After signing this petition please formally object via http://didcot.space (will redirect you to the Garden Town plan page) or send an email to [email protected] Comments can be as short or long as you like - just make it clear you object to building on Ladygrove Park. Consultation on these proposals has been extended to 28th February, so please do it now. Thank you! There are plans for 15,000 new houses to be built in Didcot as part of the "Didcot Garden Town" project. This is more than those planned for Bicester Garden Town, recently described as a "dog's breakfast" with ecologically important flower rich meadows being lost to housing. Proposals for Didcot have been announced that are WORSE than first feared. They include building technical office space and accommodation over roughly half of the Ladygrove recreation ground and play park. The remnants would be developed such that there would be no substantial level open green space for casual sports or recreation. A new road cutting across the play park and flats on the play park, opposite the Willowbrook and behind the football club with no additional parking serve to top of this awful proposal. The current morning congestion around the primary school would be intolerable. Our facilities, green spaces and paths integral to our local parkrun are threatened. You can see the briefings here : https://didcotgardentown.commonplace.is/news/2017/01/20/stakeholder-representative-group-presentation-19-january-2017 Campaigners in Bicester have been to court twice to try to protect their environment. If we are to protect our green spaces and amenities the time to act is now, by obtaining a simple undertaking from the project team before their plans are fully formed. If you want to save them please sign this petition and share it with your friends. Thank you! (You can see the Ladygrove areas initially marked out for development on the final pages of these two official downloads published by the Didcot Garden Town planners http://www.southoxon.gov.uk/node/18434 and this http://www.southoxon.gov.uk/node/18447 )

This has been a family run pub for 17 years. If these applications are allowed to pass, the landlord, a 68 year old man will be made homeless and the building will be redeveloped. Jonathon and Oz will no longer be running The White Bear. The end result is to re-open the pub after the refurbishments have been completed as a much smaller venue (lowered ceiling, reduced floor space) with no kitchen and no function room. This will mean no more home-cooked traditional food, no parties etc and with the rents this property company demand this will not be a sustainable business for anyone. They wish to make changes to the front of the listed building as well as redevelop the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th floors into self-contained flats. This will not be affordable housing for the residents of Islington, this will be yet more flats that local residents cannot afford to live in. We believe that, as a local community of residents and businesses, we need to pull together and fight for our local pub and stop allowing the 'big-cats' to force local residents out of areas that have been their homes their whole lives. This is important, not just for The White Bear, but for all of us.

We love the Lower Lea Valley marshes (Leyton marshes, Walthamstow marshes and Hackney marshes). We love having such an amazing, unique, open green space on our doorstep, a place to reconnect with nature and let our imaginations run wild right in the heart of one of the most densely populated cities in the world. And we want to make sure the marshes are there for future generations to enjoy. This is why we are devastated to learn that the London Borough of Waltham Forest has launched a consultation on their vision for the Lea Valley Eastside (http://walthamforest-consult.limehouse.co.uk/portal/leabridge/leyton), which involves rezoning the large swathe of green open space around The WaterWorks Centre - part of Leyton marshes - for housing. This land is Metropolitan Open Land, which means it should be protected from all inappropriate development, just like Green Belt land. If these plans are approved, then the spectre of our marshes disappearing under high-rise tower blocks comes one step closer. We have until the end of January to tell the Council - loud and clear - that we will not tolerate building on our marshes. If we can stop these plans in their tracks, then we have a chance to save our marshes for the future.

Q: Why is the building important? A: Dunelm House was completed in 1966 by the Architects' Co-Partnership and engineered by Ove Arup. Ove Arup was born in Heaton, Newcastle Upon-Tyne and was one of the greatest engineers of the 20th Century. Arup played a crucial role in pioneering engineering works worldwide, serving most notably as the designer and supervisor for Durham’s own Kingsgate Bridge (Grade I listed), and as design engineer for the Sydney Opera House. Arup, an honorary Geordie, considered Kingsgate Bridge one of the most important projects of his career, requesting that his ashes be scattered from the bridge following his death in 1988. Kingsgate and Dunelm House are physically connected, as a marriage of structures that depend upon each other. This makes Dunelm House and Kingsgate Bridge two of the most significant structures in the UK, if not Europe, if not the World! And they are on our doorstep in Durham. Why would you want to lose or damage either? Q: It’s a load of ugly dirty grey concrete - knock it down. A: Yes, it is dirty. It is white concrete. And it needs a clean. If you had not cleaned your house for 51 years, it would look grim too. The building needs major work, which Durham University calculate would cost £14.7m. It might seem like a lot of money, but this is a fraction of what recent building projects have required, and is comparable to renovations and extensions to other university buildings. And just think what it could cost to demolish it, bury it in a landfill (how unsustainable!) and rebuild on the same site. Q: The building 'is not able to accommodate new uses, so we should demolish it. A: This statement has been reached as part of the University’s ‘strategic masterplan’, which wants to put another building use on the site of Dunelm House. Of course, this doesn't work without significant investment. So perhaps the masterplan has not been adequately evidenced or justified in trying to impose a new function on an existing building - it’s like trying to fit a square peg in a round hole. Why not simply adjust the masterplan? Demolition is highly unsustainable, wasteful and very costly financially and environmentally. It should always be the last move when all else fails, and your building is literally falling down. Dunelm House is not falling down - it was designed by one of the greatest engineers of the 20th Century. Q: But the building has a leaky roof! A: Yes it does. All roofs leak at some point (even Durham Cathedral’s roof leaks - it doesn't mean we should knock it down). Most new roofs are only guaranteed for 20 years. Dunelm House's roof is 51 years old, and so like any other building it needs a new roof! Durham University has been aware of the leaky roof for over 10 years. Now is the time to fix it. Q: It will cost too much to repair it. Isn’t it cheaper to just build new? A: Durham University have carried out detailed estimations on the redesign and repair estimated at £14.7m. Dunelm House has a gross internal area of 3980sqm, making the refurbishment cost an estimated £3600 per sqm. That seems like a lot of money, but it is cheaper than the cost of Durham Universities new Ogden Center for Fundamental Physics (the new abstract timber building) which is costing £11.5m for 2,478 sq. m – that’s a whopping £4640 per sqm! Refurbishing the building could be cheaper than building new. A completely new building on Dunelm House’s site could cost millions more due to the cost of demolition and disposal to put Dunelm House into a landfill, not to forget the complexities of the site due to the topography, retaining walls, structures required and access issues that make this project site very complex – and as a consequence very costly! Q: We want a shiny new building by some famous international starchitect. That will put Durham on the map and make it a world class city! A: Durham is already a world class city, with a world class University. It has a diverse architectural grain from across the past millennium, and this includes the twentieth century. Durham University has been an amazing patron of modern architecture, particularly during the 1960s. So why undo that good work and lose it all now? Yes, hire great architects with lots of imagination and creativity. BUT, please look at what other highly successful refurbishment projects of Modernist buildings there have been. Look at Park Hill refurbishment in Sheffield (Hawkins Brown) or the Barbican refurbishment in London (AHMM) completed in past 10 years. Both hugely successful developments, prestigious, award winning, high profile, world class buildings that simply recognise and celebrate the value of Twentieth Century Architecture. Go on Durham, you can do that too!

This farm has become an integral and important part of East Birmingham life. It has been visited by hundreds of thousands of families since opening many years ago. It offers an opportunity for children, many of who are from an underprivileged background, an opportunity to see farm animals at very close quarters. They are able to engage with the animals and ask questions of the friendly staff. It is a local institution. The farm also offers a magnificent opportunity for local young adults with a variety of special needs and challenging backgrounds to volunteer as "workers" on the farm. They give their time freely, their only reward being the personal progress they make in terms of independence and interaction with society. It would be a disgraceful reflection on all of Birmingham's Council Tax payers and Councillors for these vulnerable young adults to see all of their hard work dashed and their achievements (both in terms of the farm and their personal development) destroyed.

This is important as there are no venues available at reasonable cost to encourage the continuance of an alternative social life within the town centre other than that provided by drinking and gambling establishments or mass market coffee houses. Without there being a reason to frequent the Town centre it will soon be no more. The building is in itself a rather splendid example of a public assembly building of the early twentieth century and would be missed from the streetscape

We as locals of the windmill feel very strongly about keeping our pub. The Windmill has been on this site since the 1800s, the windmill caters for all age groups, There are 8 dart teams which plays Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday. On Tuesday afternoon and Thursday night there is bingo which is supported well. On Wednesday and Saturday nights there is entertainment on Friday and Sunday there is Karaoke which is has a big following. Good food is served throughout the week at a reasonable price, and a great carvery on Sunday which you normally have to book to get in. Not forgetting the Real ale which are served at reasonable prices. The locals have also over the years raised £1000's of pound for charity most recently over two night we have raised £1600 for a defibrillator. Please lets not lose another local pub which is doing well.

I live beside the Park and walk my dogs there every day. Not knowing much about this problem, at first I thought I might be selfish objecting to the expansion of the Football Club. But then I realised that Meadow Park had been given to the town over 100 years ago for the community to use - not to be owned by an exclusive corporate company for profit which, needing to expand again, should be accepting national guidelines and moving further away from a town centre anyway. It should certainly not be taking community property of such practical and intrinsic value to the whole community who may or may not follow the league. A couple of weeks ago, there was a 13 strong flock of geese making a pit stop on our little park which prompted another impromptu discussion about the value of every blade of grass or tree contained there. Non of that is up for sale or lease to anyone. Obviously this little oasis in the midst of cement, patrimony of the community, antidote to the stress of urban living and venue for community events right in the middle of the town is valuable. The Boreham Wood Football Club has been allowed to gradually encroach on the park and now wants to take, fence off and profit from our space so what is left cannot accommodate traditional town events in the future Besides the need to protect dwindling urban park space (Borehamwood is growing alarmingly), Meadow Park is anyway used for many other outdoor activities. And there are football youth groups playing every week (they are not permitted to use 'the expensive' Football Club facilities which are private). If lots of us come together to sign the petition, we might be able to convince the council to stop the plans.

The section from the junction with Shelford Road to the junction with Addenbrooke's road is now much more built up than previously. Many children cross this road to attend Trumpington Meadows primary school. Reducing speed by 10mph will reduce the risk of death in a collision by 40%.

The view from King Henry's Mound in Richmond Park to St Paul's was created in 1711 by the planting of an avenue of trees. It is one of the ten protected views in London. The protection stops high-rise buildings encroaching on the sightline, either between the Mound and St Paul's or behind St Paul's. The view is now threatened by the construction of Manhattan Loft Gardens at Stratford. Already the building clearly compromises the profile of the whole of the dome of St Paul's, in contravention of the Mayor's planning guidance that requires a "clear sky background". The building was given planning permission with GLA acquiescence, without reference to the protected view. The development undermines the whole system of protected views, questions the competence of the GLA planners and destroys a view that has been cherished by Londoners for 300 years.

London is overcrowded. A brand new capital city would be a showcase for a modern outward looking country. It would provide thousands of homes where there were jobs.

Libraries have been under threat across the country. Sheffield has already seen Walkley library sold to commercial interests. Now our council has opened up a review into commercial uses for the Central Library, with the possibility it will become a five-star hotel. The Central Library is a meeting space for groups and individuals, hosts talks by local and national authors and helps people use the internet. It is also a beautiful building, purpose built as a public space, which the general public can currently enjoy. The story of our beautiful art deco Central Library began in 1929, to a design by W. G. Davies and was conceived as part of a plan to create a civic (public) square. Today, the library houses Sheffield's largest general lending and reference collection. The Graves Art Gallery sits on the third floor with a gift shop and cafe and the Library Theatre, a space for local and student theatre companies, lives in the basement. It also houses a children's library. From the start, this building was imagined as a public space from top to bottom and should remain as such.