There is already a Lidl store within a 5 minute drive of the proposed new development. The new development will potentially create more traffic in an already congested area.

The benefits and reasons to have public outdoor gyms in parks are well established. The outdoor public gyms enhance the local area, have positive impact on the public health locally and can improve the quality and versatility of its green and open spaces. However, the decision where to install these must be made in a transparent manner by the Mayor and the Council. Research conducted by Liverpool John Moores University found: • 75% or more of participants believed that outdoor gyms are easily accessible to them. • Beneficial for their health. • Enjoyable to use - 70% of participants find exercising outdoors is more beneficial for health than exercising indoors. 80% of participants find exercise more enjoyable when outdoors than indoors. In addition, outdoor public gyms in parks help in: 1. Cutting obesity - encouraging healthy living for all. 2. Providing free exercise equipment, enabling those who do not have the money for a gym membership to exercise. 3. Proving a family-friendly environment - a great way for parents to encourage their children to exercise. Even if children are too young to use the equipment themselves seeing adults working out in an environment that they are familiar with helps to make this seem like a natural part of daily life. As well as this, outdoor gym equipment in parks is an ideal way for families with older children to get out and exercise together. Cllr Maium Miah

The site is in a small village where many buildings are of historical interest and importance. The proposed buildings are not in keeping with the surrounding area. The plans on the High Street show demolition of single storey buildings to be replaced with four storey high buildings. The plans show a new modern building that would look very out of place in this part of the village. The plans also show extensive work at the back of the property. The impact of such a huge building project would have a detrimental effect on local residents and businesses. There would be disruption caused by heavy goods vehicles with limited access to the site on an already busy small High Street. The consultation period ends on 13/9/2017. To view the planning proposal and pictures of proposed redevelopment go to: https://fastweb.sutton.gov.uk/fastweb/detail.asp?AltRef=C2017/77528&ApplicationNumber=c2017%2F77528&AddressPrefix=&submit1=Go

The South Downs National Park has a duty 'to conserve and enhance natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage' and a 'duty to foster social well-being of local communities within the National Park'. We demand that the South Downs National Park adheres to their duties and allows us a say in what happens in our village. This beautiful flower-rich hay meadow is at the edge of our village and if it is destroyed the meadow will be lost and we will merge with the next village of Watersfield. The two distinct villages will become a small town. Our village is small, we have a small school, a pub and a church. Our post office is only open 3 mornings a week. There are no jobs and you need a car to get anywhere! Flower-rich hay meadows were once a common sight in the countryside but sadly since the 1930's they have declined by a shocking 97%. (source: PlantLife). Part of the UK’s natural and cultural heritage, nearly 7.5 million acres of wildflower meadows have now been lost. Meadows like this are now sadly very rare. They are a crucial habitat for farmland wildlife. "We regularly see Barn Owls sweeping across the meadow late at night. Buzzards and Red Kites following the farmer when he cuts the meadow for hay. A fox and her cubs have been seen playing only this week in the meadow" said Stephanie Croft, a local resident. "I have lived in Coldwaltham for over 50 years, having been born and bred nearby. The destruction of this meadow hurts and worries me, thinking of my children's children never being able to run in or see the flower meadow." said Jasmine Robinson another local resident.

We are getting on average one major accident a month, the latest today and only four weeks or so a young chap on a motorcycle was airlifted to the QMC . Do we really have to wait until someone dies before we do something? The speed limit on the A6 between Derby and Buxton is 50 mph, we are only a b road.

Any approval to build, is one that has huge negative impacts, to the open space and special character of our coastline forever, the impact to the cliff integrity/stability. The photo shows a site highlighted as being built on, this build is now seeking approval for unapproved works. It is important because in 2015 over 1,000 people signed an online petition through change.org ( Protect Newquay Clifftops) to two applications to build on gardens at Island Crescent, Newquay. There were further objections made to Cornwall Council. This lead to one application ( front garden) being REFUSED by Cornwall Council, then taken to at appeal by the applicants and Dismissed by the Inspector. The other application ( rear garden)being WITHDRAWN. Yet they have built to that plan anyway!? Since then the applications have continued and concerns about them and their content raised to the planning department. Now a second APPEAL PENDING on the front garden. The applications have not stopped, with the applicant not adhering to two permissions on the rear garden.Leading to enforcement action, RETROSPECTIVE PLANNING PERMISSION PENDING to be decided early September. We need Sajid Javid MP, and Michael Gove MP. to: Protect our treasured and unique coastline and support: 1) The public voice of the community and wider. 2) Newquay Town Council. 3)Our Mayor past and present 4)The members of Cornwall Council Planning department against cliff top development ( last vote on most recent application 12-2 against proposal to build) 5)The Planning Inspector on reasons for his previous decision to Dismiss the application 6)Our local MP Steve Double 7) Facebook page Protect Newquay Clifftops This area once protected by the policies of the Restormel Borough Plan no longer are until the NNP is is in place. We need it not to fall into an area of no protection that would allow it to be built on. These are garden grabbing applications, this is not "brownfield land" and should not be seen as such. The National Planning Policy Framework encourages the community to engage, to have voice within its community. Please help the voice of this community and wider that seek to protect, preserve the coastal fringe of Newquay get the weight required to give credit to the development stages of the Newquay Neighbourhood plan to Protect our coastline from such proposals.

In a time of so many pub closures, we feel that BeerHeadz would provide a licenced premises to the area that will compliment the existing pubs/bars in the Bailgate area. If allowed to trade they'll provide employment in the area, promote Lincoln through pub tourism helping out local transport and eateries. Being free of Tie, they'll also be able to support the local brewery scene. They'll promote responsible drinking in a controlled environment, much more than the less controlled off sales from the supermarkets!

Because; 1the tree was much bigger 2 Art and beauty must not be destroyed by beaurocracy 3 it has no roof ,it is just a platform made of wood on a remnant of a trunk of an ancient tree that has become functional art 4 council money should be spent more wisely

The vast majority (84%) of people do not want fracking to happen. In June 2016 Lancashire County Council voted not to give planning permission to Cuadrilla after listening to local people's concerns about the effects of fracking on the water, air and soil. However, Cuadrilla appealed to the Secretary of State, who then overruled Lancashire. Work commenced at the fracking site on Preston New Road in January 2017. A E Yates have played a major role in supplying Caudrilla with workers, materials, plant and haulage. Without Yate's services, Cuadrilla will not be able to proceed so rapidly with fracking Lancashire

Current planning law states that if a developer won’t make enough profit on a new development, they can ignore a council's regulations about building affordable and social housing. Leaked documents from several developers have shown that the maths they use to work out their profit margins are purposefully misleading, allowing them to claim they will make less profit than is accurate on a development by undervaluing the prices of the houses they will sell and over-costing the labour. To combat this Islington, Greenwich, Lambeth and Bristol councils have introduced a policy that forces developers "viability assessments" to be made public. By bringing these dodgy maths into the public domain, Councils, campaigning groups and individuals will be able to hold developers to account and force them to use more honest maths.

Current planning law states that if a developer won’t make enough profit on a new development, they can ignore a council's regulations about building affordable and social housing. Leaked documents from several developers have shown that the maths they use to work out their profit margins are purposefully misleading, allowing them to claim they will make less profit than is accurate on a development by undervaluing the prices of the houses they will sell and over-costing the labour. To combat this Islington, Greenwich, Lambeth and Bristol councils have introduced a policy that forces developers "viability assessments" to be made public. By bringing these dodgy maths into the public domain, Councils, campaigning groups and individuals will be able to hold developers to account and force them to use more honest maths.

This makes use of the paths that are already in place alongside most roads in towns and cities. Generally each road has two paths. For example the north to south path could be for pedestrians, the south to north for bicycles. More zebra crossings would be required to allow people to get to their side of the road. Side roads exiting onto main roads would need ’stop' signs rather than ’give way’ signs to ensure the safety of cyclists and pedestrians. The onus should be on the cars to stop as they are the ’stronger’ vehicles, can start and stop more readily and are the more dangerous in every sense. It would subtly shift the emphasis away from the cars dominion. Perceived danger deters people from cycling. From personal health to environmental issues, the fewer cars compared to pedestrians and cyclists there are the better. Why continue the way we are? There are so many issues to face, this is a small step in the right direction, it would not be costly to implement and could revolutionise the roads for us all. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/aug/04/fewer-cars-not-electric-cars-beat-air-pollution-says-top-uk-adviser-prof-frank-kelly The attached article, courtesy of Guardian News & Media Ltd, argues that we need less cars of all types (including electric) on the roads: “Prof Frank Kelly said that while electric vehicles emit no exhaust fumes, they still produce large amounts of tiny pollution particles from brake and tyre dust, for which the government already accepts there is no safe limit. …Toxic air causes 40,000 early deaths a year in the UK" Time for a change.