Stop housing developments - Green Belt, Walton on Thames, Surrey

Comments

#201

I believe green belt should remain to stop urban sprawl

(Walton-on-thames, 2017-04-23)

#203

there is no infrastructure to cope with this.

(West Molesey, 2017-04-23)

#205

Walton is overpopulated, we cannot take any more people moving here. I don't want to lose any more green belt

(Walton on Thames, 2017-04-23)

#206

There are so few places left for wildlife to exist in Walton, especially with the recent destruction of habitat to make way for the athletics centre by the Xcel leisure centre. We need to preserve land like this and also recognise the enjoyment and exercise that it provides for people to walk and relax in.

(Walton-on-Thames, 2017-04-23)

#207

There are already to many new houses being built in Walton and the added traffic is not good for the town.

(Walton on Thames, 2017-04-23)

#210

To uphold the unanimous decision made by EBC to keep the land as green belt and no housing if any description

(Walton On Thames, 2017-04-23)

#215

I feel this area is over congested especially Molesey Ted where the majority of the traffic from Drakes Pk will exit.

(Hersham, 2017-04-23)

#217

I live on Field Common Lane and don't want the extra traffic down the road and also one of the exit points directly outside my house making the road dangerous. Why can't we have green land anymore instead of all these concrete jungles!

(Walton On Thames, 2017-04-23)

#218

Unacceptable development in the truly valuable Green Belt. The impact on infrastructure would be intolerable.

(Walton-on-Thames, 2017-04-23)

#220

Let's keep keep our green fields!

(West Molesey, 2017-04-23)

#221

The council vote shows that this is clearly not in the interest of local people

(Thames Ditton, 2017-04-23)

#225

Green belt is more important than developers' profits. Prioritise brown sites.

(London, 2017-04-24)

#228

We need nature

(Walton on thames, 2017-04-24)

#229

--

(LONDON, 2017-04-24)

#231

I object to any building on our precious green belt and this particular area is contaminated land fill and susceptible to flooding. Our schools, doctor surgeries, roads etc are already at over full capacity and we would also lose our local suburban identity.

(Walton on Thames, 2017-04-24)

#233

The ramifications of this development were covered comprehensively when the application was submitted and for those reasons was unanimously refused. Nothing has changed and rightly the Appeal should fail in similar fashion.

(West Molesey, 2017-04-24)

#234

There is. It the infrastructure - schools, rail, road. To support this

(Walton on thames, 2017-04-24)

#241

I have signed this petition because there is no case for building on strongly performing Green Belt land,

(Walton-on-Thames, 2017-04-24)

#245

Green belt is vital to our nation

(Telford, 2017-04-24)

#249

A decision was made on the original Application and the Developers were left in no doubt about how detrimental a site this would be for the local community. The roads cannot cope with current traffic flows and this would only be worse if this development were to be given the go ahead. The area works well as it should for its designation of green belt and should be left for this purpose. Please let common sense prevail.

(West Molesey, 2017-04-25)

#250

Dear UK politicians - STOP BEING SO BLOODY GREEDY!
Save our Green Belt land

(Louth, 2017-04-25)

#251

Homes yes but not at the cost of destruction of the greenbelt. Keep our green and pleasant land for our children to enjoy. say no to Drake Park!

(Walton-on-Thames, 2017-04-25)

#253

Protecting the Green Belt is now critical.

(West Molesey, 2017-04-25)

#263

Because I strongly oppose this development

(walton-on-thames, 2017-04-28)

#264

I am signing as the proposed Drake Park development lacks the supporting infrastructure to ensure that this would be a sustainable solution both for the existing and proposed new residents. The "suggested" new infrastructure items within the planning application do not address the significant issues around transport, education, and health services, nor are they gauranteed items that have to be delivered under this planning application. Without this gaurantee the proposed infrastructure service improvements outlined in the plan should be assumed to not be delivered, and therefore any planned decision should discount these from any consideration.

(walton-on-thames, 2017-04-28)

#265

I object to the proposed development

(Walton-on-Thames, 2017-04-28)

#269

I have a 12 year old daughter and I worry about traffic on Molesey Road already. More traffic will lead to more pollution, accidents and possible fatalities as many school children have to cross this road with no lolipop lady or crossings. Traffic is horrendous already in the mornings. I struggle to get out of Walton Park on to Molesey Road EVERY MORNING!

(Walton on Thames Surrey, 2017-04-28)

#271

I sign on behalf of the Open Spaces Society. It's essential to respect both the Green Belt and the importance of local decision making on local planning matters. The Green Belt is strongly functioning here to prevent urban sprawl.

(esher, 2017-04-29)

#272

The community and council has been very clear that it does not want this development. Bonnar Allen needs to respect this overwhelming public sentiment and instead of wasting its time and money it should focus it's resources on viable developments

(Walton On Thames, 2017-04-30)

#275

I'm signing because every man and woman elected Counsillors voted against this build. Once you build on Green belt it is gone. I am against building on Green Belt.

(Walton-On-Thames, 2017-04-30)

#276

I'm signing because 19 elected counsillors voted against this Proposal. I am against building on Green Belt.

(Walton-On-Thames, 2017-05-01)

#277

I am fundamentally opposed to developments on greenbelt land when there are many brownfield sites available.

(Bath, 2017-05-02)

#278

This proposal is utter nonsense and needs to be stopped for good. This is high performing GREEN BELT and they need to find somewhere else to build their fugly housing estate

(West Molesey, 2017-05-03)

#280

Increased risk of flooding

(Walton on Thames, 2017-05-03)

#281

Increased risk of flooding for Fieldcommon Lane Estate

(Walton on Thames, 2017-05-03)

#285

Leave our precious green belt alone.

(West Molesey, 2017-05-06)

#292

The traffic in the morning going from Molesey to Hersham is already rediculous. There are no plans to widen the bridge (currently one lane that is controlled by traffic lights) so this can only get worse with a new development of that size.

I also hugely object to green belt land being used in this way.

(Molesey, 2017-05-10)

#297

Our children and our children's children need open green spaces to thrive

(East Molesey, 2017-05-11)

#300

This green belt land plays a vital role not only as a home to wildlife but also in protecting the character of the area. It is vital for flood defence too - much needed in this area.

(London, 2017-05-12)

#305

Green belt is green belt - no ifs, no buts. Urban sprawl is not the answer to housing demand and a guarantee of ruining both the ecology and future of this country. I am totally opposed to this development and the greed of the corporations involved.

(West Molesey, 2017-05-14)

#310

The green belt is precious and it is our duty of care to protect it for now and future generations to enjoy. There is no going back if this is destroyed.

(Walton on thames, 2017-05-17)

#314

Our green belt needs protecting, if you start building on this green belt then what and where would be next?
I understand that this is a habitat for flying bats between the reservoirs and the river mole, these are a protected species and should be allowed to continue.

(Walton on thames, 2017-05-17)

#315

Infrastructure will be even more heavily loaded than it is now. Will be intolerable!

(walton-on-thames, 2017-05-17)

#318

Our community does not respect building on the greenbelt boarders, and at 19-0 against.. even the council are opposed.

(Walton-on-Thames, 2017-05-17)

#322

The whole area is already hopelessly congested because of unacceptable levels of building over the past twenty years.

(Esher, 2017-05-17)

#323

This is misuse of strongly performing green belt land

(Esher, 2017-05-17)

#325

Because we do not have the infa structure to cope with a development this size. Green Belt should not be developed on. Travelling by vehicle especially during rush hour is getting worse and the car fumes will just increase creating more health issues (asthma cases per year) which our hospitals and Gps being over subscribed as it is SAY NO TO DRAKE PARK

(Hersham, 2017-05-18)

#327

A poorly devised scheme flawed in many ways. The key issues were highlighted when the proposal was rejected in addition flood risk is a real concern. A clear lack of support the only people who will benefit are the developers and the land owner.

(Hersham, 2017-05-18)

#330

This area is already heavily developed. We need to retain our diminishing greenbelt

(West Molesey, 2017-05-18)

#331

I'm signing because this housing development is proposed for green belt land which is not supposed to be built on and is there for a reason. Walton-on-Thames and the surrounding areas are already far too built up and congested and there's just not the infra-structure to sustain more housing and a bigger population.

(Walton-on-Thames, 2017-05-19)

#332

I live off Molesey Rd and feel our area is congested enough. The building of Drakes Pk will be catastrophic to our area.

(Hersham, 2017-05-19)

#335

The current infrastructure of the area is incapable of handling the traffic and other service-demands that would be generated by this development. There is no simple, cheap, effective way to develop this site and its infrastructure, bounded as it is by river, railway, and reservoirs. The main destinations will be south to the Hersham Sation railway bridge – to get to the Hersham Roundabout – west to the Rydens Road / Hersham Road junction, with the remaining traffic heading north on B369 for Molesey and the longer route to Walton town centre and Walton Bridge. All these routes and junctions are already bottlenecks.
Problem: there is no escape route to the east of the site.

(Walton-on-Thames, 2017-05-19)

#342

I own property in Hersham which my daughters currently live in and I'm sick of hearing of green belt development. What's the point inhaving green belt classification if you're going to let Developers get their greedy hands on it?

(Christchurch, 2017-05-21)

#343

I am signing this petition because of the damage that will be done to the green belt and the traffic problems that this development will cause during it's construction phase and after completion.

(Walton On Thames, 2017-05-22)

#344

Greenbelt land must be saved. Housing can be built on brown field sites.

(Walton on Thames, 2017-05-22)

#346

It is essential to retain the green belt and furthermore the surrounding area cannot sustain a development of this size.

(Walton On Thames, 2017-05-24)

#347

I do not want to see any more development on Green Belt land and believe the Traffic from a new Drake Park development has not been prpoerly investigated and will undoubtedly cause massive congestion in the morning.

(Walton on Thames, 2017-05-24)

#348

Do not want more buildings on green belt and a massive increase in local traffic.

(Walton on Thames, 2017-05-24)

#349

I believe the roads are already over congested and further housing will lead to further grid lock. I also believe our green belt land should be preserved, that's why it was invented in the first place.

(Walton on Thames, 2017-05-25)

#351

This is green belt land and this would be the final nail in the coffin if this was built on.what about our quality of life,I think we have paid enough in council tax to have what quality of life is left here,otherwise i feel we have good case against this council for compensation to get out because it will destroy this whole area.further more this will never help the local young people these are not affordable by any means.there were some affordable homes here until a couple of years ago,when the greedy people started arriving,and brought them to rent out.so if there's no room here the greedy people have only got themselves to blame.the youngsters they call lazy don't stand a chance paying these greedy landlords every penny they earn

(West molesey, 2017-05-25)

#355

There is a not a suitable road infrastructure in this area to take the volume of traffic that would be generated by the building this park. It should not be built on GreenBelt Land!

(Walton on Thames, 2017-05-28)

#358

There is no way that the roads in the surrounding areas will be able to cope and access to the station at Hersham will be impossible and parking issues will abound.

(Walton on Thames, 2017-05-31)

#361

Traffic through the area is already a big issue, and this development would only contribute to the issue

(East Molesey, 2017-06-01)

#365

I'm concerned for my family's future

(Walton on Thames, 2017-06-01)

#366

Our local hospitals are already at breaking point and we do not appear to have the ability to support a massive population increase in the area.

(Walton on Thames, 2017-06-01)

#367

Traffic in the area is already a nightmare - this development will make it significantly worse.

(Hersham, 2017-06-02)

#371

green belt should be protected for environmental reasons and to ensure a future for wildlife and air quality etc. There are options available for housing outside of these precious areas of green.

(walton on thames, 2017-06-05)

#374

This wil course to much traffic in local roads and this land still floods also it will be to bigger estate for this area x houses will be to expensive

(West Molesey, 2017-06-11)

#377

Walton and Hersham have enough new building already. We must save the green spaces.

(Staines, 2017-06-11)

#379

I live in Netley Drive and am fed up with the present traffic issues so OBJECT to the obvious impact this new proposal would create, Hersham station approach would be gridlocked permanently. I also feel strongly about the environment and love walking past and through the open fields which would be lost forever.

(Walton on Thames, 2017-06-12)

#380

I'm signing because this development would seriously impact the traffic and pollution in the area. And also the loss of green belt.
This cannot happen.

(Walton On Thames, 2017-06-12)

#382

This is a deeply flawed proposal which has already been rejected - unanimously - for sound reasons which the current appeal does nothing to change.

(Walton on Thames, 2017-06-12)

#383

The traffic in the Walton and Weybridge area is already a huge health and safety concern. Our roads are st breaking point & the number of accidents recently (2 road deaths) can only prove more traffic will only exacerbate the issue.

(Weybridge, 2017-06-13)

#386

I believe the Drake Park development is a Bonnar Allen ego trip and is not for thd benefit of resodemts at all. It is a flagrant abuse of the planning process and will destroy the beauty and wildlife in the area.

(Walton on thames, 2017-06-20)

#393

I grew up in Walton-on-Thames in the 60's when it was little more than a market town.I went to school in Walton-on_Thames and loved the green open spaces we had as children.DO NOT spoil our green belt -leave it for our children and grandchildren to enjoy.

(Blandford Forum, 2017-10-24)

#395

There are so many brown sites or other sites you could use. Not our rapidly diminishing greenbelt. There has been a spate of new housing in Walton-on-Thames and the roads are gridlocked.

(Walton-on-Thames, 2018-02-04)