Comment
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 6960
Received: 10/02/2015
Respondent: Mr Michael Moss
Representation Summary:
No. Other than if the unsuitable sites suggested for development were earmarked instead for open space provision rather than development.
Full text:
I have tried to find the necessary questionnaire about the above mentioned subject but have been unable to access it. I wish to object most strongly to the proposals for a number of reasons, not least of which is that neither Lime Grove nor Peartree Lane are suitable for increased vehicular traffic either during or post development. This is a ridiculous proposal obviously put forward by and supported by those who have either no knowledge of the area or selfish interests or both. I wish to register my objections.
[Email: See attached]