Object
Preferred Options consultation document
Representation ID: 94728
Received: 29/10/2019
Respondent: Mr B Rhodes
We disagree with the conclusion of Min 206 . this site will mean ongoing disruption especially to residents of Tottenhill Row who have had to suffer with previous and present mineral extraction Min 75 , Min 76 etc. Location of this site is also going to be part of the proposed wildlife park and we believe is a conflict of interests for the landowner and Quarry if this site was allowed , protecting wildlife and environment yet ravaging and decimating the land for many years.
We disagree with the conclusion of Min 206 . this site will mean ongoing disruption especially to residents of Tottenhill Row who have had to suffer with previous and present mineral extraction Min 75 , Min 76 etc. Location of this site is also going to be part of the proposed wildlife park and we believe is a conflict of interests for the landowner and Quarry if this site was allowed , protecting wildlife and environment yet ravaging and decimating the land for many years.