Stop the Arundel Bypass - Save Arundel's Countryside
2,356 Comments
C
Callum Foster
8 years ago
I am signing this petition to help save one of West Sussex's most beautiful districts from the evils of unnecessary development.
B
Bart Ives
8 years ago
No to option 5a due to the unprecedented environmental damage; if necessary then option 1.
M
Mr C J Porti
8 years ago
I oppose Option 5A. I support Option 1.
M
Miss D M Pitts
8 years ago
I reject option 5A. If a by-pass is necessary then Option 1 is by far the best option. Option 5A would be another example of the desecration of our countryside and all that is within it, including quality farmland for food production.
J
Jennifer Pulling
8 years ago
I ask you with all my heart to consider options that will not irreparably damage our countryside and its villages for the sake of a few minutes shorter journey time. We are living in critical times for our environment and further threats will result in more destruction of whist we in Britasin consider our heritage.
T
Tim
8 years ago
There is no consideration of demand management. There is also no real consideration of the damage to the environment. flora, fauna, peoples' well being,
R
Richard Hubble
8 years ago
NO OPTION 5A! I don't want an 4-lane dual carriageway just five doors down from where I live!
F
Fanny
8 years ago
It would a crime to ruin such ancient woodland for probably no benifit in real terms. Not to mention ruining the lives of the whole community that live in Binsted . There are other options that would be more appropriate.
A
Amanda Walker
8 years ago
No to route 5a, yes to the protection of our countryside and wildlife and better public transport.
D
David Wadlow
8 years ago
On no account should route 5a go ahead.
P
Peter roberts
8 years ago
No to 5a
J
Jonathan Gwyn
8 years ago
I strongly feel that a shorter route be considered that has less an impact and adverse effect on the environment
A
Anonymous
8 years ago
No more roads! Please improve public transport instead!
V
Veronica Grey
8 years ago
There is so little ancient woodland left in England,especially near London,that every effort should be made to protect what is left.This government claims that it wishes to protect the environment;building roads through ancient woodland is not the way to do that.
M
MIchael Shelton
8 years ago
NO NO NO NO
Countryside like Binsted is too valuable to lose
The village and wildlife also need to be protected for the future
D
Deborah Shelton
8 years ago
Binsted should be saved . Its criminal to even consider the option of destroying this ancient woodland and village. The wildlife would also be decimated......
Outrageous......
A
Anonymous
8 years ago
The only logical option is 1. It is unfortunate for Arundel. This is a major structural nightmare but is utilising existing routes with an improved bridge over the Arun, an improvement that will probably be needed soon anyway.
H
Helen gardner
8 years ago
Agreed we need a bypass or something but I object to the amount of future issues this option will create. I moved to Sussex for the rural beauty and quiet serene countryside. This is going to be ruined under this option Binsted is a beautiful safe place and will become dangerous. We will be being invaded by extra traffic in yapton once they build the new houses proposed and now this and this will in turn have an impact on what's currently a beautiful place to live we do not want any more traffic through yapton, destroyed countryside and danger to our children and residents someone will get hurt it's bad enough now. Please please find a different solution not this one
A
Anonymous
8 years ago
This will impact the surrounding countryside and community heavily
I am signing this petition to help save one of West Sussex's most beautiful districts from the evils of unnecessary development.
No to option 5a due to the unprecedented environmental damage; if necessary then option 1.
I oppose Option 5A. I support Option 1.
I reject option 5A. If a by-pass is necessary then Option 1 is by far the best option. Option 5A would be another example of the desecration of our countryside and all that is within it, including quality farmland for food production.
I ask you with all my heart to consider options that will not irreparably damage our countryside and its villages for the sake of a few minutes shorter journey time. We are living in critical times for our environment and further threats will result in more destruction of whist we in Britasin consider our heritage.
There is no consideration of demand management. There is also no real consideration of the damage to the environment. flora, fauna, peoples' well being,
NO OPTION 5A! I don't want an 4-lane dual carriageway just five doors down from where I live!
It would a crime to ruin such ancient woodland for probably no benifit in real terms. Not to mention ruining the lives of the whole community that live in Binsted . There are other options that would be more appropriate.
No to route 5a, yes to the protection of our countryside and wildlife and better public transport.
On no account should route 5a go ahead.
No to 5a
I strongly feel that a shorter route be considered that has less an impact and adverse effect on the environment
No more roads! Please improve public transport instead!
There is so little ancient woodland left in England,especially near London,that every effort should be made to protect what is left.This government claims that it wishes to protect the environment;building roads through ancient woodland is not the way to do that.
NO NO NO NO Countryside like Binsted is too valuable to lose The village and wildlife also need to be protected for the future
Binsted should be saved . Its criminal to even consider the option of destroying this ancient woodland and village. The wildlife would also be decimated...... Outrageous......
The only logical option is 1. It is unfortunate for Arundel. This is a major structural nightmare but is utilising existing routes with an improved bridge over the Arun, an improvement that will probably be needed soon anyway.
Agreed we need a bypass or something but I object to the amount of future issues this option will create. I moved to Sussex for the rural beauty and quiet serene countryside. This is going to be ruined under this option Binsted is a beautiful safe place and will become dangerous. We will be being invaded by extra traffic in yapton once they build the new houses proposed and now this and this will in turn have an impact on what's currently a beautiful place to live we do not want any more traffic through yapton, destroyed countryside and danger to our children and residents someone will get hurt it's bad enough now. Please please find a different solution not this one
This will impact the surrounding countryside and community heavily
No no no