The library belongs to everybody and we do not consent to the Council selling it off or leasing it for use as a private hotel. Our library is more than books. It’s part of our community’s stories, connections, routines, traditions and heritage. Although the Council is suffering from funding cuts, dismantling our heritage and our community piece by piece for the sake of short-term gains is not the answer. We are concerned that the Council is giving undue priority to the potential developer, Sichaun Guodong Group, and failing to properly consider the people of Sheffield, who own the building, and make itself accountable to them. Furthermore, it is our view that the Council’s actions since November 2016, relating to the proposed sale or lease and redevelopment of the Central Library building, have not met the required standards of transparency and openness. We have seen no firm plans or funding propositions for an alternative central library if the purpose built Art Deco library building which was gifted to the city by JG Graves is turned into a hotel. If the council is as cash-strapped as it says, how can it fund a new fit-for-purpose building? And how will it protect and maintain the Graves Gallery and Library Theatre, currently housed in the library building? Our city deserves better than this. We ask Sheffield City Council to: 1. Refrain from signing the proposed 12-month exclusivity agreement with Sichaun Guodong Group (SG), which would block all other potential investment in the library for 12 months, or any other agreement for the sale or lease and redevelopment of the Central Library building 2. Properly consider the alternatives A feasibility study is essential to make sure any actions taken are transparently in the best interests of the people of Sheffield. The Council is in discussions with only one potential developer of the library building, which has not been put on the market. If a private development is truly in the best interests of Sheffield, SCLAG maintains that the building must be marketed openly to ensure best value for Sheffield. 3. Give us evidence of best practice due diligence. In June 2016, The Council agreed Heads of Terms with SG regarding investments in Sheffield, including the proposed hotel project. In November 2016, the Council took the decision to enter into a 12-month exclusivity agreement with the company, to enable project evaluation. We want guarantees from the Council that best practice due diligence has been undertaken, regarding both SG itself and the proposed hotel development, as a basis for entering into these agreements. 4. Allow enough time for proper evaluation and scrutiny The Council now hopes to develop the June 2016 Heads of Terms agreements with SG into full legal agreements, apparently before the expiration of the 12-month exclusivity agreement (which we believe has yet to be signed). Proper evaluation of alternatives and project scrutiny will require more time (18 months for a feasibility study, according to the Council). SCLAG maintains that a longer timeframe is essential to best serve the interests of the people of Sheffield, not just the developer. 5. Guarantee permanent fit-for-purpose Central Library services The Council has not made provision for a new, permanent Central Library building prior to closure of the existing building, and an ‘interim solution’ has been mooted. There is, therefore, the clear risk that a ‘temporary’ solution will become a permanent one. 6. Provide maximum project transparency The Council advises that a ‘formal approach’ was received by SG, leading to the Heads of Terms agreements of June 2016. Neither the content of the ‘formal approach’ nor the agreement has been made public. Already at this early stage, the Council has been unable to provide a consistent or definite answer to whether or not it has signed an exclusivity agreement with SG. To enable full public scrutiny, SCLAG seeks the maximum permissible transparency from the Council regarding the approach from, negotiations with and agreements with SG, as well as project plans, procedures and timeframes. Sheffield Central Library Action Group is a platform for concerned citizens who oppose the sale or lease and redevelopment of the JG Graves Library building in the city centre.

Moorwell Place sits at the bottom of Eccleshill Recreation Ground. It is public right of way and the only pedestrian footpath leading from Moorside Road to the footpath that runs down the side of the recreation ground, by the bowling green. It is used by the residents of Eccleshill, including Parents with toddlers and pushchairs, children on their way to school, cyclists, followers of the Eccleshill History Trail and many others, along with the residents of the street. At present, it is in a sorry state. It is muddy and full of deep potholes, making it extremely unsafe. It is inaccessible to mobility vehicles/wheelchairs. For a number of years, the residents of Moorwell Place have asked the council to maintain the road which, although they have previously acknowledged responsibility for, they have refused to maintain in an effective manner. More recently the residents have been told that the road is an “unadopted road” and the council have refused to undertake any maintenance work. After some investigation, it has been established that the road was in fact created by the local board (the council) in 1864 and as such cannot be deemed an unadopted road – it is in fact a road created by the council in 1864 and they have failed to maintain it. Further evidence suggests that a court case in 1864 established that the council were responsible for the creation of the road – but that it must remain part of the recreation ground "intact" forever. Council asset management documents show that the road is part of the recreation ground which is a registered village green. The council are owners and managers of the village green and are responsible for its maintenance.

If ever a junction needed pelican crossings it's this one (flag lane/wistaston road at the crossroads). I witnessed yet another near miss there today, when a child stepped out into moving traffic! He seemed distracted looking at his mobile phone and ended up literally a hairs breath off being hit by a moving car! Yes people shouldn't get distracted crossing roads, but it happens. There's also the need for vulnerable people to cross safely, ie: within an allotted time and with clear indication of when it is safe for them to do so. It is always an extremely busy juction, but during school term time is particularly horrendous with large groups of children of all ages heading to/ from the many different schools on that route.There's sadly going to be a serious accident one day. Please don't let a fatality be reason to act on this issue!

There is no safe level of asbestos exposure. We don't want to wait 30 years for a cancer cluster in Cranleigh to prove that we are at risk from our drinking water. We want independent testing to be carried out now to assess the risk to public health. Almost 30% of the drinking water supply pipes in Cranleigh (highlighted in pink on the above map) are made from asbestos cement (AC), compared to a reported average of 2% throughout the rest of the Thames Water Region. The pipes are between 50 and 70 years old and frequently burst, increasing the amount of free asbestos fibres entering the drinking water supply. Evidence shows that ageing AC drinking water pipes also degrade internally over time through water friction and low pH levels, releasing free asbestos fibres into the drinking water supply. Furthermore, an increase in water pressure within these deteriorating AC pipes to accommodate significant housing development in Cranleigh will lead to more bursts and the release of more asbestos fibres. The United States Environmental Protection Agency has been testing for asbestos fibres in drinking water since 1992 due to decaying AC water mains. No one is testing our drinking water for asbestos fibres, no one is calculating the risk to residents in Cranleigh.

These businesses have been trading in the area, employing local people and providing services to the community for decades. The businesses include DW Wood who have been machining wood at its site in Tottenham High Road since 1948, and North London's famous Chick King opposite Tottenham Hotspur football ground since 1981. The Peacock Industrial Estate established since 1986 , home to many businesses where several hundred people are employed in jobs covering skills such as specialist glazers , antique restorers , joinery shops, motor mechanics & a cake factory , to name a few trades and professions.In addition , the demolition plans threaten a NHS Doctors Surgery and Coombes Croft Library . These businesses are the pillar of the local business community and must not be driven out by demolition. They must be retained as part of the future of Tottenham. Haringey Council's proposals will drive these businesses out of the area, negatively affecting the lives of the owners and the people employed.

The village of Thornton Hough was rebuilt by Lord Leverhulme to be a model village, a working village and a balanced village. This proposal will put a village which already has twice the average amount of over 65's and matches the record town of Christchurch presently but will move our village into an unknown and unbalanced level of over 65's. It is also a huge wasted opportunity to involve us in a community led development plan which could deliver extra space for school, more houses for carers, social housing, shared equity, starter homes and family homes to help rebalance village or other ideas.

People are increasingly concerned about the pressures on wildlife. Especially in cities like London, many beloved species, such as hedgehogs, sparrows and bumble bees are all visibly declining.   The 2016 State of Nature report found that 7 per cent of urban wildlife species are nearing extinction. [link: http://www.rspb.org.uk/Images/State%20of%20Nature%20UK%20report_%2020%20Sept_tcm9-424984.pdf], and the number of hedgehogs living in London has dropped by half since 2000. [link: https://www.london.gov.uk/sites/default/files/at_home_with_nature_-_encouraging_biodiversity_in_new_housing_developments.pdf]   People want to help but can an individual make a difference?    We believe they most certainly can, if this scheme receives the backing of the Mayor of London.   Every month in London thousands of homes are bought and sold. The commissions are considerable, and every home letting involves fees paid to the agents too. But what if a tiny proportion of these commissions were set aside to enable the new householder to buy a bird box, a bat box, bee-friendly plants or something else to encourage wildlife in some way? Its a simple concept - Homes for People - Homes for Wildlife!   The home’s new owner could chose which sort of measure to encourage wildlife would work best for them and gradually a whole new range of safe and secure wildlife homes would spread across the city.   Such a project has national potential but needs someone with the Mayor of London’s credibility to help get the various bodies, like the National Association of Estate Agents on board. They have always been painted as bad guys but we can give them the chance to do some real good with this scheme, by making it simple for people to give homes to nature.   If done in an imaginative way, for example by making the voucher a unique token like a coin, redeemable with companies or organisations that sell wildlife-friendly products, the scheme could be expanded in use. Other companies wanting to help people support wildlife could also buy and give away ‘eco-crowns’ and people could pass them on if they can’t easily use them in their own homes.   We could even have a competition, engaging with schools, to help design and name the ‘eco-crowns’ and another for product designers, to decide on the material (re-cycled plastic?) and ensure that the coins could not be forged.   Before all this, the first step, is to get people like the London Assembly and the Mayor to see the benefits and back the concept, and then win the involvement of national bodies like estate agents as it gains wider support. Please sign the petition and help get my idea off the ground. This campaign was started by Maurice Melzak, a zoology graduate, naturalist and documentary film maker for more than 30 years. He first developed the idea in 2010, for Waterlow Park, where he gained the support of a local estate agent and a nesting box manufacturing company. It was featured on the BBC’s Springwatch. Maurice volunteers at Highgate Cemetery where he keeps honey bees and advises on wildlife issues. He obtained a Biffa landfill grant to purchase over 100 bird and bat boxes for the Cemetery which has made a significant difference to the bird life in the surrounding area. (see pic). With the need to save urban wildlife even more urgent, with a new Mayor and new support from politicians, he hopes this petition will get it off the ground and start to make a difference soon.

There is only a limited amount of money available now and it should be maximised to attract as many visitors as possible in the long term.

When Nicholas Johnston bought the Bantham estate, much against the wishes of most locals, he promised that he would leave it untouched. Now he is proposing to develop both the village and the beach, even going so far as to say that he will not be making the new housing affordable for local people (which, in a part of the country that has some of the most unaffordable housing available, should be a priority for any development, rather than lining the pockets of a man who has already proven he has no love for the people born and bred here). This is completely unacceptable to those of us who have enjoyed Bantham in its current form for so many decades, but more importantly to the people who live in the village. The infrastructure around Bantham village struggles as it is, this development would make a bad situation worse, in particular for the existing village residents, especially during the summer months. This Old Etonian, multi-millionaire friend of David Cameron, who has more than enough to survive on already, should not be allowed to profit from developing an unspoilt gem in our coastal countryside, especially when his proposals offer absolutely nothing for local people. You can read about his plans here... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4216762/Millionaire-bought-village-plans-transform-it.html Please note that I have no legal training, I have started this petition in the hope of showing the authorities that there is a depth of feeling against such inappropriate plans for a much loved local beauty spot. Please share this petition with as many people as possible, especially with people from the Bantham area and wider South Hams. Thank you for your support.

Fracking has been proposed in the area of Eckington. The people of the area do not want fracking to occur due to the damages that are linked to it such as Sink Holes, pollution to the water table, heavy plant traffic on small B roads and the eye-sore that it will cause to the local area.

Martin Mere is a unique bird sanctuary of international importance and is located in a designated Fracking zone under PEDL licence 165 (south). Fracking in the vicinity of Martin Mere with dangerous chemicals and explosives used in this process would destroy the delicate infrastructure that has made Martin Mere the unique bird and wildlife sanctuary that it is today. As Fracking progresses in Lancashire from the Fylde downwards Martin Mere will soon face destruction unless public outcry makes the government make this an exclusion zone.

When the bypass was built this was a small side road now it is a main road into the town , with two local schools that cross at the bottle neck, traffic calming implementations are totally inadequate and parking is none existent we need it sorted before a major accident happens