Online Response Form

Responses

List of answers to the specified question
NameOptionTextDate
Marilyn Clarke But not on these sites - see earlier 06 Feb 2017 14:31
Marilyn Clarke Yes 06 Feb 2017 14:31
Mr Groombridge • Do not believe Parcels 14 or 20 should be developed. The analysis is subjective and flawed 16 Feb 2017 12:27
Mr Groombridge No 16 Feb 2017 12:27
Peter Tottle Smaller flats is better. 28 Feb 2017 11:42
Peter Tottle No 28 Feb 2017 11:42
Richard Carr Lower density development is no substitute for nature reserves, woodland and open space for all to enjoy in generations to come. 19 Feb 2017 22:26
Richard Carr No 19 Feb 2017 22:26
Richard Welch As already detailed, infrastructure – particularly roads - and local employment prospects in a semi-rural area are inadequate. This question assumes development of the areas proposed. They should not be developed. 06 Feb 2017 12:51
Richard Welch No 06 Feb 2017 12:51
First pagePrevious page Next pageLast page