|Home | Bookmark | Tell||Active petitions in over 75 countries||Follow GoPetition|
Petition Tag - planning
Lidl UK propose to redevelop the derelict Elton Gasworks site into a neighbourhood foodstore, and trade/employment units.
We have recently submitted a planning application to Bury MBC, which outlines our proposals to transform the site into a modern, attractive development. This store will not only bring Lidl’s popular range of quality products at discount prices, but also significant new employment opportunities to the area.
This development will regenerate what is currently a disused derelict site and bring a modern, bespoke development to the area. A Lidl store will help revive this location and provide safe, secure and welcoming environment. All of our stores are built to be very energy efficient and have a minimal carbon footprint.
We are designing our store to ensure that our building is not out of scale with the local properties, and to ensure we do not adversely affect our neighbours.
St. Ann’s Well is an important historic site in Nottingham which deserves thorough professional archaeological investigation. The need for this has become urgent as the City Council has granted planning permission for houses to be built on the site.
St. Ann’s Well, formerly Robin Hood’s Well, was considered to be the main Nottingham site connected with Robin Hood until the 19th century, and fits the description of the location of his hideout.
The Well was the destination for a procession of most of the citizens of the town, led by the mayor, each Easter Monday throughout the middle ages. Deer were culled for a venison feast for all.
Water from the spring was considered to have healing properties and the Knights Templars built a stone immersion chamber here to treat skin diseases. This chamber was in use through the centuries until 1887 when it was covered over by workmen before a railway bridge was built.
Around 1600 an early brick house was built here for Nottingham’s woodward and this building became a public house, visited by royalty, including James I. The house also displayed “relics” of Robin Hood and hosted a society called the Brotherhood of the Bow. Some interesting artefacts have been found here, including a medieval gold ring and coin. Since it was an important focus for a thousand years it is likely there are more to be discovered.
St. Ann’s Well faded from public memory after the railway bridge was constructed over the site. The bridge was demolished in the 1960s and a pub built on the site. The pub too has now been demolished. As a result, there is currently an opportunity for an archaeological investigation to dig down to the level of the stone chamber and locate building remains and artefacts from the area’s history.
Planning permission requires that the developer funds some archaeological investigation on the site. But this will only be shallow, to the depth that new building may damage. The immersion chamber and medieval relics are likely to be deeper underground, covered by soil from the railway embankment. Once houses are built and the land is split up into separate ownerships it is unlikely it can ever be investigated again.
So far, Nottingham City Council has shown little interest in the site, though they promote the cjty’s connections with Robin Hood. We don’t want the opportunity to be lost to research a place with a strong connection with the outlaw which became an important part of Nottingham’s heritage.
St. Ann's Well-Wishers
The Radnor Estate has recently submitted amended plans to build a 59 dwelling housing estate on land currently occupied by Folkestone Garden Centre and close to Grade II listed Ingles Manor and historically termed Ingles Meadow.
Approaching 100 individuals and groups have submitted objections on the SDC website and a group of concerned local residents have already collected over a thousand signatures on a handwritten petition, which they intend to present to the Shepway Development Control Committee before it meets to determine the planning application.
There has been a garden centre on the site since the early 1970’s. When planning permission was originally sought for the Garden Centre, the amenity value for local residents was emphasized. The town centre location means it is accessible on foot or by public transport and it also draws a huge number of visitors from outside Folkestone. The parkland setting is a green oasis in the middle of the town, an important centre for the community and a haven for wild life, complete with badger setts. There is widespread distress at the prospect of losing Folkestone Garden Centre and the popular “Blossoms” café. Folkestone Town Council policy 3, which is a constraint on the site’s development, makes provision for keeping important groups of trees. Despite this the plan is to fell over 60 of them.
Grade II listed Ingles Manor dates back to the late 17th or early 18th century when it was constructed as a farmhouse and a number of farm outbuildings still exist. It currently houses the Channel Business Centre. According to council policy, any development should respect Grade II listed Ingles Manor and the special nature of the conservation area and yet 3 storey town houses, 11 metres high, are proposed in front of Ingles Manor, dramatically changing the nature of this part of the Conservation Area.
The Draft Core Strategy document for Shepway states that the area which includes the proposed development site, entitled the central/west development arc, provides for some residential development provided it can be justified by enabling the full commercial potential of the area to be realized. 70 people are currently employed here but this number may reduce dramatically if the application is given the go ahead.
The site is bordered by Jointon Road and Castle Hill Avenue which are in the next phase of the parking scheme introduced to ease congestion. The sewers on Castle Hill Avenue and Shorncliffe Road flood after heavy rain, making life difficult for pedestrians and drivers. There have been a number of road accidents in the section of Castle Hill Avenue which will carry increased traffic if the proposed development goes ahead.
The owners of Oak Wharf - the small plot of land in Oak Cottages between #10 & #11 - have submitted a new planning application. The previous application was for five three-story two-bedroom townhouses - ten bedrooms. The new application has four three-story three-bedroom townhouses - 12 bedrooms.
So while the density was criticised in the previously rejected application, the new application has more bedrooms.
Residents of Oak Cottages / Fox Villas met to look at the application and they are unanimous in their objection to the proposal.
The planning process only considers planning-related objections. They consider these to be:
- design and layout
- external appearance and materials
- access for disabled people
- loss of daylight, sunlight and privacy of neighbours
- noise nuisance
- traffic and parking issues
- loss of, or an increase in, a particular type of use of land
The proposal is from developers and architects who are keen to get the most they can on the site. In addition to being inappropriate for the site and area, the application does not meet minimum requirements for a planning application in a conservation area. Essential details about materials are missing, some of the required drawings are missing. There is also very convenient selective reference to policy by the applicants to make the modernists and over-sized application appear to be within permitted policy.
It fails on many fronts. Unfortunately there is limited confidence in the guidance of the Planning Department to take a balanced view given that it recommended the previous application for approval (the Planning Committee rejected it having also questioned the content of the report to Committee).
It is remarkably difficult to get an application like this rejected. We were successful last time in part by mobilizing support for the character and charm of the area down by The Fox Pub. We will be doing all we can to obtain comments and support from relevant bodies.
If you feel able to please join us in rejecting the planning proposal and petition against it.
Following further discussions with the Planners at Northampton Borough Council, Lidl will be submitting a revised planning application in March 2013 for the re-development of 25-29 Gambrel Road, Northampton for a Lidl food store with a 1063 sq m sales area and 79 car parking spaces.
The site is immediately adjacent to Sixfields Retail Park and sits in an area of mixed uses including retail and light industrial units. Currently the premises consist of a car wash, a second hand car dealership and vacant land, which are becoming increasingly unsightly.
Lidl’s proposal will regenerate the site by creating a contemporary and modern store, in close proximity to the residents of Duston to facilitate further choice for consumers in the locality as well as creating up to 40 new jobs in the area.
Sainsbury's want to build a 3,773 square metre store at Steart Farm off Wedmore Road in Cheddar. The store will also host a cafe and will be open from 7am until 10pm.
Cheddar is a rural village with numerous supermarkets already available just a short drive away. The open, beautiful, landscape in this part of Cheddar will not be enhanced by the erection of an ugly new supermarket, service yard and car park. Sainsbury's will rely on visits by cars as bus services past the store are infrequent. There will be significant negative impact on traffic congestion and road safety. The paths near the proposed store are narrow or nonexistent and the scheme does not propose any improvements, in fact there is nothing in this scheme to benefit Cheddar or its residents.
Village centre shops, as well as those in surrounding villages will suffer from trade leakage and some may close. Cheddar residents already leave the village for their bulk shopping so that they can use a wider range of facilities in nearby towns, not just the supermarket, and for many residents those trips will continue even if a supermarket is built here.
In light of the current demolition threat to Trent Lane Depot (REF 12/01616/PADA), I have put an application in for listing with English Heritage. I hope you will agree that this site is of special historical interest.
It would be a grave mistake for the city to bury one of its proudest achievements, which from 1928 to its decline in 1970s was known as "Nottingham's Highway to the Sea". There have been sound competition proposals to save the buildings and develop the site but the owners The Homes and Communities Agency appear more interested in maximizing profit and speed, rather than heritage, place-making or design.
A little gentle persuasion from the City Council or English Heritage is perhaps all that is needed. The situation is urgent as the demolition team are currently setting up their equipment. I am currently liaising with English Heritage, The Twentieth Century Society and British Waterways.
English Heritage have informed me that they have put this in for emergency review early next week. Any delay to the demolition will be beneficial.
The Wards Corner Community Coalition have been working to halt the proposed demolition of Wards Corner since 2007. Developer Grainger want to replace the Latin American & African indoor market and the 3 surrounding streets of independent businesses and affordable homes with a soulless block of private rented flats and space for national retail.
On 25th June 2012 Haringey's Planning Committee granted permission to Grainger's plan in-spite of huge opposition from local people including over 400 objections from both the local community and national organisations. This is in addition to the 1, 800 objections to Grainger’s previous application.
Grainger's proposal is a step backwards for Tottenham and would see the loss of many independent local businesses and valued heritage assets. The demolition of Wards Corner would change for the worse the cultural diversity and character of Tottenham and would irrevocably damage the resiliant and growing local economy that has been developed by local traders over many years.
Although Haringey passed the plan the fight is not over yet.
We are petitioning Boris Johnson Mayor of London to call-in the application and determine it for himself. This is the last chance we have of getting this disastrous plan refused as it should have been by Haringey.
The Wards Corner Community Coalition want to see change at Wards Corner and propose a community-led, historically sensitive regeneration of the site, providing new space for local businesses and much needed community facilities.
For more information on the campaign go to:
We are a group of local residents and business owners who share a range of concerns about proposals by a company called ASH (Renishaw) Ltd to gain planning permission to use a site to de-comtaminate industrial waste (including hazardous materials), on Station Road, Renishaw, Derbyshire.
Our concerns include:-
People are fearful over the long term health implications of breathing in the emissions from a plant decontaminating hazardous wastes.
Above all we are united in the belief that Station Road is the wrong site for a hazardous waste decontamination facility.
The site is in the center of the village and is too close to residential homes and schools, as well as to incompatible businesses, the Trans Pennine Trail, Chesterfield Canal and the confluence of the rivers Doe Lea and Rother.
Access to the site (via Station Road and adjoining roads/country lanes) is also considered unsuitable and unsafe for the estimated 40 HGV movements per day carrying waste to and from the site.
We are raising awareness of this planning application so that members of the community are able to inform themselves about the development and, if they are concerned, provide them the opportunity to express their views to Derbyshire County Council who will make the final decision as to whether to refuse or approve planning permission.
Help us in our efforts to get Planning approval for a soft play area in Carryduff.
The centre would provide a fun safe environment for all ages and is undoubtedly needed! Plan so far includes a large playframe, a toddler area, a multi-sensory room and fantastic restaurant.
Please let us know your thoughts and add your name and postcode to push us along... spread the word!
In 2011 a new development of around a hundred allotment plots was created on a field in Armitage, Staffordshire. The take up was rapid and within months local people were producing fruit and vegetables for themselves.
A number of small sheds were erected on some of the plots, but Lichfield District Council soon served notice that the sheds required planning permission as they are permanent and substantial structures, and should be removed immediately. Since then it has been made clear that should planning permission be applied for it will be denied.
We believe that a 6 foot by 4 foot shed does not require planning permission for the following reasons;
The sheds are small in size.
The sheds are not physically attached to the ground in any way.
The sheds have no services such as water or electricity.
The sheds are easily moveable.
Many other councils have decided that 6 foot by 4 foot sheds on allotments do not require planning permission, and LDC could do themselves. The reason given by one councillor was “it is sensible to allow allotment holders to have a small shed on site in which to store various equipment”.
Sheds are a valuable asset to allotments; they have an environmental benefit by removing the need to travel by car with a boot full of tools, as well as by linking with water butts to reduce the use of the water supply. They make allotments neater and tidier allowing tools and other bits and bobs to be stored when not in use.
The allotments have rapidly become a valuable resource to the local community, used by young and old alike, and accessible to so many because of the sheds. Without sheds there is a real danger the use of the allotments will become limited.
Proposed plans to put offices on the skatepark site remain.
The council have said that an alternative location for the skatepark would have to be provided.
BUT there is no specific alternative for relocating the park.
The draft plans are not specific enough to guarantee the future of the skatepark and we ask that you join us in petitioning the planning department of Kensington and Chelsea council further.
!Do not allow the loss of this amazing community resource!
Thank you for your support, please spread the word!
Vale of Glamorgan Council have identified an area of land off Lavernock Road reaching to the coast as a potential area to build 450 houses.
We think the land should not be used for housing for the following reasons:
- the road and transport system in the area would be over-stretched
- the local schools are already full
- the land is currently used for agriculture and commercially as grazing for horses
- we want to reserve a green area between Lavernock and Sully to preserve the unique identities of the two areas
- we don't want 10 years of building work
- we believe additional housing, traffic and surface water would have a negative impact on Cosmeston Lakes Country Park
The proposed development of affordable housing on the land at the north side of Drum Estate will impinge on the green belt and have a massive impact on the environment of the Candlemakers Estate.
As well as the loss of amenity of the woodland and open space and the loss of wildlife habitat, this proposed development will double the traffic volumes at the entrance to the estate with the resultant increase in noise and pollution.
It will directly impact on property values and insurance costs and change the entire nature of the estate. If the development goes ahead, there will be an extended period of disruption and disturbance which will end in the area being forever changed.
PETITION to BRING BACK the DAYLINER
Commuter rail is a viable and desirable form of transportation in many cities around the world. By signing this petition you confirm your desire to use commuter rail as a public transit option for HRM.
The initial proposal is to continue the feasibility study for the section from Enfield, along the Bedford Highway, to Halifax over existing CN tracks.
Your support will be used to ensure that a commuter rail option is included in all future discussions about transit planning in the HRM. The general results of the petition will be promoted through the local media and a detailed copy will be used in direct discussion with HRM Councillors and staff.
You may choose to show your support for one or more of the following advantages that appeal to you:
- Commuter rail is cheaper than driving. The monthly cost of owning, maintaining, and parking a vehicle used mainly for commuting is considerably higher than the cost of a public transit pass.
- Commuter rail is more efficient for commuting than using the roads. Weather and road conditions, construction, or collisions can significantly impact travel time by car but are mostly negligable by rail.
- Commuter rail is more convenient, less stressful than taking a car. The time spent commuting can almost entirely be productive time, rather than the frustration of navigating a vehicle in peak traffic conditions.
- Commuter rail reduces the number of single-occupancy vehicles on the roads. The number of vehicles (rather than the number of commuters) defines the majority of the cost for road repairs, road widening, fuel prices, parking space, environmental impact. By offering commuter rail, HRM can be pro-active in dealing with the conflict between growth and sustainability. This will keep our city livable for our future and that of our families.
- Commuter rail benefits everyone. Unlike adding more cars, busses, or ferries to the transportation options, commuter rail can reduce peak hour travel time, traffic congestion, stress, collisions, road repairs, parking prices, and carbon emissions associated with commuting. This can benefit all residents of HRM independent of their use of commuter rail.
Thank you for participating in the future of your city!
For more information, contact Susan Tremills: firstname.lastname@example.org / 835-3589
Soft Play Barn
Please Sign Our Petition!
Earlier this year we were refused permission to build a new soft play barn at Cobbs.
This was despite a huge effort (and cost) in preparation of the application and indeed full support from the parish council. Reasons for refusal were, in our opinion vague at best, but having addressed them best we can we are having another go!
This facility will enable us to further still provide a safe and educational learning environment for children throughout the year as well as giving us some additional and much needed space to create a relaxed environment for parents and children.
It is our intention to provide food and drink but those of you used to the usual “pizza and chips” offer at existing “soft play centres” need not worry—our focus will continue to be on wholesome grub!
Please support us by signing this petition so that, should we encounter more issues with our application, we can further demonstrate support for a facility such as this!
Cobbs Farm Shop & Kitchen
17. Save Our Valley
*This is an online version of a petition launched on 5th October 2011, by Hangleton & Knoll Councillor, Brian Fitch.*
Did you know that Brighton & Hove’s Green Council plans to allow a local green open space, Toads Hole Valley, to be concreted over and developed into Housing?
Due to changes to the planning law by the Coalition Government, a host of safeguards have been removed & replaced with a ‘presumption to build’. Gone, for example, are rules which prioritised brown-field sites first for development.
In light of these changes, the Green Council have perversely decided to give developers the green light to concrete over green space & build housing on Toads Hole Valley.
We are deeply opposed to these planning changes, as well as the Green Council’s plans to give the go-ahead for Toads Hole Valley to be concreted & built on.
That is why we are campaigning for Brighton & Hove’s Green Council to reverse their decision.
Bournemouth council say that having an authorised transit site available in the borough will mean the police can use powers to evict travellers who camp illegally on private or public land they would then be required to use the available site or leave the borough.
Having managed sites can reduce problems with associated anti-social behaviour and limit the detrimental affects on travelling communities health, education and well being.
Update 9/30/11: CONFIRMED, Paragraphs 4(a) and (b) on pages 3-4 of the proposed Annexation Agreement spell out the complete commercial development of all current homes in the triangle formed by I-64, Green Mount, and U.S.Route 50.
If the Annexation agreement passes, affected residents WILL LOSE THEIR HOMES... Eventually. Paste this link into your browser to see Paras. 4(a) and (b) on pages 3-4:
DO WE REALLY NEED *TWO* NEW HOSPITALS WITHIN A MILE OF EACH OTHER ON THE SHILOH/O'FALLON I-64 CORRIDOR??? Belleville Memorial is already building a 2nd Campus in Shiloh, see here: http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/news/2011/04/01/memorial-plans-118-million-hospital.html
Original Text of background of this petition posted 9/28/11:
The City of O'Fallon Planning Commission is conducting a public hearing on October 11, 2011 at 6:00pm to review a recently filed Petition to re-designate our neighborhood to be part of a "Medical Campus Sub-Area Plan" in a proposed Amendment to the City's 2006 Comprehensive Plan.
This petition goes along with St. Elizabeth's Hospital's petition to re-zone the adjoining 108.79 vacant farm acres to the east and south of our neighborhood in preparation of constructing a new hospital and medical office complex.
WHAT THIS MEANS TO YOU: OUR PROPERTY IS *CURRENTLY* DESIGNATED BY THE CITY FOR A CURRENT & FUTURE LAND USE OF "NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL." Our neighborhood has been a residential neighborhood for over 100 years.
IF THE CITY PASSES THIS AMENDMENT, THE PROPERTY THAT CONTAINS YOUR HOME MIGHT BE RE-LABELED FOR "REGIONAL COMMERCIAL."
But WORSE, imagine being forced from your home in a few years WITHOUT CHOICE, being paid a "fair" market value-- as decided by someone else-- then seeing your house Bull-dozed in the name of Economic Development.
It's called Eminent Domain.... and re-designating our homes' land under the city's Comprehensive Plan *could* be the first step towards it.
We call for the development to be rejected because:
• The drastic loss of sun and daylight to residents in Whitgift House will place some residents in permanent darkness in the winter, increase their fuel and light bills, and have serious consequences for their quality of life
• The loss of sunlight and daylight to the Lambeth High Street Recreation Ground will have a detrimental effect on the quality of the park especially in winter months
• Less than 10% of the development is being put aside for affordable homes. This borough needs more social and affordable housing and not more housing for millionaires!
• The 138 exclusive car parking spaces are completely unnecessary in an area which has some of the best access to public transport in London and will increase traffic noise and pollution in local streets
We want a development that respects local residents, the amenities and character of our neighbourhood, including the listed buildings and other heritage assets of this area.
People all over the world are interested in Deptford's maritime history. The proposals for Henry VIII's royal dockyard and the site of John Evelyn's Sayes Court manor house and garden in Deptford must be fought with all the spirit and tenacity that historically characterizes the site that launched ships for the battle of the Spanish Armada, launched countless voyages of discovery of Drake, Frobisher, Cook, Vancouver, and set out ships for Nelson’s battles including Trafalgar.
By signing the petition you register that you are dissatisfied by the current development proposals for Convoy's Wharf by Hutchison Whampoa and News International.
The petition is a tool to measure local, national and international feeling about these development proposals. It is still necessary to write to Lewisham with your response to the developer's proposals.
Proposals to develop Wilmer Place in Stoke Newington, Hackney, include a 24,000 square foot retail store.
Concerns about the development have been raised repeatedly over the past few months and remain unanswered, including the impact on: traffic; road safety; the Stoke Newington Conservation Area; biodiversity; and the provision of affordable housing.
This petition is calling on Newmark Properties and Sainsbury’s to attend a public meeting in Stoke Newington to discuss the proposals with local residents and that both companies commit to attending such a meeting before any planning application is submitted.
Our next campaign action from Talking Food: Taking Action (TF: TA) is to campaign to change the planning law to stop more takeaways being granted planning permission in areas where there are already too many. In order to do this we need to show those in power, such as councillors, the strength of feeling on this issue. That is why participants at the TF: TA Campaign Weekend decided that it was important to set up a petition.
If you can collect 100 signatures on this subject and everyone else on this campaign collects 100 signatures then we will have more than a 10,000 name petition, which would be a phenomenal achievement. With this number of signatures, those people in positions of power who are able to make these changes, will have to listen to your campaign demands.
This petition seeks to persuade the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government to call in the Outline Planning application for review that was passed by Mansfield District Council.
If you have already signed a paper version of this petition there is no need to resign up to the electronic version
It has been proposed that a new scout hut is built in Myton Fields, Warwick.
This facility (whilst a useful resource) is likely to create traffic and noise nuisance for residents as well as compromising the rear open aspect to their properties.
RASH (Residents Against Skip Hire) was formed in 2007 to organise opposition to Colchester Skip Hire’s expansion plans at the site on Packards Lane. At the request of our mailing list we expanded our activities to oppose the Birch Airfield Composting Services proposal for green waste composting at Fairfields Farm.
Essex County Council has sent out notification of Birch Airfield Services Ltd resubmission of their Planning Application for the land at Fairfields Farm on Fordham Road, which appears much the same as the previous application which was refused. The application is described as “change of use of land from agricultural to composting of green waste”.
Further details are at the Colchester Borough Council website.
The location, operating hours, size of the working area and buildings remain very much the same. Also the noise, light and prevailing winds seem not to have been considered, nor their adverse effects on local residents. The size of the proposal will allow for a capacity of what was originally proposed and refused. It is likely that if this proposal is accepted the amount of lorry movements will increase as it has with Colchester Skip Hire.
It is also worth mentioning that Birch Airfield Composting started off with a similar facility at Birch Airfield; they are now proposing to build a covered facility with a microgeneration plant. This application is being strongly resisted by the local residents.
Some summary details about the Application:
- Change of use of land for a 2.75 hectare site (6.8 acres).
- Site to be enclosed by 2.4 meter green chain mesh fence.
- Installation of a weighbridge.
- Installation of a building for offices and staff amenities.
- Creation of a pond for collection of liquid.
- Moving of Public Right of Way.
- Shredding and maturation of green waste.
- To bring in up to 8,000 tonnes of green waste each year primarily from Colchester Borough Council’s Shrub End depot.
- Green waste to be put through an industrial shredder.
- Composted material put through trammel screener.
- The resultant noise created by this machinery is not described in detail.
- Composted material created to be used on surrounding farmland.
- Site operating hours 07.30 to 17.30 Monday to Friday, 08.00 to 16.00 Saturdays and 08.00 to 13.00 on Sundays.
- Up to 6 HGV vehicle movements per day, so up to 42 per week.
- Articulated lorries and Roro trains (lorries carrying several roll on / roll off waste containers).
- Traffic to come from A1124 through the villages of Eight Ash Green and Fordham.
*The number of proposed apartments / dwellings would cause unnecessary congestion, pollution and noise.
*A bus service is already operative on Bryants Rd, which is within easy walking distance, any addition to the route would only increase congestion.
*The proposed 'New Vehicular Connection' would encourage motorists to use same to access Bryants Road as a short cut, causing an excessive flow of traffic at peak times.
*The area is home to a multitude of wildlife, including birds, turtles, ducks, koalas, fish, snakes & foxes, and the proposed development would (if it doesn't kill them) force them away from their natural habitat and deprive them of their source of food.
*Local infrastructure, such as schools and child-cares, are already at their peak with long waiting lists applying. The increased population envisaged by the proposed development would add to this problem.
*It could be seen that the Logan City Council would benefit with the ability to collect more rates and fees with the proposed increase of dwellings and residents to the area.
*Can the Council provide assurance that all its councillors, including the Mayor of Logan, do not have a 'conflict of interest' as owners of properties in the area defined as 'Timor Ave Area, Loganholme', including properties on Arafura Ave and Timor Ave, which properties are not subject to resumption by the 'Parkland' proposal.
Residents of Argyll know that we are very lucky to live in an area of great visual amenity and ecological importance. This is also our main economic asset, as it is the reason people visit our area and tourism is our most important industry.
Argyll & Bute Council has obliged itself to recognise this and in terms of its own planning policy ENV 10 states that development in, or adjacent to, a designated "Area of Panoramic Quality" will be resisted where "its scale, location or design will have a significant adverse impact on the character of the landscape unless it is demonstrated that any significant adverse effects on the quality for which the area has been designated are clearly outweighed by social and economic benefits of National or regional importance;"
Despite this the Council has granted permission for speculative housing development in parts of these designated areas, most recently on the Kames Peninsula, where two large houses have been allowed on a conspicuous and ecologically-sensitive site between a major tourist route and the sea, in breach of the above policy.
Once the quality of the landscape is destroyed by development it is lost forever. For the sake of the environment and present and future generations we must call on Argyll & Bute Council to halt this destruction.
We are requesting Baw Baw Shire Council's Planning
Department to insert a condition on the above mentioned
Planning Permit to require the Applicant to retain the row of
trees on the Southern boundary of the proposed Subdivision
The Annenberg Foundation, working closely with the Rancho Palos Verdes community, has proposed creating a discovery park, a place where people will be drawn by both the restored natural beauty of the site and the increased opportunities for outdoor recreation.
There will also be a wide range of educational programming, helping visitors explore the connections between marine, terrestrial and domestic animal life.