2013Comments:Flag
-
366
Name: Lesa Ellis on Jan 3, 2013Comments:Flag
-
367
Name: Charlotte Nash on Jan 3, 2013Comments: Chineham would not be able to cope with the proposed additional housing of Razors Farm, in addtion to the 900 houses on Sherfield Park. There is already strain on the local Dr's surgery and Four Lanes school would not be able to accommodate any further children. The increase in traffic through Chineham and lack of a secondary school provisions both cause serious concern..Flag
-
368
Name: Ian Smith on Jan 4, 2013Comments: A ludicrous proposal that takes no account of the existing infrastructure or the local community.Flag
-
369
Name: Anonymous on Jan 4, 2013Comments:Flag
-
370
Name: Patricia Belcher on Jan 4, 2013Comments:Flag
-
371
Name: Mike Glynn on Jan 4, 2013Comments: I live in Bramley and the additional housing built here recently have caused the same problems as described above.Whilst there is a need for housing there must be adequate infrastructure to support it and services such as schoolsFlag
-
372
Name: David Spink on Jan 5, 2013Comments: This devolopent should not go ahead traffic would Be unbearable for residentsFlag
-
373
Name: Justin Thorn on Jan 5, 2013Comments: The continuing development of Chineham without any improvement infrastructure is harming the area. The countryside north of Chineham is scenic and should be preserved.Flag
-
374
Name: S Wilson on Jan 7, 2013Comments: It is madness to go ahead with this development without considering the negative impact on local services such as schools and GP practices. The road system is also unable to support so many extra houses. This country doesn't need more houses - just less people.Flag
-
375
Name: Vince Oram on Jan 7, 2013Comments:Flag
-
376
Name: C Haynes on Jan 8, 2013Comments: in full aggrement with the whole petitionFlag
-
377
Name: Victoria Hartnoll on Jan 8, 2013Comments:Flag
-
378
Name: Laura Romney on Jan 8, 2013Comments: Razor's Farm is not a viable option. Taxpayers paid for Manydown to be developed.Flag
-
379
Name: Chris Romney on Jan 8, 2013Comments: Replacing Manydown with Razor's Farm as a housing development site is indefensible.Flag
-
380
Name: Malcolm Wells on Jan 8, 2013Comments:Flag
-
381
Name: Ellen Bencard on Jan 9, 2013Comments: As a Sherfield Park resident I've been very impressed by Croudace's design and the layout of the development. HOWEVER there's no way that the infrastructure of the area can carry that kind of increase. If the infrastructure were there, I'd welcome more developments of this quality. But not before!Flag
-
382
Name: Brian Morris on Jan 9, 2013Comments: I am opposed to the development of Razors Farm due to already the totally overstretcged & overloaded local infrastructure, ie. schools, doctors surgeries & roads. It is not a suitable residential site due to its location in a Business/industrial park.Flag
-
383
Name: Margaret Gray on Jan 9, 2013Comments: We cannot allow houses to be built without ensuring that the correct infrastructure is in place. Croudace Homes are in it for what they can make whilst providing as little as possible for residents.Flag
-
384
Name: Jane Thornton on Jan 9, 2013Comments: There is not enough thought gone into this re schooling, medical surgeries, infrastructure as far as traffic. The traffic is already at saturation point and to get out of Chineham is a nightmare. Getting out of Thornhill Way onto the distributor road (to go past Chineham Arms) is impossible betwern 4.30pm and 6.30pm as all the traffic coming out of the Business Park comes through this part of Sherfield Park so as to avoid the Red Man roundabout. This will only get worse.Flag
-
385
Name: Georgina Perkins on Jan 11, 2013Comments: I am fully against this as it will cause too much traffic through Chineham which we suffer from already with Taylors Farm development and Chineham being used as a cut through for the Chineham Business ParkFlag
-
386
Name: Piers Bencard on Jan 12, 2013Comments: Whilst I am not agaisnt the increase in homes persay, I am against the increase in homes without improvements to the infrastructure and community ammenities.Flag
-
387
Name: Gary Williams on Jan 13, 2013Comments: I Object to the Razor's Farm development due to the impact on Chineham Schools and Infrastructure which will not be able to cope with this development.Flag
-
388
Name: Julia Williams on Jan 13, 2013Comments: I object to the Razor's Farm development due to the impact on my local Chineham Schools and the road Infrastructure which will not be able to cope with this new development in Razors Farm.Flag
-
389
Name: Emma Minns on Jan 13, 2013Comments:Flag
-
390
Name: Tim Blackburn on Jan 17, 2013Comments: I fully support the objection to this ill considered development and have made my objections to the B&DBCFlag
-
391
Name: Tina Blackburn on Jan 17, 2013Comments:Flag
-
392
Name: Louise Willson on Jan 19, 2013Comments:Flag
-
393
Name: Thiebeauld Hugues on Jan 24, 2013Comments: I am signing off this petition as I agree that this development is done without adequate consideration of traffic, public transport and public servicesFlag
-
394
Name: Kelly Williams on Jan 26, 2013Comments: Sarf. Am very concerned about the rapidly disappearing green space that the south of england is suffering in recent years.Flag
-
395
Name: Buy Viagra Online on Mar 3, 2013Comments: sVtK5y Thank you ever so for you blog post.Much thanks again.Flag
-
396
Name: Buy Discount Viagra Online on Mar 4, 2013Comments: K2pUke A round of applause for your blog.Really looking forward to read more. Much obliged.Flag
-
397
Name: Bookmarks on Mar 14, 2013Comments: NoJdDu I value the article post.Much thanks again. Will read on...Flag
-
398
Name: Social Bookmarks on Mar 15, 2013Comments: AQxzi7 Hey, thanks for the post.Really thank you! Really Great.Flag
-
399
Name: Clive Hawkett on Mar 28, 2013Comments: I object to the development of Razors farm for extra housing. We have had enough houses built this side of Basingstoke. What about Manydown?Flag
-
400
Name: Jacobs on Mar 28, 2013Comments: Decision date is 10th April 2013Flag