Nelson House is a sheltered housing block that is a community which cannot easily be replaced. Shoreline does not have the housing stock available to replace this community and its residents need special care due to their age and infirmities. Despite this and over 60% of the residents voting to keep their homes, Shoreline continues to plan to evict them all and destroy the area that many have lived in for years.Shoreline continue to put finances before this community which has made their feelings very clear during the so-called consultation.

What it would mean to the local community:  The loss of a tremendous amount of Greenbelt and farmland.  The loss of wildlife in the woodlands.  The loss of valuable open spaces.  Disruption of pathways.  Loss of natural break from the other nearby communities, creating an ugly urban sprawl.  An over capacity for local schools and doctors.  Heavy traffic on local roads which are not suitable for the amount of housing proposed. They are already heavily used and always in a poor state of repair.  More excessive housing would increase the carbon footprint.  The village would lose its heritage. It was in the Domesday Book of 1086.  According to National surveys Knowsley is already the 10th Unhealthiest place to live in the country! Knowsley Village is currently an attractive village at the heart of Knowsley authority.  Keep Knowsley Cleaner, Safer and Greener. We urge the council not to consider building on the Greenbelt or farmland, but to utilise many of the other concrete areas within Knowsley. These would more than meet the current housing demand.

Knowsley Council are planning to sell off thousands of acres of beautiful greenbelt land between Whiston, Cronton and Huyton, so that Redrow Homes can build thousands of houses. We suggest that Knowsley Council would be far better to use brownfield sites first, rather than sell off our valuable land for developers to make a fat profit from. The infrastructure around the area cannot cope with such a huge increase in houses. There are no jobs to support the increase in people, and public transport/road links are already full to bursting point. This development will also cause problems for people trying to register with GPs, schools, local amenities, local hospital services, as well as an increase in demand for services from the council itself. We cannot afford to lose one of our last remaining green spaces and all of the wildlife living in it. This will be crippling for the local area, as well as the areas around it such as Prescot, Cronton and parts of St Helens. Once it's gone, it's gone.

Local residents and neighbourhood businesses DO NOT WANT the London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham Planning and Development Control Committee to approve the Reserved Matters Application Ref 2014/03232/DET due soon, before a full independent public health impact assessment is carried out. If any demolition and reconstruction of this HUGE 77-acre West London district is to go ahead, the site and its neighbouring areas will suffer ground contamination, noise pollution (heavy demolition traffic + the accumulative impact of noise), vibration and risks to health during asbestos removal. Furthermore, air pollution in this area, already regularly breaching European air quality standards, make air quality monitoring stations for Hammersmith and Fulham residents essential.

It's part of the history of Molineux. On Tuesday the plans to demolish The Wanderer were revealed by a local paper. It’s a tragedy to lose part of the Wolves’ heritage and get a car park instead. Express and Star says: "The historic Molineux Street building used to be a popular haunt for thousands of Wolves fans but closed last year and sold to a mystery buyer. But it can now be revealed that Wolves bought the building from Enterprise Inns and have submitted an application to the city council for its demolition." http://www.expressandstar.com/news/2014/09/30/wolves-pub-to-be-demolished/

Keeping green space in the City and ensuring everyone can enjoy the park

Last week someone was taken to hospital after being hit by a car close to the Victoria Arms pub – just yards from where the crossing is supposed to be. The council first said the crossing would be "at least designed" by April 2012 and then they said it would be in place by the end of last year. Now they're saying it will be 6-8 weeks, but haven't appointed a contractor or set a start date. The money is there and ready to pay for the crossing. It's time for the council to stop promising things and start building. More info here: http://www.brentwoodgazette.co.uk/promised-paid-crossing/story-22967467-detail/story.html

Meriden Hall and it's landscaped grounds is a historic Grade 2* listed site, English Heritage have no objection to Pertemps erecting a new glass building which is bigger than Meriden Hall itself, removing trees and wildlife habitat - destroying a historic green space which will be gone forever for future generations. This seems particularly poignant following the centenary year of WW1 as it was the home of Captain Edward Bankes who lived at Meriden Hall with tributes to him shaping the history of the village (there's a link to his story further down the page). This development won't create any new jobs, so there's no benefit for the greater good, and there is a huge amount of empty office space across the Midlands. Green belt should only be built on in 'exceptional circumstances', and English Heritage are wrong, this building shouldn't even be a consideration. Sign the petition and if you've got more to say, you can also object to: [email protected] quoting application 2014/2232 More info and pictures of the proposal at: http://ww2.solihull.gov.uk/planning_new/dc/ViewApp.asp - then enter the year: 2014; Application no: 2232 An artist's impression can be viewed here - this has been rendered to only show the narrowest end of the building, and play down the actual scale (it is bigger than Meriden Hall itself) to make the development look more 'sympathetic' http://ww2.solihull.gov.uk/PlanAppDocs/2014/2232/2232_design_and_access_statement.pdf The closing date on the application doesn't give enough time for the committee to view objections properly, so please sign or object by the end of January. The story of Captain Edward Bankes and the tributes to him in Meriden http://www.midlandsgenealogy.com/5.html

Contact with green places and nature is important for our well-being. Ten thousand new people are coming to Tottenham as a result of planned development. But Tottenham has lost many green open spaces - so we need to save and improve what we have left.

The Peak District National Park is reputed to be the 2nd most visited national park in the world and when you visit this area it’s not hard to understand why, the area is truly breath-taking and living in the Peak District is a real privilege. Sadly not everyone who comes to the Peak District wants to enjoy the peace and serenity that the area offers. The area is under continuous assault by off road enthusiasts who come in significant numbers to rally up and down lanes and bridal ways for recreational sport, these off roaders have learned that if a footpath has ever been used by a horse and cart since the early 18oos they can apply to have the use changed from a footpath to a byway or even worse a Byway Open to All Traffic. To upgrade existing footpaths to byways of any designation blurs the distinction of what is permissible. Even the description of a route which allows for ‘limited use’ by motorised vehicles clouds the issue and implies some right of vehicular access. As we have seen in many cases across the national park – abuse of restricted byways by those seeking out green lanes to drive across, is a common fact. There is no meaningful policing of these routes as the police do not view such transgressions as a priority. This is detrimental to the fabric and essence of the national park and as the authorities have no power to overrule these decisions the applications virtually always get approval as the law is on the side of the applicant. It is an antiquated law that needs to change as a matter of urgency. At the very least - any national park should have special provisions to overrule decisions which will affect these beautiful areas, currently they do not have this power. We must make sure that these areas are left as we found them for future generations to enjoy in the same way, but once these paths are opened up to broader definitions of traffic, the effects and devastation are substantial. I will list a few below: 1. Erosion rapidly sets in and the ground is constantly churned up by powerful motorbikes, 4x4s, – causing once minimal footpaths to become broad lanes 2. The native wildlife and flora habitats are destroyed (some of these are rare or protected species) 3. Peat bog lands are reduced to slurry 4. Some off roaders not content with the path they have, widen their riding area in search of greater challenges, creating more damage 5. Local residents and tourists suffer as a result of the noise these machines bring to the area 6. Green lane traffic poses a danger to walkers and visitors due to the speed and aggression that some apply whilst in the area 7. Once the area is sufficiently churned up, the ground becomes unstable and when the heavy rains of winter start, the degrading effect happens much faster and the lands begins to wash away 8. Neither environmental impact nor local opposition are taken into consideration on decisions to redefine footpaths within the national park because the authorities are simply complying with the letter of the law 9. The number of routes designated as simple, peaceful footpaths within the national park reduces as the definitions are upgraded to encourage more forms of transport. The argument against this is huge and a book could be written about the devastating impact to the area, obviously we can’t do this here and indeed the applicants for this will have their own arguments about why they should have access to the land. Our decision to fight this is not because we don’t like the people who carry out this sport it’s because we value our countryside as it should be. We will add that a large number of disused quarries and certain farmlands charge a small fee for riders to enjoy the ultimate off road experience in purpose-made environments so why on earth would you want to ruin nature at its very best Please support and share with your friends

If this were to go ahead with this proposal it would have massive repercussions on not only a social but a health scale for the people living in the residential areas around the Hightown and Mallusk areas. This will also have massive finacial implications on the tax payer who will be footing the 230 million bill for this project. Bombardier have put forward a tender for this waste which they would recycle into sustainable energy to power Shorts/Bombardier. This has no cost to the tax payer and will go along way towards saving jobs at Bobardier/Shorts who are a major employer here in Northern Ireland.

At Fineshade Woods in Northamptonshire, Forest Holidays are planning to erect 70 deluxe timber lodges with ancillary accommodation, plus a new road, within the woods against the wishes of all the local Parish Councils and with over 200 objections raised. Authoritative organisations such as the Wildlife Trust the Council’s advisors, RSPB, badger groups, bat groups, butterfly organisations and ecologists of many hues have all objected but their views appear to be being ignored by the local planning authority. Requests for at least an Environmental Impact Assessment have been rejected out of hand with statements that there will be no significant environmental damage when 40+ hectares of semi ancient woodland on a Local Wildlife Site that is subject of an application to be considered as a potential SSSI are subject to development. At nine other Forests in the UK and with at least two further planning applications in the pipeline as well planning applications for additional chalets in existing projects, Forest Holidays appear to be being given Carte Blanche to take possession of public Forests and convert them into a private business; they are supported by Lloyds Development Capital and the Forestry Commission. In Feb 2011 the “save our forests” campaign was considered to be over when the Government said the forests would not be privatised. The Forestry Commission and Directors of Forest Holidays and their financial backers appear to have reversed this policy by taking possession of public forests on 125 year leases and using that natural resource for their personal gain. This must be against the stated policy of the current Government and against the wishes of the 700,000 people who voted supporting the original save our Forest campaign.