Some objections submitted via the site

We have received 815 objections in total via the web site, of which 554 are shown here. These are the objectors who stated they were happy for us to display their objections on the web site.

Grounds for objection

  • Public roads and services are currently inadequate and this development will dramatically worsen the situation.
    - Anthony Jones
  • Amesbury is already struggling to cope with the volume of traffic and the current medical facilities on offer are completely insufficient with huge waits. The land around Amesbury has been farmland for 1000’s of years and you lose the very beauty of a world heritage site and it’s stunning landscape by overbuilding and housing development. Preserve a landscape rather than surrounding it with flat pack houses and distribution centres
    - Sarah Harker
  • The recent expansion projects in the local area (Larkhill, Bulford, Tidworth & Durrington) now simply over match all emergency services. We should be protecting areas like Amesbury and Old Sarum for the future or we may as well build on Stonehenge itself! This combined with the proposed Stonehenge tunnel and other infrastructure projects are simply unsustainable.
    - Lee Rickard
  • Whether it is the A345 or the A303, our local roads are already full of traffic (I suggest that you try turning north on the A345 at Boscombe Down in Rush Hour). There are numerous examples of the surface breaking up due to sheer weight of traffic. The further increased density of traffic generally and in particular extra HGVs not only on the A303, but also on the A345 travelling to / from the South Coast ports (and clogging up Salisbury still further too) will inevitably exacerbate these issues beyond the acceptable and will cost taxpayers' money to address. Last but not least, levels of air pollution will be increased. The density of the buildings on all 3 sites will lead to high levels of additional light pollution similar to those which led to restrictions to facilities in Larkhill Camp - what has changed? (All proposals.) Similarly MOD plans for new quarters at Larkhill had to be amended because some locations in the original proposal were deemed unacceptable, since they could be seen from the World Heritage Site. We are entitled to consistency in policy (Viney's Farm proposal). Having spent 20 minutes on the phone today waiting to speak to my medical practice in Amesbury (The Barcroft), there is no doubt in my mind that the risk to overloading already busy medical services is unacceptably high. (All proposals) There is only one secondary school in Amesbury with high numbers of pupils (but no 6th Form); there is no detail as to how additional pupils will be educated. (High Post and Viney's Farm proposals.) Last but not least, we are proud of our unique countryside, of its heritage and of the wild life. These proposals come in addition to Archer's Gate, King's Gate and Solstice Park, which have already resulted in large environmental damage.
    - Chris Nicholls
  • It will ruin the country side and make a massive decrease in farm land
    - Jacob Weeks
  • 1. No further development until the current infrastructure in and around Amesbury is able to satisfactorily meet the needs and wants of current residents to ensure a good quality of life eg GP surgeries; dentists; school places; roads, recreational and sports facilities. 2. Solve the constant congestion problems on the A303 and the rat-running and improve the quality of the roads in the area first before allowing these planning applications.
    - Vivien Davies
  • This is an area of outstanding natural beauty bordering on the Woodford valley and is threatening wildlife which is already under a great amount of pressure. Is there no end to the takeover of natural wildlife habitat
    - Lynn Shorten
  • I wish to register my strongest possible objection to this assault upon precious, archaeologically-sensitive , landscapes. Amesbury has endured unprecedented levels of development in recent years, any further scale developments with entirely destroy the character of this ancient Wiltshire settlement. If anything, the proposed development at High Post is even more egregious. The landscape here is of the highest possible historical and archaeological value. If permitted it will do much to join Salisbury to Amesbury. It simply must not be allowed.
    - David lovibond
  • The A345 cannot take any more traffic.
    - Steven Kemp
  • According to reports Wessex Water is unable to supply the water and sewage requirements of any further development. Also, we are already waiting three weeks for a doctor's appointment and the local pharmacies are overburdened. Such combined development would require at least one primary school to be built together with a substantial extension of secondary school places. The roads of Salisbury cannot cope with any more traffic.
    - John Cocking
  • The speed limit on Salisbury Road is supposed to be 30mph but this is never adhered to, the traffic flies up and down the road. The pavements are narrow and you can feel lorries almost touching your arm, more housing is going to cause even more problem, there will be more footfall and it would be an accident waiting to happen, I have lived here 20 years and fully understand these issues, traffic should not be underestimated!!
    - Sandra Martin
  • Vines farm could damage the rive eco system with all the building work being carried out right by the river I believe and the exit entry is on a bend on a 3 lane hill, very dangerous and shouldn't be allowed Solstice Park is bad enough without adding houses in the field next to it
    - Nicholas J Reed
  • It would seem that councils and government concentrate development on over populated towns because it's the easy option to obtain planning permission.
    - Michael Garrett
  • River Avon is SSSI and houses on the proposed site will put it at risk.
    - Colin Maddocks
  • I object to the proposed developments for all the points indicated above, but would also like to raise some additional points. All the proposed developments - Viney’s Farm, High Post and Solstice Park Extension, are on greenfield sites and prime agricultural land. I would therefore like to raise three points: 1.Recent global events have proved to us that we need to ensure food security here in the UK - maintaining our agricultural land and using it efficiently for food production will ensure supply and help us maintain better control over prices. It’s easy to think a few hundred acres here and a few hundreds acres there won’t make much difference - but it will. It adds up. Generations to come won’t thank us for reducing food producing land. 2. Are these homes needed? Wiltshire council’s own website explains it has already exceeded its target for affordable homes - https://www.wiltshire.gov.uk/article/6290/Council-exceeds-affordable-housing-target-and-commits-to-build-more - so it’s hard to understand the argument for needing more. 3. Building new homes is incredibly carbon intensive. Meanwhile, many town centres, including Salisbury, have ranks of empty shops and premises. Let’s be clever with what we already have - let’s repurpose empty buildings into good homes, which would have ready-made communications and all amenities close at hand. It would produce great carbon savings compared to building new and would be a win for the town centres and the businesses in them. Wiltshire Council has its own climate strategy - https://www.wiltshire.gov.uk/article/1004/Climate-strategy - to become a carbon neutral county. It’s hard to see how so much building can sit with broader carbon neutral aims. We are fortunate to live in an area with good agricultural land and globally important landscapes, rivers and biodiversity. Let’s be responsible and clever, let’s preserve this land for the benefit of all of us and particularly for generations to come.
    - Julia Pugh-Cook
  • I think that it is the wrong place to build there is wildlife that live there and every morning I take my pony out for a hack along those fields if there are house there I will not be able to ride anywhere and the village of great durnford has small blind corner roads it is dangerous to have to many cars driving up and down the roads Especially with horses around.
    - Poppy
  • You have proved over the last 3 decades that we don’t have the infrastructure to cope with these new builds. You have destroyed the character of our town in 20 years.
    - Alan Caulfield
  • The side roads in Amesbury are already in poor state of repair, due in part to the higher than forecasted traffic levels. The Medical and Dental facilities in Amesbury can barely cope with the current increase of population and would collapse if the population load increases any further. There is limited shopping and entertainment opportunities in Amesbury town centre to support a further increase in its population levels,
    - Mr Stephen Williams
  • When you drive over the surrounding hills approaching Amesbury, what was attractive countryside now looks a mess.
    - Antony Beardmore
  • Amesbury is a small town. Too many houses been built here already due to forces return to area. Enough already.
    - Julia Richards
  • Rather than destroying yet more of our desperately needed farmland, developers should be forced to repurpose the vast amounts of “brownfield” sites that exist in the county. Amesbury does not have the necessary infrastructure to cope with the influx of the 3000+ additional residents which these developments would bring.
    - Robert Hall
  • With Prinary Care services already struggling to meet demand and school places already stretched and being to stretched further with the rebasing of Army units from Germany in progress; local public services can’t cope with yet more demands! This along with water supplies, lack of town centre amenities is a recipe for disaster as well as reducing the quality of life for both people and wildlife alike. The South of England is over populated, encouraging further population growth is detrimental to levelling-up. People and business need to be encouraged to reverse the depopulating of the north of England, Wales and areas of Scotland - these areas have far more space and natural resources to cope with increased population. With the ability to WFH many of these houses proposed do not need to be built here- people can work from homes built in the areas mentioned, so helping to level-up without both the environmental impacts and diminution of the quality of life in the Amesbury area.
    - Ewen Miller
  • i have lived locally for 50 years and Amesbury has changed significantly. The greatest change has been the loss of so much open farmland with the huge number of houses and imposing industrial buildings. Like many others I think enough is enough. There are too many cars and the essential things like doctors, schools and dentists are already stretched. These developments displace our wildlife and add various forms of further pollution - enough is enough.
    - Annabel Moss
  • To build on vineys farm would be a SIN It is one of the very few places left
    - Stephanie rudd
  • In 57 years living here there has never been worse flooding, especially across the road from Woodford through Stratford sub Castle which was impassable. There should be NO development to the west of A345 to exacerbate this problem with inevitable run-off of water from further housing. The dearth of surgeries, pharmacies and secondary schools continue to be a concern
    - Jean Coates
  • Adding an extra development to the already considerable solstice park is not beneficial to the local area. Porton road - 1 of the main feeder roads to said area has already (due to the current development at solstice park) become a dangerous road with a large number of Lgv vehicles using it. This road network and surface was never designed or intended to carry such numbers of heavy goods vehicles, the road surface is also in poor condition due to the extra weight LGV vehicles have imposed on it. This will only worsen with more traffic using it due to this new development. The light pollution as well as noise pollution from solstice park is already overbearing to the local properties and residents. any additional developments will only worsen this. The county side surrounding the town of Amesbury is very much part of the town and it’s character, therefore any new development has to to protected this and I feel this fails to do so on a number of levels.
    - Juran Wilson
  • It is very evident that Amesbury has expanded a lot in recent years which is well and good, but there comes a point when we have to realise that enough is enough. I seriously struggle to believe that the infrastructure of Amesbury can accommodate much more growth as this has not been invested in sufficiently to match the rapid housing expansion.
    - James Wells
  • The A345 is a busy road at the best of times and any traffic either along this route or diverting via the Woodford Valley would increase both noise and congestion through the valley. Light pollution remains an issue for the valley and is also detrimental to wildlife. The River Avon is being polluted with sewage, the night sky polluted with light. I have regularly seen owls and other wildlife on the road down from High Post into Netton and I believe this would, as I have said, have a detrimental affect on our already declining wildlife. I don’t believe this excessive development is a) necessary and b) is a loss of valuable farmland.
    - Christine Foster
  • The developers have stated that they will give access to river walks. It is not theirs to give as we already have it!
    - Sally Osment
  • Would spoil what's left of our countryside, over populated in amesbury with over stretched doctors , chemists schools etc , no facilities for the young families especially teens ,this would just add to the problems already facing Amesbury .
    - Cheryl Pearce
  • Each time these new estates are built, we're promised more infrastructure regarding doctors , Dentist , chemist .. what happens ..NOTHING ! AMESBURY IS ALREADY OVER POPULATED FOR THE STRETCHED FACILITIES IN PLACE
    - Andrew Richards
  • Amesbury has grown massively; and with that growth has come a failed infrastructure. We residents already suffer from poor service from the Doctors' surgeries and the pharmacies. Those operating within these facilities are suffering from stress and overwork trying to keep an already failed mechanism running. This can only lead to stress related illness and a reduction of staffing. When these people leave, there is no one who wants to take their place as we already have seen nationwide with Doctors. The idea of adding more housing and people will certainly overload this very fragile infrastructure and WILL cause it to collapse! What we need building is more surgeries, pharmacies and schools, plus a serious upgrade in the utilities department.
    - Gordon Baker
  • The ongoing housing and business development at Solstice Park is providing hundreds of new homes for people who need it, along with the associated services. However, the road network has not been increased, which means more cars and lorries using minor roads. Whilst I am in favour of building housing fir those who need it, there has to be a limit before the surrounding countryside is destroyed, which will be bad for everyone including the ecological environment. Solstice Park is already vast, and there can be no rational argument other than construction companies pushing for more profit to prove further construction here is feasible or needed now.
    - Jonathan Ward
  • These housing estates are far too big and need to be more spread about and smaller in size
    - Tom Moloney
  • To many houses already. Roads need upgrading to much heavy traffic coming though Amesbury already. Nothing for adults to do and definitely nothing for the younger people. Not that any of this will make any difference,to many rich people going to make money out of it including local councils
    - Steven London
  • I am concerned about the effect on the flood plain, living close to the river.
    - Roger Evans
  • Amesbury has already been expanded far beyond what it’s medical and school facilities can support, further expansion without addressing these issues is a monumental fallacy. The impact to the countryside is also of serious concern, new estates have houses almost one on top of the other with no consideration given to maintaining green space, sustainability or remediating harm done to ecology.
    - Chris Mouland
  • 5pn9ru
    - Hello World! https://apel.top/go/gu4winrshe5dgoju?hs=c67cf7c3a558af4f105337febe0a62ec&
  • I feel this is a development that will destroy the countryside and will be totally out of character to the nearby Woodford Valley. There is already too much traffic on the A345 especially at peak times. Local roads in Salisbury and around Amesbury need upgrading before any developments are even considered
    - David Fielding
  • No further housing should be built in or around Amesbury, we just don t have the infrastructure to cope with an ever increasing population. Our doctors dentists and chemists just can t cope as it is.
    - Kathy Gevaux
  • The continued extensive building between Salisbury and Amesbury is leaving no green space ruining what countryside is left , as well as increasing the pollution levels from the extra traffic. The roads in the area can not take the extra traffic, they are already at breaking point.
    - Sean Kelly
  • As a life long resident of Amesbury and someone who walks this area of Vinneys farm regularly, I object to the building of yet more houses on our beautiful countryside. Essentially you are adding further elderly housing to a town which is dying due to young people being pushed out of the housing market and also lack of facilities here. We NEED more doctors and chemists here, not more housing! We need to encourage new growth, swimming pools, parks, there needs to be facilities for people to enjoy here. There is very little for people to do in Amesbury, unless you want to buy a house or have a coffee. Also Vinneys farm is such a beautiful area to enjoy our river Avon, walk in the countryside and get some much needed fresh air, housing on this site would ruin the area, both for humans and wildlife alike.
    - Tracey Reed
  • The proposals for the extremely large and extensive developments at Solstice Park is wholly out of scale for a small town like Amesbury. The town has already seen the very extensive development since 2000 on the existing Solstice Park and to double the area of the site in one application is not acceptable. Not only is there not a requirement for this speculative development but it will increase the pressure on a road infrastructure that is both already very busy at peak periods but not suited to the increase in traffic. Does this mean upgrading of existing roads or more dual carriageway linking the A303. Vineys Farm is a vast area of existing greenfield, woodland and arable land bordered on the north by the River Avon (SAC and SSSI) that is of international importance. Over the last twenty years there has already been a doubling of the number of houses from the Archer Gate development. The proposal is wholly out of scale for a small town and will, despite what the developers will state in all their documents, be extremely damaging to an extremely fragile and important landscape that is rich in archaeological and environmental features. Wiltshire Council itself has already stated that the existing Local Plans have 140% of their requirement for housing - so why do we need more? 1200 new homes are not needed in this location. The World Heritage site adjacent will be changed forever by this development due to the light pollution and visual impact created by inappropriate development. High Post North and South are proposals for a mix of industrial and office space, car parking and 500 new homes over more than 500 acres. Again the proposed developments are on total greenfield locations with a proposal to destroy forever the Wiltshire landscape that is rich in biodiversity and history. Why on earth this land on top of a ridge of land stretching from Amesbury to Salisbury is targeted for development is baffling. There can be no screening of such a massive development, and the light pollution in the Wiltshire landscape will be dreadful and pollute forever. Perched on high ground there will be a visual impact for miles around. It will not be long before the 4 miles between the Beehive roundabout at Salisbury and the White Railings Roundabout in Amesbury will be one urban corridor! Any large developments should be restricted to existing road networks, brownfield development area and already designated areas for development and never spread across virgin greenfield sites. Another 500 homes are not needed - as explained previously - and the local road system is absolutely unsuited to additional traffic. What is not needed is a vast upgrading of the road network and a large increase in the heavy goods lorries and cars. the local small valley road system is already full of vehicles using them as a rat-run. There can be no "Trade-Off" in any biodiversity improvements / carbon offsetting because of the scale of the proposed development. The overall proposal is for 840 acres of development land in a small geographical area that should be refused and never even contemplated to protect our valuable natural resources. The proposal would also require an upgrade of the road network - dual carriageway directly between A303 and Salisbury? The tourism industry relies upon not only the historically important features in south Wiltshire but also requires the environmental setting to remain unaffected by totally unacceptable development. Act now and refuse any proposal for these developments.
    - Martin Giles
  • Strongly opposed to this for so many reasons. When will we start to put the environment first?
    - Mitchell Evans
  • It will destroy the natural beauty of our countryside
    - Mr Jonathan Watson
  • Amesbury was a wonderful small town but it’s becoming overgrown with housing developments struggling to support all those that already live here! It definitely needs a new doctors surgery for the residents of Archers and Kings gate. We have wonderful green spaces and walks around Amesbury especially along the river Avon linking Stonehenge and the Woodford valley. Building this proposed phase will permanently destroy all this, the eco system, cause air, noise, light and people pollution. With small villages being sucked up by developments, where is this going stop?
    - Jessica Fretwell
  • The countryside included in the plans if built on would take away an enormous area which is used frequently not only for people's physical health but mental health also. Adults, kids, dogs all enjoy this space and if taken away there would be very little remaining in this part of town to actually be able to have time to spend outside!! Amesbury has lost so much land over the years to housing estates this would have an utterly shameful impact on the local community!
    - Sophie Tait
  • The Larger amount of land ,east of Solstice Park . My objections . 1 Existing Solstice park site is mostly empty . Stand at Solstice Services and view the many ,Units To LET signs . 2. This new property extension will endanger existy habitat . 3 Extreme noise pollution. 4. Existing Neolithic Barrows scattered across the landscape , UNESCO world Heritage site . 4 Original ancient track ,now the defunct Amesbury Rd ,will be destroyed . 5. Nesting stone Curlews will be destroyed . 6. A corrupt deal between Classmaxi ( Solstice ) and Kings Collage Oxford. ( Survey carried out with corruption )
    - Darren Pearson
  • It is beyond belief that the fragile ecology of the pristine upper Avon valley should be contemplated as a suitable location for so many houses. Amesbury already is fit to burst it cannot, and should not, be further enlarged by a new estate at Viney's farm.
    - David Redwood
  • I am an avid naturalist and angler and I am opposed to a development of this size and in this location as it poses a major threat to the fragile ecology of the river Avon. My rationale being that this will pose excessive run off into the river Avon, cause more water to be abstracted, and waste water include phosphates to be returned to the rivers. Chalk streams and their inherent fragility cannot cope with this type of constant encroachment and surely a more suitable place can be located in the borough for the development of houses. I also think that a development of this size is unsuitable for Amesbury, as it will fundamentally change the character of your charming town. I lived in Hampshire for six years and know the area well.
    - Bryce Cochrane
  • The council has already built more houses in Amesbury than were needed for our quota. The impact upon the famous countryside (fields of barley anyone? and the Nobel author VS Naipaul's landscape) will be irreversible and unnecessary. It's just driven by greedy investors.
    - Alex Fryatt
  • Car-dependent development near the already overloaded A303 makes no sense. It is not sustainable. This is the wrong place for new homes.
    - Antonia Cox
  • The A345 is already congested and will not sustain larger amounts of traffic, especially at the Salisbury end during the rush hours; this could also overload the Solstice Park exits which are already blocked on some evenings.
    - James Gaite
  • As a resident in Amesbury for over 20 years the town is unrecognisable. I’m a local tradesman so I see the roads are unusable in archers gate. Many new houses have no off-road parking and so park in the road. The new development in kings gate is I nightmare to access with the 2 schools and only one access road and residential parking it’s a joke. Amesbury lacks the proper infrastructure for new housing and the housing estate designers cram too many houses together. Also the standards of the new builds are substandard at best and the builders make too much profit
    - Ben Teasdale
  • I am writing to object to the Viney's Farm, High Post & Solstice Park Extension for the following reasons: Amesbury suffers from over development already, both housing and industrial development - there are insufficient Drs/Dentists/Secondary schools/Churches/public transport and green spaces. Viney's Farm: 1)This is an area of unusual beauty, any development here would change this ancient landscape which many from Amesbury and the surrounding villages value. This proposed development will be seen for miles spoiling what are currently beautiful views across our ancient landscape; tourists are drawn to this area because of Stonehenge, Woodhenge and Old Sarum as well as the natural beauty. 2)The site is steep, there will therefore be run off into the river Avon polluting the river further. The developers discussed this aspect of the site as a challenging - we should protect our rivers and the wildlife that live in them, not design and build a development knowing it will have a negative impact. 3)There will be an increase in light pollution at night, this will have a negative effect on wildlife and the balance of biodiversity - the developers are aware of this too, so why are they proposing something that is going to make this problem worse? 4)There will be an increase in traffic - likely 2 cars per household + other trades that would deliver services and goods; our roads can only just cope with the volume of traffic as it is - the idea that people will walk or cycle to work is not realistic as work is likely to be in Salisbury or beyond. 5) The suggestion that the shops in Amesbury will benefit, is not born out by the lack of increased footfall since the development of Archers & Kingsgate - increasingly many people shop online. High Post: 1)High Post is the highest point between Stonehenge and Old Sarum, any development here would change this ancient sight line, the development would be seen for miles in all directions spoiling what is currently beautiful Wiltshire countryside. 2)The increased traffic using the A345, turning off or coming back onto the A345 at High Post is an obvious problem when this road already struggles with current traffic volumes. The small lanes through the surrounding villages could not cope with the large HGVs. 3) To develop High Post & Viney's Farm would in effect create a ribbon development between Salisbury & Amesbury which would change what is unique to this part of Wiltshire; a Cathedral City & an ancient small town with archeological links to Stonehenge; this would indeed harm our Heritage assets. Solstice Park Extension: 1)while it makes sense to have areas of light industry sited together, is the current development really used to full capacity? 2) In the long term is this really how businesses will operate? 3) this site is huge, the design of the buildings is ugly, no consideration was given to blend them into the landscape, minimise height and there is detrimental light pollution at night to a very large surrounding area - do we really need more of this type of building to support business, in this location? I am asking our Councillors to reject all three of these proposed developments.
    - Julia Gallop
  • To build on vineys farm would be a SIN It is one of the very few places left
    - Stephanie rudd
  • I object to these developments on all the above grounds but in particular on the effect it will have on our one and only hospital. The staff are already working under great pressure so how can they be expected to cope with the increased population these developments will bring.
    - Joan Allan
  • Has anyone from Wiltshire Council ever been to Amesbury, or do they just spend all their time in Trowbridge? Because if they did ever venture this far, they would see a hideous blighted landscape ruined by the ever increasing number of badly built shoe box size houses. When I was a child I stand at the end of the Officer's Quarters and look across the MOD playing field and see the road to Salisbury with the cars on it, I could stand at the crossroads at Boscombe and look across another field and see the cars on the A303. What can I see now, nothing, but the tiny horrible houses, and I lived in one of them in Moyne Gardens so I know how badly they are constructed. If you didn't keep building more houses, we would not get all these extra people, it seems like they might live here and drive off to work in Andover or London. If you build 1,600 more house or whatever the number might be. That is not just 1,600 people, they might be married with a child, so that is a potential 4,800 extra people. Where will they shop or work, because I don't see thousands of people shopping or working around here. So they are not contributing to the local economy at all, and yet they will expect to send their kids to school, go to the Doctors, Dentists and Salisbury District Hospital. A hospital which was put into special measures the other week because it cannot cope with the amount of people around here now, so how are they expected to manage? I know someone who works there and they say it can be a bit chaotic. When I report street lights not working or electronic bus timetables at the bus stops not working, they hardly ever get fixed. How is the Council going to manage with more street lights, pavements and pot holed roads? What about the crisis in Ukraine with the grain, we need food to be grown in fields not houses, we can't eat houses. What about the deer and the Red Kites, who might be endangered, what are they going to do, buy a house! I can see three ancient burial mounds in the fields between the A303 and Boscombe Camp, surely they should be protected.
    - sue chapman
  • These developments are not needed in this area. There is an enormous amount of development taking place and no provision for a Dr's surgery or a Senior school. This a mad idea and should be put to bed immediately. Listen to the people.
    - Christine Thompson
  • Any increase in the population of Amesbury will affect Salisbury with the increased traffic. Particularly on dangerous rat runs such as Ford. Stop all development in the area until a Salisbury bypass is completed.
    - Keith Westlake
  • The CLIMATE EMERGENCY trumps most considerations, or should do so. VINEY'S FARM Special Landscape Area (SCA) and River Avon Special Area of Conservation, and Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) would be harmed. Additionally the river especially so by sewage treatment works (if that were ever built, which is doubtful). The proposer says the site is devoid of significant ecology, but that depends on how (and who) defines ecology - every bit of soil & its wild inhabitants is important in a world having a Climate Emergency. Therefore brown field development must be fully exploited before giving any consideration to greenfield sites, and do that largely regardless of the expense. Do you agree? The proposal would be in danger of setting precedent for creeping conurbation, gradually extending along the A345 all the way to Salisbury, and should be opposed accordingly. Assurances to the contrary won't bind future generations as effectivly as refusing this proposal would. The town does not have the infrastructure to cope with the development that has already taken place. Get that fixed before entertaing any thought of further housing development, not in parallel with furure works, because there's no guarantee the infrastructure would ever be built after developers have taken their profit and gone away. "Affordable Housing" is a strange term, as all housing is affordable to someone, or it would not be built. "Social Housing" is sensible, ideally being built, owned and managed by the town council in perpetuity. The current market driven attitude to social housing means it gets sold off and/or watered down in the final plans. How can planners make absolutely certain that social housing would be provided in adequate quantity? Without that assurance, there's not much point including the aspiration in this proposal. I think lots of small flats are more appropriate, not 3 / 4 bed semi detached houses. A pub by the river sounds nice. Get a contract signed (by eg. a brewery) to run this place before including it in any plan. Without that assurance, there's not much point including the aspiration in this proposal. It's just words to get it through the planning process after which it will be dropped, if that's not the case, prove it by getting that contract signed first. The proposer authoritavely says the development "is said to sit well in the landform". Interesting that they didn't say "it sits well in the landform", but only that someone has said it does. Who said it? I can say the moon is made of cheese, doesn't make it so. The development does not sit well in the landscape in my opinion, and the claim needs qualifying with other views. The proposal shows "potential for...food shop, pharmacy, medical centre ... etc". Again, like the pub, get these made definite before allowing them to go forward into the planning. "potential" means nothing much. I note that there's no "potential" for a primary school, and that needs adressing too. Covenants to keep the green bits "free of future non-agricultural development" and held in a trust are somewhat re-assuring, but doubtful in the long term. A covenant is (only) a promise without an enforcable contract, and distant future trustees could be pursuaded to do almost anything. What's to stop it all being built up later? or sooner? There's nothing in the proposal about the construction details, which would follow in the formal planning process. It would have been sensible to include something in this proposal to guide the subsiquent process. Specifically - Highest insulation standards ; District heating ; Communal and idividual heat pumps for all premises ; solar PV & water panels ; energy storage ; rain soak-aways ; minimal light pollution ; electric car charging ; etc, etc. Remember the Climate Emergency? HIGH POST The proposal would be in danger of setting precedent for creeping conurbation, gradually extending along the A345 all the way to Salisbury, and should be opposed accordingly. Assurances to the contrary won't bind future generations as effectivly as refusing this proposal would. Industrial units are particularly sutable to have the roofs covered with solar panels. SOLSTICE PARK Industrial units are particularly sutable to have the roofs covered with solar panels. Is there a demand for this? Are the people available that would work there? Are there traffic issues? Nationally, container traffic could be largely transferred to rail if there were a transfer depot near each town, so only the last mile is by road. This could be at the disused rail yard behind Salisbury station, likewise at Wilton and Solstice Park Amesbury. ----------------
    - Stuart Fyfe
  • The magnitude of the inappropriateness of developing on these areas of land is so vast, it is hard to know where to begin. Infrastructure is mentioned a great deal and rightly so. The current phases of development already given permission locally have not finished and the effect of them on the surrounding area is yet to be fully felt. To allow yet more building at this stage, let alone at the scale envisaged, would be unconscionable; to do so on prime agricultural land even more so. To build on greenfield sites in open countryside which is part of a Special Landscape Area with historical significance should not be a planning consideration in the 21st Century. We should know better than that now. At the very least, development on the proposed areas would between them contravene a number of current Local Plan Core Policies: Core Policy 50: Biodiversity and Geodiversity, Core Policy 51: Landscape, Core Policy 58: Ensuring the conservation of the historic environment, Core Policy 59: The Stonehenge, Avebury and associated sites World Heritage Site, Core Policy 60: Sustainable Transport, Core Policy 61: Transport and new development, Core Policy 62: Developments impacts on the transport network. Development on these sites would be incredibly detrimental to the area with no merit and should not be considered.
    - Chris Down
  • Food security has been highlighted by the war in Ukraine. The use of farmland must now be considered as a last resort for housing. I have lived in Amesbury for over 30 years. In that time we have seen many developments where we were told that infrastructure would appear alongside the houses. This has not been the case , particularly so of late. Even before the pandemic, GP services were substantially worse with each passing year: Just too many people for the facilities. We were told that Long Hedges would have a medical centre. After building a change of use to residential housing was issued - we were told that staff were not available. So existing services had to take up the slack. Everything from Children's services to the care of the elderly is under great strain. Without guaranteed increases, new developments cannot be supported.
    - David Yexley
  • Amesbury is already a concrete jungle and completely overcrowded without the required amenities. Please do not take anymore of our land away for houses
    - Sharon petford
  • This is one of the few nice places to walk in Amesbury. I also feel it’s an important ecological location and a large development will take away natural habitat for wildlife.
    - Barry Hawthorne
  • How will drinking water be provisioned? Electricity? With global warming, water resources are already under stress, with existing developments; let alone new ones. The south west is now full - part of the levelling up agenda should be build in the north of England, areas of Scotland and Wales which have not recovered from the de- Industrialisation of the 1980s. Building house in these levelling up areas as well as encouraging jobs in these areas needs to be the priority - not stuffing more people like sardines in the South West. We don’t want the quality of living for everyone, pollution and wildlife decimated like in the Soutb East
    - Ewen Mller
  • This development on this side of the A345 would have such a damaging impact to Amesbury rural feel that has been in place for centuries and as it is at the start of the Woodford Valley would spoil this natural beauty. Not to mention the damage to nature and the close by River Avon that is a SSSI .
    - Simon Shorten
  • There are so many aspects to object to, as per list above, it becomes difficult to single out a particular issue (or group of issues) to illustrate my objections to the developments. However, it is already the case that the general infrastructure of the area is inadequate and will only get many times worse with these developments. Medical services - The local surgeries are already under severe pressure with chances of actually seeing a doctor (or appropriate medical professional) apparently lessening by the day. Dental services - I understand that the local dental surgeries can no longer take on NHS patients. Road systems - Wiltshire road surfaces are already some of the worst in the country. Road usage would be greatly increased with increase in potential accident and road congestion. Broadband - Service provision is poor at best. Even if any new development was provided with full fibre connection that would mean the rest of us continuing to put up with a sub-standard service for years to come.
    - Charles Bartholomew
  • It’s enough new building with Archersgate and Kings gate developments, which never seems to end.
    - Lois CHAPMAN
  • Amesbury has seen enough development over the last 20 years. We cannot be accused of not contributing to the housing shortfall in Wiltshire/UK, we have done more than our fair share. The medical facilities (GP surgery/chemist) cannot cope already without adding hundreds more to the town's population.
    - Peter Banting
  • I am against any further development around Amesbury and surrounding area. We simply do not have the infrastructure to cope with anymore new homes. Schools, particularly secondary schools, medical surgeries, dentists, roads and sewage works are already completely overwhelmed. The NHS may or may not eventually amalgamate the two current doctor surgeries in Amesbury and build a much needed polyclinic but this will take many years to plan and build. The dental practices are full, the roads up to 100% capacity and what about all the sewage? Our beautiful and historic village of Amesbury has become a disjointed sprawl and in my opinion, parts of Boscombe Down an ugly blot on the landscape. The green fields of Viney's Farm offer relaxing walks for local families and habitat for many kinds of wildlife. Such a shame to witness a decline in our once plentiful skylarks soaring in the skies. I object to any further development in this area. We simply do not have the infrastructure.
    - janis hughes
  • No infrastructure to support this.
    - Brian Stokes
  • I do not think that permission should be granted for further expansion of the Solstice Park development for the following reasons: * Further impact on quality of life of residents of Raleigh Crescent (as detailed above). * Impact on existing monuments: Industrialisation of the new area will irreversibly alter the connection between the barrow groups nearest to Boscombe Down’s perimeter fence (and the group in the valley below) to Woodhenge and Durrington Walls. While the barrows are being protected from development their connection to the wider landscape is at risk due to the height of new buildings and light pollution. The people that built the barrows positioned them in prominent positions in the landscape, from the ridge top below Allington Track there are clear sightlines across to Woodhenge and Durrington Walls, they are also connected to the group at Double Hedges and on Telegraph Hill by sightline. The barrows were intentionally situated where they are so that they can be clearly seen, developmental encroachment into the fields below them will isolate and dissect them from the other monuments nearby. * Effect on visitor experience of Woodhenge/ Durrington Walls: Visitors to Woodhenge/ Durrington Walls can currently look out and over at the landscape and survey a scene that hasn’t changed dramatically in the last few thousand years, they can easily wonder about what the landscape looked like to the people who built and used Stonehenge from the place where they feasted and celebrated the Winter Solstice, expanding an industrial estate or building more housing into the valley will ruin this experience, the fields and contours will be buried in concrete and tarmac and will be lost forever never to be returned. * Extensive ecological damage: I am aware that the farmer who owns/ owned the land had been managing the scrub around the barrows because there had been Montague Harriers nesting there in previous years, these are a Category 1 Red List protected species with only 5 pairs recorded as nesting in the country (according to the RSPB). Other species that live in and hunt amongst those fields are kestrel, red kite, barn owl, house martin, roe deer, slowworm, grass snake, stoat, field mice and shrew they are supported by an abundance of insect life which will also be lost. I have personally seen snakehead fritillary growing along the track that leads over the railway bridge to the A303, these are also a rare species to be growing wild in the landscape. The landscape to the East of the World Heritage Site is dramatically changed over the last few years; I am aware that people need places to work, however the number of jobs delivered by these schemes never matches the figures quoted in the initial press briefs – however the damage to the landscape and further discomfort inflicted on the people who have lived in it for many decades will be permanent and irreversible. Nobody is going to look back in 100 years and congratulate you for allowing the expansion of another industrial estate, or the building of houses in an area which has already met 140% of its development targets, however people will still be searching for answers to questions about the landscape, its monuments and the people who lived and died there. I believe that peppering prominent burial sites and important habitat amongst parcels of industrial land cannot be done sensitively and is a desecration. Amesbury and the archaeological environment do not need this scheme, I implore you to stop the spread of the development beyond its current boundaries and restrict the height of additional warehouses being constructed in the current development.
    - Ben Mogg
  • Predominately the increased population without the corresponding infrastructure to support and sustain the welfare needs of the new residents. The health service locally can not cope. The inability to be able to see a Dr or Dentist who are already stretched.
    - David Porter
  • of8rzh
    - Hello World! https://racetrack.top/go/giywczjtmm5dinbs?hs=c67cf7c3a558af4f105337febe0a62ec&
  • As to the increase of traffic on our one way system through town - we like the one way system, it copes fine with the odd short periods of congestion when a delivery wagon is parked up. It's ideal to be able to park outside a shop for a quick visit and it supports the Hopper bus and taxis more than adequately. The one way system with it's on street parking is one of the reasons why our town centre has survived. It supports many quick short trips into our shops. Just because someone wants to build more houses I do not want so called road improvements in Amesbury. I strongly believe that the overdevelopment of Amesbury will harm it in the long run. We have more of our fair share of new build. I feel the discovery at Blickmead should be protected and feel sure that there is more to find. Nevermind the obvious intrusion the Vineys Farm development would have on the skyline of the World Heritage Site. I can hear the call of the vixen who lives in the area of Vineys Farm, along the river bank and I do not want any unnecessary development intruding upon the habitats of British mammals and birds. We are told to plant trees, to count butterflies, to count birds and yet at the same time we see trees cut down and ground cover removed and who's to say one day we'll be asked to record hare sightings, foxes, beetles and more. It's just unnecessary desecration of wildlife. Many residents will complain of our GP healthcare and pharmacies, which are already overwhelmed. I do not care for a developer to get their way just to have appeased Amesbury with a new health centre. We need to find those improvements from elsewhere.
    - JULIA DOIG
  • We are struggling enough with recent building of Kings Gate the doctors and chemist is overwhelmed
    - Launa Trigell
  • Amesbury and the adjoining corridors to Salisbury have already supported and embraced generously massive amounts of significant development in the last 10 years. The Amesbury and Salisbury community has done more than enough to satisfy "Government Targets" and therefore proposals that further line the pockets of avaricious and greedy millionaire landowners is both a tragedy and travesty. To allow further development brings deeply and sadly into question the ability of our council, councillors and Government to steward our land and community voice responsibly . Our communities across the nation and here in our own community deserve and require future planning and development matters to be handled with outstanding and transparent objective responsibility - revealing an undeniable commitment to being ethical and moral stewards who are prepared to stand up and protect our people, our community, our wildlife, our countryside and our rivers and natural resources against what is allegedly coined as necessary "progress" but actually, in the raw, is pure avarice and greed. The social, environmental and economic impact of over populating and industrialising an area that is meant to be a Historic area and attract many thousands of tourists is a significant consideration. Salisbury and Amesbury are meant to be historic sites of significance - one could argue that more and more development bundles us into the same "urban sprawl category" as other towns with maybe one or two reliable attractions suc as the Cathedral and Stonehenge. The industrial development at Solstice Park is still not 100% utilised and yet more industrial units are absolutely NOT what the area needs. Responsible, intelligent and ethical development in the Solstice Park area would include premises that are focused on the community - not on pure commercialism. Health Centres ( note the plural) and a seriously well planned Sports Leisure, Training, Education and Community Centre with superb facilities ( such as tennis/squash/gyms/Swimming/Exercise studios/ skate park / Scouts/Brownies etc etc ) that would engage the community and give the ever growing population of disaffected, bored young and older people somewhere to go, to develop interests, hobbies , learn to serve others and bring a powerful community focus to Amesbury. It is needed already and we DO NOT need more housing to justify it! Currently urban sprawl satisfies Government targets and that is it. A tick box exercise that is having massive negative social impact if allowed to continue unchecked. Where are the checks and balances in these projects ? to the local community it clearly is about cheques and bank balances - certainly NOT the moral and ethical stewardship which we should and can require of our councillors. I would suggest a serious look at the matter of responsible and long term stewardship of this slice of Heaven that we are currently privileged to call home. The unchecked housing is leaving our roads - both A roads and country lanes ridiculously congested, litter strewn, fly tipped and used as race tracks - Children bycycling to school is a laughable phenomene that most parents in the rural community will no longer even entertain owing to the lanes being used as cut throughs for the ever increasing population. There is no distinguishing rush hour traffic from normal traffic volumes - travel time from Salisbury to Amesbury and vice versa has significantly increased owing to traffic volume. Our healthcare facilities are buckling under pressure and rendering them totally useless. As seen in the initial objections summary and narrative, excessive population has disabled any form of meaningful patient care. More housing, even with one more surgery thrown in, will not go anywhere near ameliorating the issue - at least two or three are needed. Education beyond Primary level is stretched beyond capacity and there is no Sixth Form provision. Stonehenge School has already had a huge development and is at capacity - the proposed idea of using the Amesbury Recreation Centre as development site for the school to grow into unsupportable and the extra traffic in that area is equally not thought through. The lack of Sixth Form provision still remains an issue and Andover College is expected to expand commensurate with all the development around there, let alone the development here in Amesbury. This is untenable and unsustainable and is jeopardising the accessibility and availability of educational provision for our young people to whom the Government is making grand promises of education and development. We are at our maximum of housing population. Salisbury District Hospital is on a constant state of alert and pressure. A&E waits are dangerous and healthcare professionals are increasingly demoralised by the pressure of growing housing bringing more and more people to their already stretched services. Policing, Crime prevention and safety is eroding with the increasing demands of an explosion of local population. Anti-social and dangerous behaviour used to be of note - it is now commonplace and no longer considered worthy of reporting. Police are too busy... insufficient resources to cope with our expanding communities and social issues. Litter dropping, signifcant fly tipping, domestic issues, theft and burglary, vandelism and anti social behaviour are all trademarks of an overpopulated and under resourced community... why therefore are we thinking of increasing the population further with more housing and more people? Environmental impact is beyond measure - We will never ever ever reclaim these beautiful lands and chalk streams. We are already damaging the environment, the fauna and flora and countryside heritage for our future generations - where is the responsible stewardship in these decisions? We have not been NIMBYs in this region - we have embraced developments and their population but enough is enough and our Council must examine very very thoroughly the ethics vs commercials of these decisions and be prepared to be fully accountable with 100% intergity to any member of the community who seeks a response as to why as a community we are expected to build more and more... WE must be a generation who protects not sabotages this incredible area that we are trying to steward.... it raises the underpinning question to all of this..... whose pockets are truly being lined and do they really need lining?
    - Tina Beard
  • charlesscott575@btinternet.com
    - Charles Scott
  • Development of further open country should be halted on environmental grounds among many others, and re-wilding and also food growing should. be prioritised. Our quota of building obligations has been more than fullfilled and Amesbury, as the most ancient settlement in the country, deserves to be protected.
    - Lesley Denbury
  • Yet again the flag of jobs available is waved yet, Amesbury has a lower % of unemployed than Salisbury which is itself beneath the national average. Overnight parking of LGV's has already transformed the site to a tip in some areas with discarded rubbish, and worse, from these itinerant drivers. There are brownfield sites within easy travelling distance that should be re-purposed prior to putting valued agricultural soil under concrete. The wildlife and local population in the area are constantly assailed by light pollution, CO2 emissions from vehicles using the existing Solstice Park, including those using Stockport Ave, Underwood Way and Stockport Road as a rat-run from the A345 to the A303. This development "opportunity" should not be allowed to proceed.
    - Paul Chapman
  • Dear Mr Botterill, As a relative newcomer to the Woodford Valley (moved to the area in 2022), I write to express my major concerns for the proposed outline developments at Viney's Farm & High Post. Originally attracted to the valley for its peace, tranquility, ecology and sheer beauty, I fear this expansion of Amesbury will impede on all of these aspects. Having purchased a house within a UNESCO World Heritage site, I had little concern that such developments would ever be allowed. Sadly, the fact this completely undesirable, oversized proposal is even being considered is almost laughable. I do not need to discuss the traffic concerns that will arise from such a development. The data speaks for itself, with the Salisbury Road already at full capacity and dangerous. The ecological damage that this will create is more of a concern to me. As a keen fisherman, the River Avon is one of the UK's, if not Europe's greatest treasures. Our chalk streams being the lungs of southern England. The increase in population will undoubtedly result in increased contamination of this precious waterway. Greater surface runoff will kill our rare and protected species in the valley. No amount of mitigation and waste management will prevent this. The proximity to the river of this proposal is appalling. Light pollution, noise pollution, air pollution are three major issues. I moved my family from London to raise my young children in the countryside, away from such concerns. This development will undoubtedly increase all three. The increased pressure on the already heavily burdened infrastructure is a major concern. Crime levels in Amesbury are one of the highest in Wiltshire. I see this as simply exacerbating an existing issue, with police under pressure. Waiting times at the doctors surgeries are lengthy. Schools are over-subscribed and performing badly, which will only increase pressure on an already failing system of local education. I am a strong believer in beneficial development, improvement of infrastructure and appreciate that we have a growing population in the UK. I do however know that there are a plethora of alternative sites in Wiltshire where such proposals on a mass scale could be positioned. I whole heartedly object to this abhorrent proposal, which is grossly over-sized and not even required in a SSSI. Chris Lewis
    - Mr C G W Lewis
  • Lived in Amesbury since 1993, and in that time it has seen a huge increase in both housing and the development of Solstice park. Also within this area we have seen an increase in MOD personnel returning from BAOR. In my view it is now at capacity for the infrastructure of this area, as none of the major roads have been upgraded during this time. Then we have to consider schools, doctors and dentists etc, plus the pressure on Salisbury hospital that only yesterday declared a level 4 alert. Taken together with the other housing estates that have been/are being built on the northern side of Salisbury I feel we have to, at some point take a stance and say, at least for now, that it's time to stop these massive projects and at least wait until all the present building has been completed and see how Amesbury and the surrounding areas cope.
    - Ian Richard Lawes
  • Complete over development, with tunnel looming now is not the time for more development, major consideration to infrastructure such as power, water , roads cycle ways , Drs etc etc, Before long Salisbury will be linked to Amesbury and connection will become intolerable with no clear road mapping of future developments being looked into. We seem to be building without looking into the future of what IS needed and how we plan for it, just building homes is not the answer.
    - Sheryll Jerred
  • The plan to develop the beautiful countryside at Vineys farm is shameful and depressing. The land at vineys farm represents a pristine example of the kind of countryside we are fortunate to have in Britain. Peaceful, tranquil, full of beauty and home to many, many species of birds and mammals. I use the tracks daily for running early in the morning and see hares, deer, red kite, buzzards, herons, kingfishers, barn owl and woodpeckers. I hear a cuckoo in spring. And this is just what I get to see and hear. This land and the river absolutely must be protected and cherished, and not sold by a wealthy landowner living in Monaco. I suspect he or she had acres of private land to enjoy during lockdown, when getting outside once a day was so critically important for mental heath. I continued to run on these tracks during the lockdowns and got much solace from the space, fresh air and beauty. I will do what I can to protest this disgraceful plan. For example, join a protest outside of work hours or at the weekend.
    - Anna Tooth
  • The character of Salisbury and the surrounding countryside is being destroyed by dense, oversized housing developments encircling the city. These large developments are almost exclusivly being built on precious Greenfield sites destroying wildlife habitats and farmland. In addition to this the infrastructure of our city is unable to cope with current demands and I find it utterly incredible that consideration is being given to yet another huge development driven purely by profit rather then the well being of the residents of our city.
    - Stephen Monk
  • Beautiful country side that's a peaceful haven for wildlife and lovely walking area
    - Anne Luce
  • Development should never be even considered in such a sensitive environment knowing what we know now of chemical and human waste being discarded which is so influential to natural inhabitants that are already under immense stress,
    - Keith R Morley
  • There are already too many second homes and too many unoccupied houses that need refurbish/rebuild. Stop stealing our green land.
    - A E
  • As I have previously objected Amesbury is our local town and we are already experiencing congestion on a large scale also the are is full of natural and historic places that will be encroached upon by further unnecessary development .the landscapes in our area are already affected by housing developments at Boscombe Down and Old Sarum. The road networks are horrendous and are unable to cope with any further development which in itself will bring more traffic. Please do not give the green light to these proposals?
    - Alan weston
  • This is our green and pleasant land being buried under tarmac and houses once it’s gone it will never return you will never look over the fields again the wildlife will disappear and were once animals roamed all you will have is the polluting cars trucks boilers and humans the light pollution will block out the stars so on a clear night you won’t see any.
    - Simon Ward
  • We already have a lot of new house's being built at King's way Amesbury and solstice Park on the outskirts of Salisbury. There is too much traffic on the roads as it is without adding more. Farmers will not have any land to grow crops so we will have to rely more and more on imports from abroad. We will loose a lot of wildlife as they won't have any fields or woodland to live in . Schools Dr's and Dentists won't be able to cope.
    - Michelle Stevens
  • My primary objection to these proposals concern water quality. The Avon valley is one of the most perfect chalk streams in the world - a unique UK ecological asset. This intensity of housing is certain to have an effect on abstraction not to mention further appalling and illegal sewage dumping into our rivers.
    - Jon Dovey
  • This is ruining precious greenery and countryside
    - Ferdy Reeve
  • With all the new homes at Archers Gate and still building homes at Kings Gate I think Amesbury has gone above and beyond with the building of new homes. The building of houses on this proposed site will ruin the landscape and wildlife, have detrimental effects on the environment and the nearby river. Amesbury is a wonderful small town and the local residents want to keep it that way, that’s why we live here, because of the wonderful countryside and walks across the fields to Durnfurd and along the river. The local roads cannot take any more traffic and HGV’S, plus where the proposed sight is does not have a bus service so people would have to use their cars plus no new schools or doctors or dentists. We don’t want or need anymore housing developments in our wonderful Amesbury.
    - Sharon Lockie
  • Amesbury is already hemmed in by the A303 and new builds. This is the last piece of accessible open countryside that the people of Amesbury can access. We are already fenced out by private lands and concrete so why take this last place away? It is widely enjoyed by hikers, dog walkers, cyclists, family's and an essential place for the people of Amesbury to enjoy nature and improve their mental health. The pandemic saw a huge amount of people flock to this area and it continues to be widely enjoyed. The area is a huge habitat for animals of all types which we would lose. It further blocks animals ability to access the river and the disruption when being built would be immeasurable. I appreciate the need for new homes but please don't destroy an area of such natural beauty forever.
    - David Tait
  • I strongly object to any further developments which will ruin this wonderful area in which I live.
    - Emily Vivian
  • I attended the recent meeting at Antrobus House when the somewhat elementary outline plans were presented. Discussion with the various planning consultants for the developer indicated that very few of them had bothered to walk/drive through and really examine the positives and negatives of Archers/Kings development. Surely the estates there should properly evaluated first.
    - Mrs Kirstie Richards
  • Amesbury is lacking the infrastructure and services to support the current population, and those due to resude in the proposed housing in Kings Gate and so could not support more residences. The proposed building at Vineys Farm is an area of natural beauty used and enjoyed by so many who live in Amesbury...whatever time of day you walk there you will always see others.
    - Sarah McNicol
  • Amesbury is overfaced with new developments. Medical facilities both dentists and doctors are imploding with waiting for appointments up to 6 weeks. Insufficient secondary school facilities and increase in road usage which already is unbelievably busy . Utterly ridiculous to consider further development.
    - Lynn Woods
  • These housing estates are far too big and need to be more spread about and smaller in size
    - Tom Moloney
  • This site is home to many ground nesting birds including the endangered Curlew. The enormous estate at Archers Gate opposite the proposed site has already damaged the local ecology. Housing may be required but we should be looking at brown field sites not virgin fields. Once built on many species will be lost forever.
    - Mandy Kerley
  • This will destroy the Amesbury countryside and harm wildlife. Amesbury does not have the infrastructure to cope with increase in population this would bring.
    - Heidi Andrews
  • A destruction of our beautiful green belt for profit. Amesbury has been destroyed enough.
    - Mark sim
  • Too much development spoils the communities surrounding Salisbury, and the unique countryside surrounding too. There is insufficient utility, and civic amenities, medical,educational, and social. There is also a lack of employment opportunities in this area, therefore the traffic increase is not catered for. I'll conceived idea based on financial consideration only.
    - Andrew Reed
  • There is only a single stretch of foot path along the river that remains undeveloped that Amesbury residents can access. Many people walk along there every day, all year round. It is a vital resource, not only for the ecology but for the mental health and well-being of Amesbury residents. If the Viney's development goes ahead, there is no other undeveloped river side we can walk along. The causal link between exposure to nature and improved physical and mental health is well-documented and there is increasing evidence that fresh-water ecosystems have a particularly beneficial effect. This incredibly precious, 1km stretch of river-side, rural foot path should be protected at all costs.
    - Lorna Hemingway
  • There will be nowhere left for us to spend our leisure time. As I grew up at Boscombe Down I have watched as housing development quickly destroyed all the places we children used to play. Already there's not much left but we need it for some quality of life.
    - Sonia Jackson
  • This development is not only going to affect the residents of Amesbury, it will also affect everyone living in the surrounding area. There is no infrastructure to support this development. The roads can’t cope. We need more Schools, Doctors, Dentists, Hospitals, Shops, etc. Also the Wildlife is also going to suffer with all this development. How many of these houses will have Solar Panels on them, as all the other new houses built in Amesbury does not have Solar Panels installed which is not helping climate change. I really worry that my Grandchildren will not be able to live on this planet as it will not be viable. The developers are only interested in what profit they can make they do not care about the environment at all.
    - Jacqui Elkins
  • - Routes into and out of Salisbury (A345 and alternative routes) all congested at peak hours already, this would be significantly exacerbated by the above plans. - No sixth form college within the local area - requiring students to use the above roads to Salisbury, or travel to Andover in a neighbouring county. - Dental facilities are an even bigger problem than medical/doctors facilities. - Extending public transport to these areas does not seem particularly viable - resulting in more cars and more pollution. - The case for this significant increase in housing in the area does not seem well supported by evidence.
    - Dave Pollock
  • It seems to me that WCC are hell bent on ruining Amesbury, and do not have a care for the people already living in the area. We already have the continuing development at Boscombe Down (Archers Gate etc) which had no provision for doctors, chemists, or secondary schools. The 2 very small Boots chemists in Amesbury are overwhelmed by the amount of prescriptions that pass through their system, with large queues every day and waiting times for prescriptions to be filled now at over a week, and bearing in mind that we cannot renew until a week before the medication runs out the possibility of going without medication is now very real. As for the doctors surgeries in Amesbury - well! Getting a face to face appointment is impossible, and virtual appointments are not a suitable or sufficient alternative. The staff at the doctors and chemists are bearing the brunt of their customers' dissatisfaction, which is surely leading to stress. I refer you to Wiltshire Housing Site Allocations Plan 2020, which allocates 2440 dwellings over the period 2006-2026 for Amesbury, Durrington and Bulford (now a 'market town'), but does not give any stated housing allocation areas in Amesbury. It also states the requirement for avoiding harm to the WH site of Stonehenge and Avebury, the adverse impacts on the Avon river SAC, and avoiding harm to ecology. The proposed developments are not required, will lead to more congestion in the surrounding area and do not seem to be environmentally sustainable.
    - Kathi Baker
  • We have lived in Ford for 22 years and have seen the area change from green fields to concrete housing estates. We have seen a great decline in wildlife and our medical services are just overloaded at present. Any future developments in our area will just have an even more negative effect on our surroundings and cause more everyday stress to people living here. We are already overpopulated with all the problems that that brings.
    - Carole Stanton
  • Disturbance/harm to the diversity of wildlife that inhabit and thrive in the area. Enhanced flood/water logging risk to an area that is already susceptible.
    - Angela Broster
  • We strongly object to these plans to build both a residential and industrial development along the A345. It is quite obvious that the developers are planning in the long-term to have full ribbon development along this transit route linking Amesbury to Salisbury. This is arguably the easy option for developers and councillors to take as this is virgin countryside and an easy planning target. The increased traffic and human habitation without fully supporting infrastructure (schools, medical and roads etc) will be detrimental to all our current local and transport networks; particularly with the significant increase in lorries and large vehicles. We must make more effort to protect our environment, water courses, wildlife and archaeological heritage. Furthermore, in todays challenging world a greater emphasis is needed on sustaining our agricultural resources together with our natural countryside and wildlife. We strongly object to this creeping development and would advise that greater effort must be made by the planning authorities to use brown field sites and those areas already utilised for industry and housing.
    - Alan Collett
  • I called the doctors everyday for a week to get an appointment without any sucess of getting through. so i went down in person to be told there were no appointments unless it was an emergancy . which it wasnt, the nxt day i had to queue for 55 mins outside the chemist to get my regular monthly prescription. The queing happens every month now. Thankfully this time it didnt rain. My daughters partner cannot get into the family dentist in Amesbury as they cannot take on any more patients due to being fully booked and you want to build more houses in Amesbury. Total and utter Madness!!.... The area in question is farm land and has animals all over it and thats how it should stay. There is a wood running parallel to the river lots of animals and birds live there all this will be gone. Amesbury has done its bit with Butterfield and Archers Gate. Please dont ruin whats left of this town and its countryside. Once the beautiful countryside has been destroyed with houses theres no going back. Leave Amesbury in peace now please.
    - Stephanie Morton
  • The road from Salisbury to Amesbury used to offer views of the English countryside at its best, much appreciated not just by residents but also by the many tourists visiting Stonehenge and Salisbury Cathedral These views have been impacted by developments at Archer's Gate and Longhedge and if the proposed developments at Viney's Farm and High Post go ahead we will eventually have ribbon development all the way. AS many others have said, Enough is enough; it is time to stand up for the countryside as a precious and finite resource.
    - David Hutchison
  • The current road infrastructure is already heaving at the seams (have you tried to drive past Salisbury?). This will exacerbate the issues. You can’t just throw more people into the same area and not consider the load on the road network. Before building yet more housing, explain how you will manage the horrific traffic (and road wear) issues we have currently.
    - Graham Murphy
  • Increased development without concern for infrastructure upgrades, principally sewerage.
    - Nathan Friel
  • I see this huge development as unnecessary. It far exceeds the targets set by Government which could be met by enlarging other smaller developments without detriment to our beautiful countryside. Once it concreted over, we will never get that back.
    - Ian & Nicky Tennent
  • 'Historic Amesbury' and the surrounding villages will be irreversibly damaged by the proposed developments. The damage to river and woodland SSSI will be irreversible and irretrievably change our fragile landscape for which this part of Wiltshire is known for and which in turn attracts the visitors and tourism, which sustains so many existing local businesses. The road network is insufficient for this dramatic increase in development and will cause congestion throughout Amesbury, surrounding villages and back on to the A303 trunk route, which is already creaking at peak times. The close proximity of our historic and biodiverse World Heritage Site is of huge concern, with the impact on traffic, pollution, light pollution etc etc. This is a treasured landscape, which we should be protecting for future generations not risking for a short term and ill thought out gain for a handful of individuals. Once allow unnecessary development on such a treasured and biodiverse rural landscape there is no going back. We have a responsibility to protect the history and beauty of our local area, this development recklessly risks it all.
    - Louise Jopling
  • Amesbury has expanded Beyond belief and already can’t cope with the additional homes recently built. There is a huge escalation in drink related issues at night and schools, doctors are at bursting point. The town simply cannot accommodate any more housing. This is supposed to be a National Heritage site and be respected for that.
    - Nicole Blake and Andrew Blake
  • The quality of public rights of way and the ability to immerse yourself in nature for mental well-being, has long been one of the best qualities Amesbury can offer. It boosts toursim and lends us the ability to be the perfect backdrop to 2 world heritage sites. Without this, Amesbury will become little more than another suburban jungle. Many of the primary schools in the area use these rights of way as nature discovery walks. They teach our young people the joys that nature can offer and also the respect that it requires to live amongst it. If these developments are to go ahead, we will lose this small but important part of our education. With increasing focus on the environmental impact of our actions, it is hard to see these developments as little more than a way to line someone’s pocket. There is also the threat of polluted run off from the Vineys development plans. Britains waterways are already significantly polluted and this development would just add yet more strain on the environment. Amesbury can barely sustain the recent developments it already has, with the lack of higher education and access to sixth form and colleges. As a parent I know how important the right higher education establishment is for our children and in order for them to accesses it, many already have to travel outside of Wiltshire. In addition to schools, medical facilities (doctors and dentists) in the area are already oversubscribed. The new developments, such as Kings Gate, are constantly causing animosity between neighbours over parking and narrow roads. When we moved here, Amesbury was a quiet, friendly place to settle and raise our children. These new developments threaten to turn our once welcoming little town into just another sprawling suburb. Please reconsider.
    - Dawn Cannon
  • * AONB - this will be detrimental * Rare Wildlife needs protecting here * Important chalk stream already suffering from 21st century life, needs to be considered * I don't live but I come down regularly and these things are important to me
    - Claire Waterfield
  • Viney's Farm proposal will build right up to a SSSI and these types of endangered landscapes do not cope well with that type of pressure. All four sites will put a huge extra burden on water supply and waste management. Currently water companies are unable or unwilling to implement any ecologically sustainable strategies to cope even with the their current commitments. Inevitably they will fall back on the well known loopholes in legislation designed to protect water quality and the wider environment. I find all of the above unacceptable and suggest that development plans for all four West Amesbury sites are put on hold until both Wessex Water and Southern Water demonstrate their ability to cope; firstly by getting their current operations within guidelines (Water Framework Directive?) and then showing a workable plan for coping with the added requirements from the proposed developments. Any subsequent acceptance of the Water Company's proposals should include full access to transparent monitoring by all interested parties and must be backed up with agreed and stringent penalties.
    - Rupert Smythe
  • Since archers gate and kings gate have been built/ still building it is all an eye sore it was a lovely town when we moved here and now it is all so built up! We cannot get a dentist local as no one has spaces every month I do the rounds in calling and they do not offer waiting lists for some ridiculous reason this has been over 6 Years! I have to drive 1 hour 35 minutes back to where I used to live to attend the dentist which is just unbelievable! The drs surgery’s around cannot cope along with the struggles of Salisbury hospital and a&e It’s scary to think I had to take my child to a&e a few weeks back and the wait was over 6 hours! And I truly believe that this would be even worse if you increase the volume of houses and people!! Local secondary schools for families who do not drive there is 1!! With the cost of living increasing etc there is no way people can afford the additional fees of bus passes to send a child to school! There just seems to be little care for individuals that are already here and greed to produce more houses and get rid of the greenery affecting the wildlife around. We have also had a problem with an increase of rats! Upon speaking to pest control they have clearly said due to the new builds and the disturbance that it causes the rats have to find somewhere to go! It would be such a shame for more houses to be built to overfill Amesbury and surrounding areas we cannot cope as it is!
    - Stacie
  • This site is located to the North West if Avon and the valley of the Avon. It is too far from the town centre for most people to walk. This is a beautiful area that attracts walkers every day. There needs to be an expansion plan for Amesbury that has broad support, not ad hoc housing estates.
    - Clive Underhill
  • I believe that this housing project would damage and ultimately destroy this countryside together with the Hampshire Avon and its beauties around it. All the building process, tools, resources and people required to do this project would have already started damaging this area even before the project would complete. Housing should be done where the right place is and this is not the right place to build anything. If anything, we should be adding more nature around the things we built, not viceversa. Talk to people and find the right place for this project. It does not belong here and never will. Leave nature be. Nature is our own natural healing place. If you don't, you will all bare the blame for floods, more global warming and its devastating effects. Please read this and think twice.
    - Mugurel Budara
  • Enough for heavens sake - huge developments in this area over the past 10-20 years - we simply do not need all these extra houses and the strain on the local economy and facilities is incalculable. Add to these the developments outside Salisbury and you are just simply covering the countryside with housing - that is not needed. PLEASE STOP BUILDING EVERYWHERE
    - SM Vickery
  • Amesbury is over flowing as it is and can not keep up the the amount of residents needs
    - Roger Hare
  • Stop destroying the area!
    - Stacey Brindley
  • Development in and around Amesbury has become 'an over saturated solution', further excess building will turn the 'village' into a suburb of Salisbury. The irreparable damage to the countryside, ecology and overall environment that these proposals will establish is entirely irresponsible. There are 'brown field 'sites that should be investigated, and developers' submissions directed to these sites. I formally object to all these proposals.
    - Nigel de Foubert
  • This will ruin our countryside. There is insufficient infrastructure. Additional traffic congestion will result in these developments. Houses being built are already not being sold.
    - Beryl Mccarthy
  • The area around vineys Farm is the green lung of Amesbury. Our river is one of the best chalk rivers in the country and all the extra run off from this proposed development will damage it. This is also a wonderful place to walk and is very important for the residents of Amesbury enabling them to walk safely and improve their mental health and well-being
    - Marguerita Goldthorp
  • Enough is enough, the areas are being over developed especially with insufficient infrastructure! Pure greed comes to mind, a number of people making a lot of money with no consideration for anything or anyone else. This is happening in more and more places, we’re over populated already, it has to stop somewhere!
    - John Peachey-Austing
  • As much as we need living and working spaces, we need nature to keep us alive! The wildlife is declining drastically but still the council wants to kill more of their living environment. We need the wildlife as much as they need us!
    - Kerstin Beacall
  • This is totally unneeded and unwarranted in Amesbury. The town has grown expediently over the past 10 years and there is a serious lack of infrastructure to support more people in the area. The proposed sight is a beautiful area of Amesbury of huge value to wildlife and the mental well being of the existing residents. This development will undoubtedly damage the ecology of the area and the river way. This should not be allowed to happen and is not for the benefit of the people in the area it is of benefit financially to a land owner who will not be impacted by these decisions.
    - Jennifer Robinson
  • I have been visiting Amesbury on a regular basis for over 20 years and there has been a significant amount of development in the local area in that time. Whilst I recognise that there is a need for additional housing it seems to be that the Amesbury area has accommodated more than its fair share. The pressure on roads, countryside, schools etc would be significant if development was allowed on the additional areas of land which are proposed for inclusion in the local plan. It would seem sensible to focus development on areas around towns such as Andover where there is appropriate infrastructure and to limit further development around smaller towns and villages such as Amesbury.
    - Jan Davies
  • I object to proposals to build on Viney’s Farm and at or near High Post. When I first came to this area 31 years ago, Amesbury was a pleasant town sitting by the river Avon, with a good balance of housing and facilities, and surrounded by beautiful countryside. Since then, housing development initially spread outward along Boscombe Road and adjacent roads. That much was reasonable. However, with the advent of Archers Gate, the town became over-developed. With further development at Kings Gate, the eastern side of Amesbury has become a characterless, sprawling housing estate with continuing loss of green space and an ever-growing traffic problem. The proposal now to expand westwards along the river Avon at Viney’s farm is shockingly irresponsible. With limited facilities in Amesbury, every new house means extra traffic for employment, shopping, schooling, healthcare and so on. This traffic will in large part add to the already over-loaded A345 as well as adding to the rat-runs through the Woodford Valley onto the A360 and Wilton. The river Avon and its surroundings provide a priceless environment for a host of wildlife, from trout to otters to deer and a wealth of birdlife. The Viney’s Farm development will have a clear negative impact on the wildlife and ecology of the area. Immediately downstream, the Woodford Valley is a carefully-controlled flood plain. Replacing agricultural land with housing along the river at Viney’s will inevitably lead to an increase in run-off into the Avon, adding to the flood risk in the Valley. With regard to the High Post area, I object to this planning proposal on 3 grounds: visual, historical and traffic. Visual. The site for this proposed development is one of the highest points in the area, with unobstructed views over the regions of the Avon, Wylye and Bourne rivers, as far north as Bulford and east to Porton Down. The corollary of course is that the site can been seen from throughout this extensive region of the Wiltshire landscape. In terms of adverse impact on the visual landscape, it would be hard for planners to choose a worse position for further industrial development. Historical. For centuries Salisbury has developed on low-lying land at the confluence of the Nadder, Wylye, Avon and Bourne rivers. Our generation has inherited a fine market and cathedral town set in a region of beautiful rolling countryside. The town does not dominate the countryside, due to its relatively low elevation and in much of the region the only visible part of the town is the tip of the cathedral spire. The town and the surrounding countryside complement each other: housing and industry on the one hand, and farming, recreation and wildlife on the other. Current proposals to develop along the ridge of the A345 break this centuries-old balance between Salisbury and its rural setting. For the first time in its history, Salisbury is breaking out of its natural setting in a ribbon development along the ridgeways. This has already started with housing developments creeping north along both the A360 at St Peter’s Place and the A345 at Longhedge. If the proposed developments at High Post north and High Post south go ahead, planners will have effectively given the green light to urban ribbon development from Salisbury to Amesbury. We would pass on to future generations an irreversible loss of the fine visual environment of southern Wiltshire that we have inherited and enjoyed. The Wiltshire Council Local Plan, Emerging Spatial Strategy, January 2021 section 3.63 makes this very point, “Previous iterations of Local Plans for the Salisbury area show how expanding the city outwards is becoming increasingly difficult. The undeveloped landscape setting and approaches to Salisbury provide its distinctive Cathedral character and these areas would be lost.” Section 3.64 foresees a decision to contain the spread of the city. Traffic. The A345 is already a busy route, connecting Salisbury to Amesbury, Salisbury Plain and the A303. Recent housing developments at Old Sarum, Longhedge and Archers / Kings Gate have increased commuter traffic. Castle Road in Salisbury is already extremely busy. We have seen at Churchill Way and the A36 how development along a main through route can reach a tipping point where traffic becomes stationary at peak times. If the A345 goes the same way, driving through and within Salisbury will become increasingly difficult. As a resident of the Woodford Valley, I am particularly concerned about the increase in traffic using the rat runs through the narrow side roads of the valley. Traffic on the rat run via Camp Hill, through the Woodfords and up from Netton to High Post has increased in recent years and is already heavy at commuter times. These roads are not suitable for anything other than light local traffic. They are narrow, in quite poor condition and (for the greater part) have no pavements. Walking or cycling on these village roads is already risky at times despite their being part of the National Cycle Network (Route 45). Development at or near High Post would inevitably increase the burden on valley roads, as commuter and delivery traffic from Wilton, the A36 (west) and A360 will exploit the shortcuts to avoid the centre of Salisbury.
    - Nigel Wood
  • Amesbury can not take any more development. The infrastructure is not in place nor the amenities that are required e.g. doctors, dentists. The whole countryside is disappearing and the promise of affordable homes is a dream. How do people afford to buy these homes or even the cost of the rent? I can't and I have a reasonably well paid job. We have spoiled what was lovely countryside and replaced it with pollution and increased traffic that is using roads that are not suitable or well maintained. Develop brown sites, not taking away the farmland/ countryside otherwise we will not be a UNESCO World Heritage site but just become an extension of Salisbury.
    - Debbie Mardell
  • In 57 years living here there has never been worse flooding, especially across the road from Woodford through Stratford sub Castle which was impassable. There should be NO development to the west of A345 to exacerbate this problem with inevitable run-off of water from further housing. The dearth of surgeries, pharmacies and secondary schools continue to be a concern
    - Jean Coates
  • Amesbury and surrounding areas has already over expanded and in my view now has enough housing. Our medical teams are working under immense pressure already to cope from the influx of population including our much needed forces. We need to stop all the over development before our area looses all of its character.
    - Mrs Jacqueline Sainsbury
  • Amesbury has grown out of all recognition since we arrived in 1988 and I think as it now has the 8th fastest population growth amongst small towns in the South West we need to be sensible and put a stop to any more building. We do not need more housing and do not have the infrastructure in place to cope with the present population. we are all doing more to save the planet and our wild life and rivers are being threatened as well as bridle paths fast disappearing under concrete. I want any future children to be able to play in our lovely green fields and enjoy the lovely nature we have in abundance around us here.
    - Nicole Blake
  • This is simply vandalism of valuable and viable farmland of which we now need more than ever if we are to feed the nation and reduce the effects of carbon on the environment. Add to this that the local A345 road is at capacity and the speed and attitude of drivers who use the HighPost/Woodford valley road/Wishford Road to A360 and A36 as a fast rat run link to avoid the A303. It’s madness on an unsustainable scale in terms of destruction and danger to inflict to the whole area.
    - John Bennett
  • The proposals to develop a further 800+ acres of land around Amesbury are clearly a reflection of the developers and land owners desire for profit ,and show complete disregard for local and national interests. There is no recognition of the strategic requirements to secure food supplies by retaining, not reducing, farmland. The current conflict in Ukraine makes it absolutely clear that we need to be more not less self reliant. The recent new highs of 40 degrees + are, we are advised, to be the 'new normal' and demonstrate that we need to do all that we can to preserve our environment. At a local level the 600+ objections that have been tabled so far eloquently make the case that there is inadequate infrastructure to support the existing population. The waiting times for doctors surgeries and the impossibility of obtaining a dental appointment are well known. The schools are overcrowded and transport links unable to cope. The recent developments at Archers Gate, Kings Gate, Longhedge and St Peter's Place (on the A360) have all come without adequate investment in the infrastructure. We understand that Wiltshire has met it's housebuilding targets and analysis would I am sure show that the Salisbury/Amesbury area has been particularly prolific. The expansion of development along the A345 with Vineys Farm, and High Post North and South, would result in a ribbon development linking Kings Gate with Longhedge. Such a development would completely alter the local landscape, restricting views for tourists visiting Stonehenge and Salisbury and creating a linear urban sprawl without a heart. In short there can be no justification at all for the four development sites proposed and all should be excluded from the Emerging Local Plan.
    - John McColl
  • The town does not have the infrastructure to cope with the present population let alone a doubling . Cant see a doctor,dentist,no police station or permanent fire station, no ambulance station ,only 2 chemists , no leisure facilities for both young and old,eg cinema,swimming pool, etc. Generally the town is poorly supplied with all facilities for its size
    - Richard Mansell
  • It is clear to me that if these go ahead there will shortly be no separation between Amesbury and Salisbury - simply development all along the road joining the two towns. The road is already very busy and dangerous and we do not need more traffic on it. Further development in an area in/near the Stonehenge World Heritage site is not acceptable - it will destroy ancient sites and disturb the wildlife in a beautiful area. There are other/better areas to build houses - all the empty buildings in Salisbury need using first before fresh countryside is ploughed up.
    - Susan Roller
  • Harm to natural countryside
    - James
  • This would completely ruin the precious countryside in Amesbury. There aren’t many greenfield sites left in this country and plenty of brownfield sites to built on. Viney’s farm is next to a river and will only cause more pollution, soil erosion and wildlife disturbance in the lovely freshwater habitat. There are so many rare species of animals and plants in this area which will be heavily disturbed by the habitat destruction, increased pollution, and increased human activity. This is one of my, and many other peoples, favourite walking routes. It would be such a shame if this land, and the three other projected sites, would be built upon.
    - Jonny Timperley
  • Far too much traffic already no infrastructure to cope
    - Judith Ashley
  • Get a grip
    - mr graham chalke
  • Amesbury has already lost a large area of countryside with the Archers Gate Development which is still expanding and to lose other large area at Vineys Farmand High Post would be hugely detrimental to the area. New housing should utilise brown field sites wherever possible before looking at more sensitive areas such as these.
    - Richard Taylor
  • I have been visiting the Amesbury and its surroundings regularly for over two decades and have observed the quite dramatic changes in the area over that period. It seems to me that development of yet more greenfield sites is going to destroy the rural landscape that we all wish to preserve and enjoy. The idea of a building development on the riverside fills me with a profound sadness. The whole character of an area will be utterly changed. Instead of quiet footpaths, fields and hedgerows we will have another anodyne housing development with a ghastly pub that will contribute noise and general pollution. At the moment the area around Viney's Farm is greenfield with open access to the public to some fabulous walks. Build these houses and those walks will be lost forever.
    - Jonathan Scott
  • Briefly, I have fished here for more than 30 years but this development looks wrong from future of Amesbury's point of view as well. The A345 is already awkward and over busy with rush hour choke points, this gives two more. The town is going to become a straggling ribbon development connected only along main roads. This site is very visible and made a natural town boundary - so where would you stop after this? The R.Avon, a national treasure, is already groaning under the current sewage load and aquifer over extraction - it doesn't need this many more mouths and bottoms - as is plain for all to see.
    - Charles Simeon
  • Please save this green site. Please do the right thing and reject the proposal in its entirety. Farmland is precious, feeding the country is vital. This is a beautiful, unspoilt place, and it is a much appreciated asset for the people of Amesbury and Archer’s gate. People walk and cycle there, on the ancient rights of way. There is abundant wildlife, including deer, skylarks, hares and buzzards. These homes are not needed here and not wanted. We have already lost enough of the Amesbury area to concrete. The A345 is saturated and dangerous: the last thing it needs is additional traffic from more feeder roads. I cannot see any benefit to the community whatsoever, unless you count lining the pockets of someone who is already rich. Please do the right thing and protect this beautiful and valuable site. Let us not lose one square inch of it to development.
    - Mrs Susie Gibson
  • gazza.1@hotmail.com 1st and foremost, Amesbury cannot support another 5000 (est) people living here, 2nd farming cannot be wiped out to be replaced my more houses and industry. 3rd we need to think about wildlife and the environmental issues that are so prevalent. 4th our roads would need to be upgraded, further exasperating the previous issues. Come on WCC use common sense or maybe this is an opportunity for "back handers" that is too good to miss
    - Gary minnitt
  • I am extremely concerned about the plans to build new houses near the Hampshire Avon. If the plans go ahead it will be the most idiotic and unnecessary mistake any country administration could make. Our nature is precious and due to our reckless destruction of it we are now having to survive climate change, loss of biodiversity and land impoverishment. I hope whoever is in charge of this folly will come to his or her senses and throw the building. plans into the rubbish bin and start thinking about how we can respect our country.
    - Shirley Moore
  • I have lived in Amesbury for 22 years and when I was able to walk on farm tracks, we used to enjoy walking up on the hill close to Vineys farm. Also , walking along the river path, from the hatches to South Mill . I am very concerned about the traffic on work house hill A345 exiting Amesbury. Already it is very hectic when the 30 Mph limit changes to 60 mph.
    - Kathleen Kirby
  • The roads can not take more commuters, not just HGV's, especially the A345 between Amesbury and Salisbury
    - Joan Chapman
  • Why do we need more houses. When there are plenty of empty houses and flats,,, and they still haven't finished longhedge and Kings Gate,,,,,,,
    - Stuart Gray
  • We need infrastructure in place first i.e Medical services etc.
    - Prakash Prema
  • I remember in the late 1980s objections were raised to the Butterfield Down housing developement to the west of Porton road. I was a member of the Amesbury Action Group. But it went ahead and at the time it was said 'that money changed hands' but know nothing about that. Most of East Amesbury is now a 'red brick jungle', the town's population doubled with no practical increase in schooling and medical services. So here we go again!! I don't have children but as far as medical services it must be remembered that by a recent local population vote Barcroft Medical Centre is the worst in the Salisbury area, results being in the Salisbury Journal newspaper. One is more likely to see the 'second coming' at the local church than a doctor. As I stand in the doorway of my home and look east over Earl's Farm Down, south of Beacon Hill, I see crops being grown for the Nation's food. I would rather see that than factory units. Is that being selfish? It will bring employment for 2000 people they say, how do they know this. They don't, it's just speculation. Where are they going to live? Another couple of red brick jungles. I went to the presentasion at the Baptist Church last week. I asked about the extra schooling and medical services needed for the increase in Amesbury's population, needless to say, as in 1990 reguarding the Butterfield Down developement I got no answer.
    - Dennis West
  • I cannot get registered with a dentist, and neither can my wife. Amesbury is already at over-capacity for the existing facilities. If you build any more homes, destroying green space, the lives of everyone currently in and around Amesbury will be made even worse. This development is wrong.
    - Mark Arathoon
  • I am worried about the impact on the flood plain .
    - Alison Evans
  • No estimate of what is considered affordable. Short term, to have this size development going on whilst work is being carried out, over a number of years, whilst the tunnel/dualling of the A303 is preposterous.
    - Brian J Ford
  • Our medical facilities are already overstretched. It is often difficult to get a doctors appointment. The dentist won’t take on any new NHS patients. The road from Solstice Park to the 345 is very busy already and access to Salisbury due to population increases is leading to severe congestion to the detriment of businesses, the environment and locals.
    - Marianne
  • This is at the head of the Woodford valley and is very close to the river Avon which is a SSSI. Although I understand that we may need extra housing building on this side of the A345 will spoil the country feel to Amesbury that has been here for hundreds of years and will spoil the peace of the beautiful valley. I work at SDH and this hospital is already bursting at the seams and we have a lack of doctors and nurses and the ones we do have are demoralised and exhausted but still maintain an excellent level care. Surely money would be better spent on hospitals, doctors, dentists the police force, fire brigade and sewerage works for the people already living in this area.
    - Lynn Shorten
  • Amesbury is vastly becoming oversubscribed, overpopulated and over polluted. There are few beautiful green spaces left and these habitats are being destroyed, not just by the houses being built here but by the pollution that this number of humans create. The roads, rivers, bushes and woodlands are already covered in litter. There are no dentist or Drs appointments available. A family member works in a pharmacy here and they’re at breaking point due to not having the capacity to cope with the volume of orders and customers. This overdevelopment of Amesbury needs to stop for the betterment of all that currently live here.
    - Sarah Matthews
  • Ther are numerous reasons why we object. One is the over 800 acres being used to see the development plans, the there will be no schools, medical or new doctors will not be a feature and the amount of traffic would cause total disruptions and the wild life would be affected.
    - Mr and Mrs R.W. Acworth
  • As a resident of south mill road I do not believe it is sustainable for my road to be used as an access road. In addition, the further loss of the countryside and public footpaths is detrimental to the surrounding area. During lockdown I believe areas such as Vineys Farm has been a safe haven for many people who struggled with their mental health, myself included. Further overdevelopment of the area would limit peoples access to the beautiful countryside we live in.
    - Abi Cannon
  • Amesbury is struggling to cope with the massive drug and anti-social behaviour issues as it is. The last thing it needs at this stage is more populous adding to the situation. This town has become an unpleasant to live, with the drugs being dealt on the streets and field and not to mention the youth are disgraceful in Amesbury. The total disregard for the green spaces is simply sickening, the amount of trash they leave is terrible.
    - Sean Ferrier
  • Damage to the country side. Area is already over loaded with house and developments. The infrastructure can’t cope now. Doctors, dentists, school, hospital and roads can’t cope now. Damage to the country side and wildlife is awful.
    - Cherrida Foulger
  • When will the planners learn we need to protect our rivers - both for the sake of the environment and to help the flooding that has become an annual event. I don't live here, but I visit regularly as it is a beautiful spot, and am appalled that you are considering proposals to built all over this area. It seems to me thattThe river cannot cope with more run-off from housing and roads, especially as you plan to build on a slope that will channel water towards the river.
    - Mark Waterfield
  • You are allowing all of these houses to be built but almost no infrastructure at all. No extra Shops, no extra Drs or Dentists. No where for children and teenagers to go to.
    - Simon Day
  • This is the same path that developers and Council take each time, develop the land and maybe put in the infrastructure (schools, medical facilities etc) later. But that infrastucture did not appear after the last round of development let alone being able to support more development. I have served in the military for 34 years with a significant proportion of it in the Wiltshire area and I have seen the beautiful countryside surrounding Amesbury being eroded by monstrous estates. Maybe some investment in the town centre instead which seems to be dying a death.
    - David Forrester-Addie
  • Amesbury is becoming overcrowded, we do not have enough facilities for a larger population. We are part of the countryside and that’s the way we want it, if more and more houses and being built not only are you stripping the countryside we adore from us but you’re also stripping the biodiversity away by ruining the habitats of our cherished wildlife. More important things should be attended to first such as sorting out the roads, building more GP Clinics, larger car parks, facilities we need rather than making it harder for us to use the facilities we currently have due to the shear amount of people moving into Amesbury.
    - freya niven
  • I am very concerned about this development, particularly where the planed development is on the flood plain!
    - Steve Williams
  • We have a topical moment in the media where the transnational water companies are getting us to pay for the improvements in sewage that they were entrusted with 40 odd years ago. Now Wiltshire council are trying to pass unsustainable planning that will put further pressure on the extremely sensitive environment that they are entrusted with. Who stands to gain from this? Certainly not the people of Amesbury and it's surrounds. My principle objections are that our chalk streams are the rarest river habitat on the planet and far from putting further pressure on their precious water we should be looking at sustainable alternatives - how about doing something in the national interest such as building a few reservoirs? A further concern is the outstanding archeology of the area which will be disturbed with inadequate time for reasonable appraisal and research. It seems that the council is riding roughshod on the heritage and environment of Wiltshire. You are out of touch and these development proposals seem to be profoundly damaging for a great gamut of reasons. Who 'really' stands to gain and how? None of the PR on this has me convinced one iota.
    - Tim Hicks
  • There are more important issues to be dealt with. Salisbury has 9 out of the 12 AQMAS in Wilts. The NHS cannot cope with the undoubted medical effects of air pollution of traffic origin, which will continue for at least another decade. The 303 Stonehenge problem is only a part of the South Wilts unfit for purpose road system and needs to address the issues raised by Col Parker many years ago. Please note that I was present at the John Clewer chaired Transport committee when 2 invited members of Highways England SW attended and informed us that the S Wilts roads system was unfit.. I have been a Salisbury District council portfolio for roads waste and environment. The tunnel was said to require diversion of road traffic through the city for 5 years. Setting aside the need for NHS resources we cannot justify the tunnel, and the inner city ring road with no less than 5 A roads joining it. It is disgraceful and hazards all all citizen, visitors and even the unborn ! The Clapham coroner said that an asthmatic child had died as a result of air quality which was not within the regulation limits. This suggests that the time is up for poor AQ control, especially due to ill considered private developments of this alarming scale signed Dr James Robertson, FRCP MRCS LRCP DCH RSA
    - james robertson
  • I object for the following reasons: 1. There is already insufficient infrastructure for the local population, crime has increased and quite frankly Wiltshire council has ruined the local area. The only thing they manage to efficiently do wrong is put brainless mini roundabouts everywhere. 2. If local and central government actually bothered to do something about controlling illegal and legal immigration there would be no requirement for the houses.
    - Grant Taylor
  • LACK OF FACILITIES!!! Been here for a year now and love the space walks and peace but STILL CAN'T GET A DENTIST! There's two pharmacy's both are very busy always a que of at least 7 people.
    - Danny Winters
  • There are enough houses already built, this will have a massive impact upon the environment, the right to green space, countryside.
    - Mrs Nicola Mann-Rae
  • A development in this location, next to an important chalk river, is unacceptable when we are in a biodiversity emergency. This will be a bat corridor and light pollution will negatively affect their foraging.
    - Amanda Brookman
  • It seems entirely wong to further develop the Stonehenge and Old Sarum landscape. It is already under threat from recent developments of poor housing quality with poor public transport connectivity and a lack of educational and health services. The countryside around Amesbury and Salisbury is unique, both in its chalkland biodiversity and its archaeological interest. Chalk downland and chalk streams are a feature of Southern England and barely exist elsewhere. We need to protect these rich and unique land forms. If developed for housing, the loss from both a cultural and a sustainable green viewpoint would be devastating.
    - Caroline Harmsworth
  • Since I moved to Amesbury 32 years ago I have seen the town grow from a small village/ town into a sprawling urban development. I don’t think developers will be happy until it looks and feels like Andover and personally I don’t want to live there. More and more people are being squeezed into an infrastructure that has not changed much in 32 years. Same amount of doctors, dentists, shops although most of them are now charity shops, hairdressers or estate agents which generally tells you that the town centre is in decline. Yes some development at Solstice Park has been welcome and created jobs for local people and we are quite well off for supermarkets now. But the fact is the road system remains the same the A303 is a mess, the A345 going into Salisbury is poor at peak times and the A36 along Southampton Road is a no go area at anytime during the day. Going in the opposite direction towards Swindon you come into Marlborough which is another lovely town blighted by traffic. All the houses you want to build will have on average between 2 and four people living in them! So until you sort the infrastructure out there’s no point in moving more people into an area that is already pushed for doctors, dentists, police, fire, ambulance, hospitals and a decent road system.
    - Paul McDonnell
  • A bad idea to build so near to a river and area of wild life habitat
    - Celia Emery
  • I would like to add my objections to the applications on the grounds listed above, but above all because I believe that it is important these areas remain in their existing agricultural use as social and recreational amenities for EVERYBODY, the residents in surrounding towns or villages as well as tourists and visitors, who currently enjoy this important heritage landscape.
    - Joe Studholme
  • It will harm our Chalk Stream one of our most important rivers we have in the world not just the UK
    - Ken Blotheridge
  • The whole area is continuingly being built up without providing essential additional health care practices such as doctors and dentists. There are plenty of teenagers/young people in the area who already cause a lot of trouble where they don't actually have anything constructive, healthy or entertaining in the area (Salisbury and Andover are the closest which are both pretty boring for them). The congestion through Salisbury and sometimes amesbury during peak times is already frustrating, especially being by the A303. This is slowly destroying the beautiful countryside unnecessarily and along with it, natural habitats being disturbed. Start actually improving the community that is already there, making it better so that in years to come it's more welcoming for new members; instead of introducing those coming to the area to a broken community, making it worse.
    - Cheryl McEwan
  • Amesbury is the oldest continuous settlement in England and has archaeological, heritage and environmental significance. The area around Viney's Farm is loved and used by walkers, riders and families and is an asset for the health and well-being of the people of Amesbury as well as the wild life in the area. So far we have had Archer's Gate, King's Gate and Longhedge as well as smaller developments within the town. This additional development is neither wanted nor needed and those proposing it show a contempt for the character of the town, its surrounding countryside and those of us who live in it.
    - Elizabeth Mcloughlin
  • We can’t cope with the development we already have let alone additional development
    - Mark Barrett
  • Lack of chemists, queues already horrendous! NHS dentist and private dentist not taking on patients haven’t been able to get to a dentist! No secondary schools in area Loss of nature and greenery! It’s so built up already and loosing its country side feel Shops cannot cope we have small sized shops! Lots of teenagers walking around with nowhere to go and don’t want to add more volume of people to that!!!
    - Sharon
  • I have lived her for 15 months and can’t get a dentist. The doctors are over capacity by 4 times. Schools can’t take any more children. The roads can’t take any more traffic. Not to mention what all this will do to the environment.
    - Irene Read
  • This development should not be considered before the A303 tunnel is completed to reduce the summer traffic congestion.
    - Ben McNiff
  • Enough is enough. You cannot get a Drs appointment due to overhousing in Amesbury. You cannot get a dentist. Where can the remaining wildlife go? It is merely bringing more people into the area rather than housing Amesbury people, mainly those who want to be in the catchment area for the grammar schools, taking places from local kids. The schools are full to bursting. And, please, please leave a bit of country side in beautiful Amesbury. It cannot be replaced when gone forever.
    - Sylvia Wright
  • The world is already struggling to control air and pollution, problems caused by waste,also doctors dentists schools shops and jobs in an area that doesn't seem to be coping now,I personally feel, that until the structure is thought out more, I'm against any more housing developments destroying the habitat that is left between kingsgate and then over the A 345,down to the river side,where wild life will be in danger,
    - Janet Puxley
  • Water infrastructure needs addressing before the continuation of any further building
    - Jackie Robins
  • I don't think the Viney's Farm development should go ahead - the light pollution will have a big impact on the area, and the fact that it is right next to the river will destroy the wildlife in the immediate area, plus there will be so much extra traffic - there has already been too much building work in the area.
    - susie greenwood
  • Current nfrastructure is already over-burdened including medical, educational and transport. Traffic is a huge problem. The area cannot cope with more building on this scale.
    - Christine Bennett
  • Should we be building on prime agricultural land when their is a world wide food shortage
    - Andy Pike
  • The infrastructure needs improving our roads not suitable for more traffic , Old Sarum will soon be closer to Amesbury with all the house building
    - Sandra Burch
  • Using beautiful farmland
    - Wynne mcgawn
  • Amesbury has not got enough infrastructure ture to support the building of thousands of new houses. Ie Senior school Pharmacies Dentists Doctor's surgeries Swimming pool Green spaces Youth services Mental health provision for adults and young people. The planned building of the number of houses proposed would be detrimental to wildlife -protected species of birds,animals,flora and fauna Slow worms The chalkstream and it's unique ecosystem
    - Julie Edwards
  • The Hampshire Avon must be protected at all costs
    - Brian Duncan-Weeks
  • The need for housing is real but the facilities of Amesbury are already at full capacity & much of this development is on Green field sites which are agricultural and and given the renewed need for the UK to grow more food there are surely better sites. The local infrastructure simply cannot sustain this level of development, led it would seem by already very wealthy land owners looking to cash in.
    - Laura Heitz Jackson
  • Amesbury does not need anymore housing. There is not enough essential facilities in the town for the population living here now. We need to protect our countryside and wildlife by not destroying their habitats.
    - Caroline Reeder
  • There is far too much building work in that area now.
    - Jeremy Tidswell
  • The single ground put forward in the proposals for the three sites is that there is an existing infrastructure. That argument is clearly unsupported by the facts because the existing population explosion of Amesbury has already caused road congestion and a shortage of medical and schooling facilities. More infrastructure investment is needed, not more population pressure.
    - Lt Col Alex Fryatt
  • More over development & ruining the countryside. Not enough public services already!
    - David Raney
  • Pharmacy Dental and medical services are already inadequate for the area, any further development would have to bring infrastructure and not just houses for the developers to earn even more money from.
    - Louise Crow
  • Amesbury is already a building site. Kings gate, archers gate, longhenge, St. Peter’s place, netherhampton development, Larkhill development. How many more houses do we need to build in our once beautiful Wiltshire? How much more do you want to destroy? As it is currently a working farm, producing food, shouldn’t we encourage that in our current climate??? Or should we really need to import any more food because you have built over all productive farm land???
    - Heike Bailey
  • The proposed developments are not needed. Soon Salisbury and Amesbury will be joined up. All the land, apart from Solstice Park extension, is agricultural land, currently being farmed. Why more industry at High Post? There are 100’s of empty Commercial units in the area now.
    - Wendy Bright
  • Council should build council houses for rent, including flats for existing residents. No more houses without jobs
    - Elizabeth Cuthbert
  • Lovely county sidewalk for dog walkers and fitness and don’t believe it’s need
    - Mike Huggins
  • There has been a lot of development in Amesbury over recent years and the town is now well under resourced with a strain on educational, medical and social services. The Vinneys farm development in particular will ruin the countryside and threaten the ecology and beauty of the local area
    - Rebecca Burke
  • How this is even being considered is beyond me. The complete devastation this will cause to a natural habitat and ecosystem which is enjoyed by residents and tourists from all over the world is incomprehensible. The roads, sheer lack of facilities in the area for the residents who already reside in Amesbury and the surrounding areas is concerning. Doctors surgeries with 3-4 week waits, hospitals that can’t cope, dentists which refuse new patients, no car parking, roads unable to cope with volumes of traffic? We don’t need more homes we need you to stop building around a village and destroying everything about the area and the landscape! Stonehenge is being preserved with billions spent on a new tunnel then just on the other side youre happy to obliterate the landscape, force thousands of animals and insects out of their homes and change a landscape simply for the landowners greed? If this is allowed it’s a disgrace and I know the people of Amesbury are tired of it.
    - Todd Hart
  • We do not have enough facilities such as Drs, currently a 6 week wait for an appointment and even then it’s a phone one. Hour long queues to collect prescriptions , it’s insane. Traffic infrastructure is already at a maximum level. We already have enough retirement properties, not enough low income rental properties as they use help to buy then sell it on this depleting social housing stocks. We’ve left EU and we can’t afford to ruin more agricultural land which should be providing us with food. The new houses are such appalling quality they are not built to last, like fast fashion quality equivalent
    - Jennifer Brojek
  • More hoses along the banks of the river Avon will cause even more pollution, water abstraction and this river is under severe threat already without more houses being built
    - William Warner
  • My main objection is to the extension at the existing Solstice Park on the following grounds: Noise and light pollution to neighbouring residents Increased HGV traffic along Porton road,( although this was promised with the first phase of Solstice Park it has not been the case). Loss of food production farm land; especially in this current climate Finally loss of wildlife habitat and green space of which Amesbury has so little, especially with the proposal to build houses at Viney’s Farm. I attended the public exhibition regarding this proposal and spoke to representatives of said proposal but do not feel my objections were satisfied. I have lived in Amesbury for over 54 years and seen many changes. I do not feel building distribution buildings ( as described on their plans), on a greenfield site will enhance one of the oldest towns in this country.
    - Charmaine Wilson
  • Is nowhere safe from builders and greedy landowners? Is no blade of grass safe from being torn out of the ground? Are no animals safe from having their homes annihilated? The proposals are unbelievable. Amesbury is already overpopulated and under-resourced. The A345 is dangerously overloaded, even more so at rush hour/school times. Salisbury is a nightmare for traffic, especially to get in and out with huge queues which cause horrific pollution. Amesbury town centre itself is small, effectively one high street, and it's being squashed between all the building going on. No bank, one building society, doctors and dentists already over capacity and dentists simply unable to take new patients, doctors appointments scarce. No sixth form school, very little for children to do. Even the supermarkets will struggle, and that's just the parking spaces let alone products on the shelves. The walks by the River Avon are littered with dog excrement and rubbish and that will be exacerbated with thousands more inhabitants in the area. The River Avon is polluted with rubbish. The health of the river and water systems around will be damaged beyond repair. The land cannot constantly be built on without retaliation from Mother Nature. Witness the catastrophic weather conditions etc around the world because the earth has been pushed far beyond it's limits. That's what happens when humans abuse it and each little abuse, like building, building, building here, there and everywhere, adds up and the consequences are clear to see. No further homes are needed in Amesbury. Plenty of building has been done, and is still being done. It's time to stop.
    - Y Ivanov
  • No extra shops going up to accommodate all these new homes, or schools to teach the children. Roads are in shocking state as it is already
    - Terri
  • The reasons for objecting any of these developments are obvious and set out by so many others. It’s extremely concerning that these are even being considered as I am at a loss to see how any of it is justified. I am a local resident and we already feel the effects of an over developing Amesbury and Salisbury. There really is no infrastructure in place to support any of these developments. I strongly object. Please stop ruining valuable countryside.
    - Clover Edwards
  • Amesbury currently has insufficient infrastructure to support the current population let alone any new build. There are a lack of facilities already ie medical, dental, pharmacy and leisure including swimming pool. Local bus services are already inadequate. Greenfield sites would be lost, leading to tremendous loss of habitat and wildlife.
    - Patrick James
  • The government advocates sustainability and a green agenda yet at the same time oversees the perpetual and relentless concreting over of England at the rate of the size of cornwall in the last 25 years alone. This is totally unsustainable and is borne out of engineered economic growth, not natural population demand. No one wants coast to coast urbal sprawl and near total reliance on imported food but that it what our near descendants will have if the government is allowed to pursue this agenda.
    - R Fouracre
  • The Upper Hampshire Avon is a rare chalkstream and these houses and the associated run off, abstraction other pollutants will damage the already fragile environment,
    - Geoffrey Short
  • Damage to the ecology, water levels and water quality of River Avon and its fisheries.
    - Iain Hunter
  • Lack of public consultation is suspicious. High Post South, links to Longhedge & Beehive, thence Old Sarum estate, Ford and the edges of the City of Salisbury. The GREEN BELT for Salisbury is in danger, making a conurbation with Amesbury, Durrington, Larkhill etc etc.. No wonder there's no public consultation! Build on the north of A303 instead. (Dual the A303 near its current location, no need to bury it).
    - Stuart Fyfe
  • NO MORE housing or industrial development between A345 and A360. Wiltshire has well exceeded its quota of new housing. No sense of community in the new existing estates. Light pollution and river pollution would be even worse with yet more housing. Panoramic photos at recent exhibition omitted to show superimposed houses. Infrastructure over-stretched already - roads unsuitable and very dangerous, particularly the narrow lanes used as ‘rat runs’, avoiding Salisbury and Stonehenge. Doctors’ surgeries overwhelmed with more than 200% extra patients and other facilities are inadequate. Three primary schools but no provision for more secondary education to GCSE and A level courses. Damage to good agricultural land and biodiversity of the area. Archeologically the area is very important and should not be disturbed. Future generations will marvel that such a beautiful and special area could have been so desecrated by us.
    - Jean Coates
  • Amesbury has already contributed to more than enough extra housing in Wiltshire in the form of Archers Gate, King's Gate (which is still ongoing) etc etc, and it is over-saturated with homes. It is not possible to get a doctor's or dentist appointment without waiting weeks or months for the people already registered with the surgeries. The dentists refuse new patients because they are at full capacity. The Salisbury Journal called 15 dental surgeries in/around Salisbury and NOT ONE would take a new NHS patient. Instead, it was suggested to try Southampton! Dentists are in incredibly short supply and there is no guarantee that, even if a new surgery was built, it could even be staffed. WCC have already exceeded their affordable homes target, therefore no more are needed. In addition, Viney's Farm site is not included in either the local plan or the strategic housing plan so why on Earth is it even being considered? Oh, wait. It's all about money. Of course it is. There is zero consideration for the severely negative impacts on the land, local environment or the local residents. My understanding (from other objector's comments) is that the farm is a working farm and produces food; with reference to Russia's war against Ukraine and the resulting food shortages worldwide, why would anyone with one brain cell even consider/want to concrete over farmland when we need to become far more self-sufficient and reduce food imports? Oh, wait. It's all about money. Again. With regard to even basic services, there is not even a bank in Amesbury. The only one, Lloyds, closed it's doors earlier this year. There is one branch of Nationwide which is in probably the smallest shop space in the town and, when it's busy, the queue is out the door and down the street. The infrastructure is not in place now to support the requirements of the existing residents and the A345 will never cope with more traffic. All the new building, without the new proposals, is more than the original town size, a town which should be cherished as one of the oldest settlements in the UK. The Earth is past the point of no return with climate change and it's ability to support us so why cause more destruction to it? None of the proposed developments are needed, there is no employment for, overall, thousands more people. 850 new houses = +/- 1,600 cars and +/- 2,500 people. They will need to drive/be driven everywhere on roads that are, generally, already in poor condition. The extra noise and light pollution will be catastrophic on the locals, animals and ecology system. The River Avon is an SSSI and is already polluted from the sewerage works, chemical from farms, etc. Just recently, some children swimming in it, by the recreation ground, have contracted some kind of virus from the water. The river cannot survive if it is abused further. We do not own the land, we are merely custodians, and it is our responsibility to care for it and nurture it. We all know that money talks but, honestly, these proposals are so puerile that they should be laughed at and refused without even thinking about it. The green spaces are the lungs of the area which need to breathe, not just in Amesbury but everywhere in the world. Please don't let the Earth, and us, sufffocate.
    - J Ivanova
  • The increase in housing in Amesbury has had a depremental effect on all locals.. schools, doctors surgery’s, pharmacys, dentists plus local parking and amenities!! Viney’s Farm land is a mindful landscape which has been enjoyed for centuries. People count! Protect our local environment!
    - Jane Luce
  • I visit this area regularly because of the archaeology and wildlife. Please reconsider the siting of these proposals, especially the ones near the river. There is so much evidence now that building near rivers is a bad idea. Don't go for the easy option, rethink this and make decisions for the future, otherwise there will be none.
    - Anna Max
  • Amesbury Area has become over developed . This area has already met the goverment targets. Our local roads are full, our local facilities are at there limits. Enough is enough. Time for strong action against new development.
    - Roy Flint
  • This proposed development is entirely unsustainable; the traffic plan in Salisbury feeds HGV traffic through High Post , Amesbury & Boscombe to the A303, this single carriageway will need developing to cater for the further influx of vehicles; it is already struggling with the Long Hedge capacity! The infrastructure for Amesbury has not been increased to cope with the additional housing and demands placed upon it by the further development of Butterfield Phase VII, Archer's Gate and King's Gate, and that is still incomplete; there is difficulty in registering at GP and dental practices and, SDH, being the nearest A & E and long term care provider, is not being further developed despite the increase to Council coffers of the Community charge from these new properties. A long term plan to provide for the existing needs of the current community should be undertaken and then facilities put in place to meet the demand, rather than it being driven by the demand of an over-developed community.
    - Paul Chapman
  • what little pristine countryside we have left should be protected against extensive and intrusive development
    - Timothy Scoble
  • The walks around Viney’s farm was my refuge during the COVID lockdowns and remains a calming space for many people to get close to nature and a beautiful quiet space. To loose this space will have a damming effect on the physical and mental health of all generations of Amesbury. Please don’t take this away from us.
    - Paul Stitson
  • Our infrastructure is already overwhelmed with no sight of this being rectified and further development would see an even more substantial decline in all aspects of quality of life. I believe brown field sites should be used for development. Once green field sites are developed the door is open for further development, there will be no end to the rape of our countryside.
    - Mrs Jane Durcan
  • I wish to object to the scale of the proposed new build for all the above reasons. Whilst I would not be too opposed to a limited development of maximum 500 houses (to include provision for a number of really affordable one or two bedroom properties which are much needed), 1200 new homes is excessive. There is already insufficient provision of medical services and lack of secondary schools. The conservation and protection of this area of natural countryside is very important but seems to be ignored by those who support the proposals.
    - Catheryn Turrell
  • I object to these proposals on the following grounds: Doubling Amesbury and Salisbury is deleterious to both their communities and the sensitive and high value local landscape, seen from and adjacent to the World Heritage Site. The prospect of a developed corridor (including Boscombe Down) between Amesbury and Salisbury stretching for over 7 miles is overdevelopment by any stretch. Amesbury is still in character essentially a village and Salisbury a market town - to permit a doubling of what is already a large number of new housing estates in both settlements will overwhelm the rural landscape and create almost a conurbation in rural South Wiltshire. An approach by car from the A303 along the A345 will be grim! This is an area visited by many tourists which contributes greatly to the local economy. Enlargement of both settlements should be a gradual evolution not an urbanised takeover. Worse still - this proposed overdevelopment will exacerbate already overloaded local infrastructures in both areas with limited prospects to secure even more GPs (already currently too few) and dentists from a diminishing resource. No matter how many s106 agreements the Council enters with the developers, the sheer pressure of increased households will not result in the commensurate number of doctors, medical support, dentists and teachers to fill the necessary posts required by the subsequent increase in population provided by the new housing - as there is an increasing national shortage of public and private sector staff to accommodate these jobs. Research also shows (Natural England) that the intensity of urban pressures increases with the proximity and density of residential development and which impacts wildlife. To have increased pressure of housing and leisure development right on the side of the (SSSI and SAC) River Avon will cause serious environmental impact on the wildlife interest of these internationally important habitats. The proposed development would cause noise and physical disturbance by people and dogs on nesting birds/wildlife together with a high impact from the predation by pets of the adjacent wildlife in those areas set aside for nature and near housing. It will decrease biodiversity, it will not increase it as the developer wrongly claims. Building on farmland will cause loss of grassland, grass field margins, trees and hedgerows, currently under great pressure from existing housing development never mind more. The loss of this extensive farmland and hedge margin habitat will reduce the overall biodiversity in the area, no matter how many saplings and 'green' space is provided by developers. New housing occupiers will stretch even further towards the remaining open countryside to seek green space causing further erosion and disturbance to wildlife - a double whammy for biodiversity! I know housing is needed nationally but to permit these developments at the scale proposed between Amesbury and Salisbury is wrong, unjustified for our locality and very poor planning design and practice.
    - Pippa Giles
  • I strongly object to the proposals for development at Viney's Farm, High Post and the Solstice Park extension. Development in this area has already gone far enough and it has already overwhelmed the local infrastructure. We also need to remember that we are in an area of outstanding natural beauty with some extraordinary World Heritage sites and it is time we stopped and remembered our responsibilities. We need to protect this area now and act before it is too late. These propsals would be catastrophic to the area . We should act for now and for future generations. NO MORE DEVELOPMENT.
    - Clare Beckford
  • Already traffic issues. Lack of doctors and dentists. No sixth form provision at local schools
    - Debbie Ruck
  • Leave the countryside alone! Urban sprawl is taking over Wiltshire. Modern day slums of the future.
    - Clare Astbury
  • Our small beautiful town Amesbury is not the place for industrial development. The increase in building here is already harming our historic environment and is completely unsustainable. Any more would be catastrophic for not only our surrounding area but our planet. We can’t afford to add to the damage. As a local, I strongly object to any development proposals at High Post, Solstice Park and Viney’s farm.
    - Riminy Jenkins
  • This is the last piece of unspoilt countryside within walking distance of Amesbury. It is very well used as a leisure facility by walkers, runners, mountain bikers. During lockdown it was especially valued and made a huge difference to the mental health and well being of the community here. It’s loss would do incalculable harm not only to the wildlife but to local people and the visitors who come to walk the Stonehenge trail and the Avon Valley path. Also,this is productive farmland. These fields support two crops a year of cereals, beans and root crops. It is madness to build over in these days of world shortage of food. This country is supposed to be aiming for self sufficiency. Conflict in Ukraine has thrown this into sharp relief.
    - Norah Ash
  • There is fundamentally no need to increase the level of building development in this area when taken in the context of all the other housing being constructed at Solstice Park, Old Sarum and Wilton, and all seemingly without much thought about the impact on the local infrastructure, including roads, schools, and medical services. It goes without saying that the ecological harm to the countryside would be catastrophic too: there is understandably always a need for more houses, but not at such a price for everyone who lives here.
    - Jonathan Ward
  • I object to these plans, as we do not need any more homes here in Amesbury. I feel that we are physically sufficiently far enough away from Wiltshire County Council that they may feel they can use us as their dumping ground to enable them to meet their perceived statistics, with little regard to the people of Amesbury. I hope this isn’t the case. Amesbury is the oldest known place of habitation in the country and surrounded by archaeology and heritage sites. It is not suitable for further development. There clearly isn’t the infrastructure or facilities to support a vast development of this scale. This land in question is an established breeding ground for rare birds and a home to much other wildlife, it is outrageous that it should even be considered. We need to protect our green spaces, not build all over them. All brown field sites within the county should be the first port of call for any further building, if indeed it is actually required. My understanding is that it is not required. Planning Officers hopefully won’t allow themselves to be pushed into decisions based on money and the influence of developers. They are the custodians of our countryside and should protect us from bad developments. Once lost to building these acres will never be recoverable. There have been so many bad planning decisions made by councils and yet none of them are ever deemed liable. Councils should, I my opinion be fully liable for their decisions. The medieval heart of Salisbury was ripped out, back in the 1970’s and now lost for ever. 50 years down the line it is now generally accepted that it should never have been allowed to happen, but the then Council did allow it. Surely the Council is there to do what’s best for us all in the long term, not see how much they can claw in by way of Section 106 payments from the developers. None of which I doubt would benefit the people of Amesbury anyway, rather it would expand the coffers to be spent elsewhere in the County. We do not need all these houses to be build to the detriment of our countryside. Planet earth is facing a stark future as it is and by allowing this vast scale of development to take place would be adding a further nail into the coffin. All green spaces need to be preserved and protected for future generations.
    - Dreena Booth
  • OBJECTIONS I strongly object to these proposed developments on several grounds. LANDSCAPE I strongly object to this proposal on the basis that the sites are within a designated Special Landscape Area, covering much of the downland to the north of Salisbury and the proposal breaches the 2015 Wiltshire Core Strategy. It is a landscape of strong character, and currently the lack of settlement accentuates the feeling of isolation and remoteness that enrich the character of the landscape. The sits are currently in agricultural use and they sit on the edge of the Woodford Valley, a significantly beautiful landscape. The National Policy Planning Framework states that planners should conserve and enhance the natural environment and that planning policies and decisions should “contribute to and enhance the natural the natural and local environment”. It goes on to state that planning policies and decisions should ensure that developments will function well and add to the overall quality of the area, not just for the short term but over the lifetime of the development”. Any development should protect, conserve and where possible enhance landscape character. Though the sites are not within a nationally important designated landscape, they are covered by the Special Landscape Area, saved policy C6 SDLP. The sites largely comprise of Grade 2 agricultural land which is defined as best and most versatile and highlighted in the NPPF paragraph 174b. These proposals therefore contravene those principles. The proposal to build 1200 houses at Viney’s Farm and 500 houses at High Post on farmland will encroach onto significant and beautiful rural areas and ruin them. Indeed, the proposals are grotesque and there will be severe harmful effects on the landscape, that will contravene established Wiltshire Council Core Policy 51 (Landscape). Additionally, there will be night light pollution, from the street lights and houses that will add to an effect of increasing urbanisation in this location from viewpoints, that diminish the rural tranquillity of the whole area including the Woodford Valley and therefore will contravene Core Policy 51. The proposed removal of the woodland block at both sites will destroy the overall character of the areas – a conclusion reached within the Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment dated Dec 21. It appears that there will be no screening from the area footpaths, and the surrounding countryside. The plans do not meet the Council’s own criteria. TRANSPORT I object to this proposal because there will be a significant increase in traffic through the Woodford Valley. The existing road system is not adequate to support additional traffic. There will be several hundred extra cars accessing minor roads on a daily basis. There will inevitably be an increase in the flow of cars, vans, tractors and HGVs through a local network that is not equipped to cope. Predictably, drivers of all vehicles will wish to take routes to the east and through Upper Woodford, Middle Woodford, Lower Woodford and through to Salisbury along Stratford Road or up along Camp Hill and onto the A360, or down the Avenue and into Wilton. Traffic will also increase hugrely through Netton, Salterton and Little Durnford into Salisbury. These small country roads are narrow, twisty and with limited visibility. There is a primary school in Middle Woodford that sees considerable congestion at the start and end of each school day. The A345 is a busy two-lane road and the existing High Post crossroads, where there are traffic lights, is already congested at rush hours. There are few buses serving the sites. The increase in heavy traffic will increase pollution and thus contravenes the Planning principles identified in the Wiltshire Plans. ARCHAEOLOGICAL I object to this proposal because the potential archaeological heritage within the proposed sites may be significant. No geophysical survey or evaluation trenching has been completed as yet, and it should be, prior to the Planning Committee review and decision-making process in accordance with planning regulations. In the case of High Post, a proposal for the construction of an industrial site adjacent to High Post in early 2022 and the Wessex Archeology Report’s recommendations on page 17 (Wessex Archaeology Document ref: 253790.1 dated Dec 2021 – Project Spitfire) reommended that “ …. Potential adverse effect could be reduced through the implementation of an appropriate scheme of archaeological mitigation, in accordance with national and local planning policy”. A Desk Based Assessment has been completed that concludes on page 16 of the Report “The effect of the development proposals on the known and potential heritage resource will be a material consideration in determination of the planning application”. …. It goes on to further state “This assessment has established that there is an archaeological interest within the site. This is defined as the potential for the presence of buried archaeological remains, in particular relating to iron age and Roman-British occupation.” DRINKING WATER SAFEGUARD ZONE / SOURCE PROTECTION ZONE I object to these proposal on the basis that they are within a Drinking Water Safeguard Zone and a Source Protection Zone. The Interpretive Ground Investigation Report (Interpretive Ground Investigation Report, Project no. P1562 by Ground Investigation Ltd) states that the “Seaford Chalk Formation is classed as a Principal Aquifer by the Environment Agency, with soils of high leaching potential. Furthermore, the High Post site lies within a Zone II and Zone III Environment Agency source protection zone (SPZ), and is thus considered highly sensitive from a controlled waters perspective”. The proposed site lies within: • A Drinking Water Safeguard Zone – that is one where public water supplies require additional pollution control measures. • An Environment Agency (Water) “Source Protection Zone”. As described within the Wiltshire Core Strategy. (Reference: Metadata Identifier: 6288b7b0-d465-11e4-b13c-f0def148f590). See map at: https://wiltscouncil.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=8175cb711fd94b338e2b9f748c4e91f2 DEVELOPMENT AND LAND USE I object to the development of these sites. • The Wiltshire Local Plan does not allocate these sites for development. • There are other sites near in Amesbury, and other brownfield sites near to Salisbury. • The sites do not meet at least three of the conditions required under CP 34, namely: o Development of these sites would adversely affect the surrounding area. o They are not required in order to benefit the local economic and social needs. o They do not have an adequate transport infrastructure. It is understood that under CP 34, planning permission can be granted where the development is “considered essential to the wider strategic interest of the economic development of Wiltshire, as determined by the Council.” My objection to this development is that they do not meet the requirement for being “essential”. THE PLANNING PROCEDURE I object to these proposal because the proper planning procedures have not been followed. The order of decision making these sites should surely be to allow the Local Plan procedure to be followed before deciding to permit development of it. This proposal pre-empts the proper decision making process determining which land in Wiltshire should be developed, and prevents public consultation from taking place about the use of these sites. The Council is scheduled to publish the next draft of the Local Plan in September 2022 and that will then be subject to six months’ public consultation. They should be withdrawn and the proper procedures followed.
    - Robert Phayre
  • I strongly object to these applications. The conversion of farmland to industrial units runs totally contrary to the Woodford valley's rural nature and it's designation as an SSSI. The developement will massively increase the flow of traffic through the valley's narrow and already congested roads, further endangering the lives of the children attending the school in Middle Woodford and the many walkers and cyclists who use the valley roads. I note that the proposed developments will dominating the visual amenity in a prominent hill top location. The proposed location of a police station at High Post is ridiculous, located as it is 4 miles from the major population centres of Amesbury and Salisbury. Its remote location and the infrequent private transport links mean that almost all staff and visitors will have to use public transport to access the site, putting further stress on already overcrowded rural roads. Furthermore staff and visitors will have virtually no local amenities to access. These proposed developmants are totally unnecessary as there are many existing under-utilised industrial zones in the area which should be put into use first. These developments should also be viewed alongside the many residential developments underway and planned in the Salisbury/Amesbury area which threaten to destroy the rural character of the area and represents extreme over-development.
    - Erica Cosburn
  • Chalk streams are more than precious. They are a unique feature of the British countryside which need to be protected. I am a long term resident of Hemel Hempstead and I have witnessed the progressive decline to near oblivion of our very own river Gade. The decline occasioned by building a new town post WW2. Abstraction was the culprit and little thought given to the consequences of the need of the new town. I am passionate that our chalk streams should be protected and preserved. So should everyone else.
    - Michael Allsop
  • This is absolutely disgraceful. Amesbury has more than it's fair share of new builds and is already overstretched. The total disregard for our environment and green spaces is disgusting. So many homes would be lost for wildlife, which is already in heavy decline in this country. It's their planet too and we have absolutely no right to take it all away.
    - Natasha North
  • The proposed developments at Viney’s Farm and High Post are are in danger of creating a complete blight on the villages of the Woodford Valley. This beautiful piece of pristine Wiltshire countryside is already plagued as a ‘rat run’ between developments in Wilton and Amesbury. A minor village road has been turned into a short cut ill suited to the volume of traffic it now carries. High Post in particular will exacerbate these problems. What is needed as it is is a traffic planning system that prohibits HGV and light commercial vehicles from using these vlllages as a cut through. The logical site for further development ( if it absolutely essential )is Solstice Park as it has easy access to a major arterial road ( A303).
    - Howard Elston
  • Amesbury had already had many houses built. The areas mentioned are part of the natural landscape and important , natural habitats , close to the River Avon. It would be so sad to lose yet more land to houses, when we have already had large developments locally.
    - Angela Bayliss
  • There are very few green spaces in Amesbury for people to enjoy, especially those where people can go for a proper walk and enjoy the countryside. To lose this space would be a real shame, having a significant negative impact on the existing community.
    - Alex D
  • The whole stretch of the A345 Salisbury to Amesbury has been developed constantly since I moved to the area in 1992. During this time various housing estates and smaller clusters of houses have been built but the road remains the same. We have reached saturation point on this road to the point that it is exceedingly difficult to pull out onto the A345 from smaller roads e.g. Porton Road (low flying corner). (How many accidents have there been at the junction with people trying to pull out into the 'gap'). Having cycled this road for the past 20 years, I can state that the traffic volumes have made it far more dangerous than it was. It is too narrow for cars to past cyclists until the other lane is clear, which it often is not. Nothing else should be built on this stretch until the A345 has been upgraded for the thousands of extra cars that have already been put on what is a single carriageway country road.
    - Richard Johns
  • Because of over developement with housing and industrial units, Andover is number 22 on the list of 50 of the most worst places to live in England. I don't want Amesbury to be olongside Andover on that list and the first in Wiltshire to join it.
    - Dennis West
  • The development encroaching on the Avon will adversely affect the ecology of this very special river and is entirely inappropriate.
    - Michael Hadi
  • Amesbury residents have shouldered the heavy burden of new developments over the last 14 years I have lived here, Archers Gate, Old Sarum, Long Hedge and Army Basing recovery from Germany to name but a few. Wiltshire population in 2008 was 464,007, in 2020 it was 504,070 and projected to be in 2028 528,100. The A303 and A345 (opened 1967) struggle to cope with the current traffic from new residents and vehicles servicing commercial enterprise in Solstice Park and High Post. Any disruption through accident, roadworks or cyclists causes major holdups, not just during rush hour. There is not even a viable cycle route between Amesbury and Salisbury. Medical and Dental services cannot cope in Amesbury and Salisbury Hospital is sorely overstretched struggling with old buildings and understaffing. Salisbury itself suffers badly from traffic with any attempts at building a bypass being thwarted. While I could easily be accused of being a NIMBY the population increases and inadequate traffic and cycle provision facts speak for themselves. A plan to bring all of the above into harmony is needed before and new development or housing approvals should be granted.
    - Nicol Hotson
  • I regularly walk in the tranquil area surrounding Viney's Farm and believe the proposed development would have a huge adverse effect on the environment, including the haven of wildlife and the ecology of the River Avon which is already under strain. It would also put added pressure on the infrastructure of Amesbury (including SDH) which is already unable to cope.
    - Suzanne Kelly
  • Amesbury is fast losing its countryside village appeal, with continued development ruining its rustic landscape. You only have to look at historic photos of Amesbury to see how the area has and is, rapidly declining through continued development. Wildlife and their natural habitats are being harmed and lost in favour of a concrete jungle. Furthermore, infrastructure and facilities just do not exist with an ever expanding local population. NO MORE BUILDING. NO MORE DAMAGE TO AMESBURY LANDSCAPE AND HARM TO WILDLIFE.
    - Ian Hammond
  • Roads in the area are already congested, particularly in the early morning and evening when children are being driven to school and the workforce head to stores and offices. 1200 new properties would add considerably to the amount of traffic on the already inadequate Road system in this area. Medical facilities are already overstretched and the NHS already has problems in attracting new GPs.
    - M Withey
  • The building of these estates is unwarranted at this time. The infrastructure is totally inadequate particularly on the A345 and our historical sites such as Old Sarum are simply being swamped. Already the traffic is at a standstill on the A345 most days contributing to pollution to the residences already here.
    - Susan fitton
  • Damage to the ecology, water levels and water quality of River Avon and its fisheries.
    - Iain Hunter
  • Just on the subject of a suggested Police Station at High Post. And this is just one of many things that are so wrong about this. It is stated in the Journal that one benefit of a Police Station at High Post is that it is one a BUS ROUTE. Below is the exact wording of the first of many points of Objection made by WILTSHIRE HIGHWAYS against an application to have a new industrial park at High Post that also promoted the public transport links. Specifically to the use of the bus route for employees to travel to work it stated : 1. There is no pedestrian phase on the signalised junction at the A345 crossroads. The bus stop for southbound buses is located opposite the petrol station and currently serves High Post Golf Course. Passengers alighting the bus would be required to cross the busy, 60mph A road. There is no footway opposite the southbound bus stops and no safe pedestrian route to and from this bus stop and the site. Figure2.3in the TA appears to show a pedestrian route across the petrol station forecourt , this is not public highway and the route cannot be secured. It could also result in potential conflicts between pedestrians and vehicles entering / exiting the petrol station. The bus stops are not connected to the site and in the absence of this link, the bus cannot be considered to be a viable option. Without a viable pedestrian connection to local bus stops on both sides of the main road, the development which is located in isolation from any supporting infrastructure or housing is considered unsustainable and contrary to Core Strategy Policy 61 and 62. This is the opinion of the Council's own experts. Could this be made any clearer ?
    - Peter Curtis
  • Our medical facilities are already overstretched. It is often difficult to get a doctors appointment. The dentist won’t take on any new NHS patients. The road from Solstice Park to the 345 is very busy already and access to Salisbury due to population increases is leading to severe congestion to the detriment of businesses, the environment and locals.
    - Marianne
  • This is yet another poorly thought through application that should be rejected by the council on multiple grounds. There is no appetite for any of the proposed expansions by anyone locally due to issues such as increased traffic, a lack of local amenities, poor road conditions, pressure on existing services (both private and public) to name but a few. If Wiltshire Council care in the slightest about Salisbury, Amesbury and the surrounding villages then these plans must all be rejected.
    - Tim Green
  • I am very concerned at the proposed development at High Post to create extensive commercial industrial and residential development. I do not understand the logic of transforming a significant greenfield landscape areas into developed zones. This falls outside previous policy. It will have a hugely negative impact for the landscape and runs contrary to sound planning decisions on our behalf as residents in this part of Wiltshire, signalling a frightening message for the future of planning in the area if policy is disregarded. Planning has to be justified but where is the evidence for this demand coming from? The development proposal for High Post for light industrial is illogical when there already exists industrial development at Solstice Park which lies adjacent to the A303, with better transport connections (and does not appear to be “full” and would appear to have the capacity if desired for further growth if needed to meet more clearly identified need from evidence of demand. Solstice would in my view have a lower environmental impact if there was demand. High Post sits at a very tall point on the A345, making any development there highly visible to the surrounding countryside, and would have an irreversible impact from light pollution in the night sky. This is already significantly impacted by Chemring’s decision to install intensely bright lights for a mere car park adjacent to its main building for staff and visitors. All the further development proposed would rachet this light spill up ten fold. I live in the Woodford Valley and we have become a rat run for traffic connecting A360 with the A345, to reach the A303 for Amesbury, or travel southwards to Salisbury. To suggest that new traffic emanating from High Post would stick to the A345 and not cross the Woodford Valley with its lower topography and Special Conservation status encased in planning law and areas with SSSi status, is ludicrous. The impact will result in unheralded extra pollution from vehicles and heavy, unrestricted traffic from lorries, not just cars. There is also no capacity for bicycle lanes and certainly nowhere for pavements to walk between connecting residential areas, making it a risk for young and old alike. This natural chalkland provides a haven for wildlife and these habitats have taken thousands of years to evolve. The delicate ecosystems traversed many hundreds of acres and cannot be replaced with a few bug boxes placed around in false sympathy and disregard for nature. With the newly created residential developments already in place at Longhedge and Old Sarum, any additional development would need additional infrastructure and this would add yet again to over-development. It simply is not a well founded planning proposal and should be overruled. The development of Vineys Farm just to the South of Amesbury is across meadowland adjacent to the River Avon and is another green lung that should be retained, with planning to be avoided in this location. Where is the demand evidenced and what is the logic of this site? Archers Gate is already a massive expanse and commitment to residential development and this additional huge residential demand would crush the capability of Amesbury to cope with this overload. Vineys Farm is a greenfield site with huge ecological, archaeological and recreational importance. As a fisherman I do recognise the ecological importance and natural beauty of the River Avon as an important chalk stream. The wetlands around the River are home to many endangered and threatened species including the water vole, brown trout and otters. There is even a unique subspecies of salmon coming to spawn which until recently I was not aware of. Level headedness and clear thinking for the future of Amesbury is needed and I would object to development of this site wholeheartedly.
    - Lindsay Guilder
  • There are no NHS dentists available This week, I tried to make a Doctor’s appointment and was told there were none for the next month and they can’t book further than that in advance. How are more houses going to impact already stretched services? I realise it’s probably all a done deal; clearly someone is going to make a lot of money. What a shame the rest of us will have to pay for it
    - Denise Gale
  • I grew up in South Mill Lane, Amesbury where I lived from 1956-1972. This is a long time ago of course, and when I visited Amesbury a few days ago I did not expect it to be as I remembered. But I was shocked by the vast developmental sprawl. We need new homes but the burden should be shared equally across communities. Amesbury is carrying more than its fair share.
    - Dr Myna Trustram
  • Amesbury is an important historical area that has already lost its character due to enormous housing and industrial development. As shown by the building of those developments, there are untold historically significant finds beneath the ground in this area. Our fields are home to many important wildlife and fauna species, many of which have not been seen since the new building development arrived. Frogs and toads, lapwing and skylarks to name but a few. Our village centre, Doctor and Dental practices are overwhelmed and incapable of servicing the existing population, with no additional services in sight for a long time, if at all. Very many surrounding villages and military bases use Amesburys existing services as it is and an influx of yet more residents will result in the total breakdown of any workable system. There must be brownfield sites within South Wiltshire, develop those and leave the damage already caused as enough. Those few who wish to get rich at the expense of an historically and fauna and flora rich area and it's residents should not be allowed to put our and our landscapes health at risk.
    - Carole Mason
  • Can Amesbury and Salisbury please get some more facilities and better infrastructure before we get more housing? Has anyone that works for the council ever actyally driven on the dreadful roads in the horrendous traffic around here? The infrastructure can't cope.Then we get to the facilities, there is nothing to do here, the only thing Salisbury has going for it is the proximity to places like Basingstoke and Southampton that do have bowling alleys, cinemas and restaurants in purpose built locations. The local council need to realise they work for us, hence Civil Servants, and should be doing things that are best for us the residents. All they are interested in is getting more houses to get more easy cash in rates. We need better.
    - Nick Saunders
  • I am writing to confirm my initial objections to the proposed developments at Vineys Farm and High Post. Neither of these two proposals have merit, especially in the current financial climate the Country and County find themselves facing. I draw attention to all the reasons indicated as to why these proposals are without merit in an area of Outstanding National Beauty and decry the avaricious proposals put foward by the developers. Philip Andrews.
    - Phil Andrews
  • Amesbury is already overpopulated, with strained infrastructure. GP surgeries & dentists are rejecting patients due to a lack of space. Schools have unsustainable staff to child ratios. The worst situation is the traffic due to the unique layout of our historic roads. Receiving larger amounts of traffic would cause further strain on an already over stressed road system. In addition, the congestion is causing unhealthy pollution levels, which will only worsen with an additional population.
    - Yasmine
  • I enjoy peaceful countryside walks with my family on the land at Vineys. It is a beautiful, safe place to explore, with plenty of wildlife and mature trees. Building here would absolutely ruin what is a wonderful area and is absolutely not necessary at all.
    - Helen
  • There has been so many new properties built in this area since we arrived in 2014. Kings Gate is still on going. The access to this site is narrow and would disrupt the natural ecosystem that lives along the river bank and in the adjoining fields. The land proposed has always provided a source of food for human consumption.
    - Battey Carolyn
  • The increase in housing in Amesbury has had a depremental effect on all locals.. schools, doctors surgery’s, pharmacys, dentists plus local parking and amenities!! Viney’s Farm land is a mindful landscape which has been enjoyed for centuries. People count! Protect our local environment!
    - Jane Luce
  • The plan to develop the beautiful countryside at Vineys farm is shameful and depressing. The land at vineys farm represents a pristine example of the kind of countryside we are fortunate to have in Britain. Peaceful, tranquil, full of beauty and home to many, many species of birds and mammals. I use the tracks daily for running early in the morning and see hares, deer, red kite, buzzards, herons, kingfishers, barn owl and woodpeckers. I hear a cuckoo in spring. And this is just what I get to see and hear. This land and the river absolutely must be protected and cherished, and not sold by a wealthy landowner living in Monaco. I suspect he or she had acres of private land to enjoy during lockdown, when getting outside once a day was so critically important for mental heath. I continued to run on these tracks during the lockdowns and got much solace from the space, fresh air and beauty. I will do what I can to protest this disgraceful plan. For example, join a protest outside of work hours or at the weekend.
    - Anna Tooth
  • I have already objected to both of these developments for the following reasons: 1. They are inappropriate in scale and location 2. They are both close to world heritage sites and visible from the sites 3. Given the scale of current house building already taking place - there is not need for the Viney's Farm site 4. Solstice Park 2 is a more appropriate location for light industial development
    - Simon Stephenson
  • We can’t keep using valuable farm land to build more and more houses.
    - Peter banks
  • My objections are primarily related to the proposed Viney's Farm development. In particular the following aspects ......... * This is a greenfield site not included in either the Local Plan or Wiltshire’s strategic housing plan * The proposed number of new homes is significantly above the 350 allocated to Amesbury under Wiltshire’s strategic plan * The requirement for these homes is arguable. CPRE reports that Wiltshire is over-building homes, delivering 140% of its target for new housing * The homes are not within walking distance of the local amenities * The A345, which borders the site, is already at 100% capacity * Medical services are already over-stretched * Inadequate school provision in Amesbury including no 6th form * Site borders the River Avon, designated Special Area of Conservation and an SSSI and already deemed as in an unfavourable condition Above all the proposed development will place an unacceptable burden on the already overstretched facilities of Amesbury and represents an unwelcome intrusion into the Wiltshire countryside adjacent to the Stonehenge heritage site and the vulnerable Avon chalk stream.
    - Antony Wells
  • We regular walk by the River Avon which is a haven of quite solitude in our hectic world. The area offers sanctuary for wild life and gives us all an opportunity to reconnect with our roots. Huge developments like this, with high density housing packed in like sardines, will destroy this fragile environment and shatter the communities in the area. Wiltshire Councils first responsibility must be to its current residents before future residents or property developers.
    - Peter Burke
  • Until you sort out the infrastructure in Amesbury (i.e not being able to get a Doctors appointment for 3 weeks and taking 45 mins plus to get through on the phone). The A345 is at full capacity and cannot cope with 0000's more vehicles each day. It can take nearly 45 mins to get into Salisbury on a busy day. Furthermore, how will this address the proposed move from affiliation with Salisbury to Swindon for voting purposes which is equally not welcome. There is no need for more houses in Amesbury. It has been overdeveloped in the past 20 years and there is a need for the Town to remain unchanged for a substantial period. You need to engage with the residents to understand what they want rather this sit in some office somewhere in Wiltshire with no regard as to the consequences of your poor decision making.
    - Steven Gill
  • The current town centre in Amesbury is simply not big enough to support the proposed developments. Amesbury is a small town with a local, friendly feel and low crime rate. Adding so many more houses will inevitably damage the overall atmosphere. The roads here cannot cope with increased traffic, they barely cope with the existing traffic. A huge increase in traffic volume could cause the roads around the area to become unsafe.
    - Joanne Melling
  • There is already over a months waiting time at my local GP surgery, and the two dentists in Amesbury are not even accepting new private patients let alone NHS ones - we simply do not have the capacity for even more people. It is also a beautiful greenfield site close to the river Avon, which has huge ecological importance as well as being an area of conservation and which would be put under even more pressure from this development. This proposed number of homes is also significantly above the 350 allocated to Amesbury in Wiltshire council's strategic plan - we do not need and cannot cope with this volume.
    - Alice Stephens
  • Our countryside is under a lot of pressure and to build even more high density housing along this very congested route is going to cause even more problems on the A435 as it is not fit for purpose we suffer greatly from traffic build up and congestion in Amesbury and Salisbury already please do not go ahead with these projects and make our already stressful lives even worse.
    - Alan Weston
  • Amesbury has already been expanded significantly with the Archers Gate & Kings Gate developments. A major concern is the saturation of this area with people & traffic. The A345 is already struggling to cope with the existing traffic load. The medical centres are already overloaded - & there is additional work going on extending Kings Gate. I feel that this area will become overloaded and feel more like a city centre.
    - Alex Petty
  • The A345 Salisbury to Amesbury road is already at capacity (Wilts Council, Atkins Report) and there is a a serious shortfall of capacity at either end of the road. To increase the flow of traffic on the A345 will both magnify the already substantial queues that form at various times of the day and increase the rat-running that already takes place along the Woodford and Bourne valleys. The traffic issue is in addition to the severe infrastructure problems that already exist and would be exacerbated by more development. There is a shortage of doctors and dentists, public transport is ineffective and we have a shortfall in water supplies. The River Avon is being polluted by sewage, the night skies polluted by light and the air by traffic fumes. In addition we will be loosing productive agricultural land at a time when import costs and obstructions are soaring. Amesbury is already over capacity due to the various developments that have already occurred and this spillage of urban development along the A345 corridor is nothing more than a form the ribbon development that planners have refused for many years. The recently announced scheme to move the Salisbury Police Station to High Post is a further classic example of poorly thought out planning as it would place the Police response to incidents to use a narrow congested road to access its main user - the city. The landscape setting of Salisbury is a crucial part of its appeal, both to residents and the all important tourists who bring so much to the area financially. This piecemeal destruction of that setting will in the fullness time destroy that appeal for local and visitors alike. We seem to be faced with a cyclic scenario where too many house are built so more industry is required and then not enough people are available so more housings is required and so on. All these schemes come with promises of employment, facilities, transport and communication. Time and time again these promises are renamed upon an only expensive houses are built adding to all the problems identified above. Please do not consider any of these schemes suitable for further consideration.
    - Rob Foster
  • I would like to echo the comments already expressed so eloquently by more than 100 people. I moved here 18 years ago from London and have raised my family in this beautiful town and walk every day in the the Viney Farm area. Please please don't spoil this wonderful area of natural beauty . These developments are not needed in this area. There is an enormous amount of development taking place and no provision for a Dr's surgery or a Senior school. This a mad idea and should be put to bed immediately. Listen to the people.
    - Sandy Mackie
  • This is for corporate profit and deliberate destruction of wildlife habitat, without trees, plants and all wildlife we are dead. The amount of traffic in these areas and the lack of spaces in local schools, dentists, doctors.
    - Antony Langham
  • Being healthy means outdoor activities, I do not want to cycle or walk through a housing estate, you will force me to drive my car to escape the urban sprawl which you are creating for greed. I doubt any objections will be upheld as the decision has probably already been decided based on money. I will laugh when the occupants of the new houses at high post complain, when the Pyrotechnic factory sounds its fire siren and burns its rubbish, which I may add has been doing so for 40yrs.
    - Pamela Anne Mitchener
  • It is discussing that our farm land is getting less and less when we need the land to feed our children and our self's, what is going to happen when it is all gone, YEP we will have food shortages and the increase of traffic is going to do horrendous
    - Peter Stevens
  • i have lived locally for 50 years and Amesbury has changed significantly. The greatest change has been the loss of so much open farmland with the huge number of houses and imposing industrial buildings. Like many others I think enough is enough. There are too many cars and the essential things like doctors, schools and dentists are already stretched. These developments displace our wildlife and add various forms of further pollution - enough is enough.
    - Annabel Moss
  • I have attended both the public consultations put on by the developer , the first concerning Viney’s Farm and just yesterday for Solstice 2. At both these meetings the agents told us that they were just at a preliminary stage and the purpose of the meetings was to gain local feedback. I asked the various agents at both meetings if any residents had come along and said that either development was a good idea or remotely welcome. They confessed that none had so far. Hence, if they took the results of these exercises at face value they would not proceed to get these parcels of land into the Emerging Local Plan. To the Councillors are reading all these comments ? I do hope that before you make any decisions that you read the simple Government guidance on the role of a Councillor which is primarily to reflect the views of the residents they represent. At both meetings so far everyone I have spoken with has their own reasons why these developments should be opposed. Yesterday I listened to close residents of Solstice Park who hear the reversing beeps of lorries throughout the night at Home Bargains. What does the developer say - that they planted hedges to cut out all the noise - but clearly such mitigations have not worked. Time and again the common theme of lack of essential services comes up. Everyone with a doctor in Amesbury knows it is near impossible to see a doctor when we wish to. Please read The Journal of 21 July 2022 : on Page 2 it is reported that the Barcroft Practice came last in the 2022 GP Patient Satisfaction Survey Then on Page 5 it reports the critical state of Salisbury District Hospital. Will Councillors considering these applications please ask themselves how around 1000 new homes and upwards of 2000 more residents will be served by existing medical, social, educational and all infrastructures services - not just in Amesbury, but will Salisbury District Hospital be enlarged and improved, will there be more ambulances, police and fire services ? Will there be more schools to cater for ALL ages and not just nursery provision ? I think most of us know the answers here and I just hope that those considering these proposals at this stage apply this common sense and reject all four of them.
    - Peter Curtis
  • Amesbury is a small town that has already suffered several huge development projects on greenfield sites. These proposals go a long way towards joining up Salisbury and Amesbury which is evidently Wiltshire Council’s long term ambition. Why can’t a few affordable houses be built in each of our village locations providing homes for local people rather than them having to move to these huge faceless developments around our little town. We do but have enough doctors, dentists etc to serve the current community and no more will be provided whatever the developers claim because there is a national shortfall. Use brownfield sites in the large towns of which there are hundreds. The developers dont like them because the sites are more problematic and expensive to clear but that shouldn’t mean they can keep on stealing our countryside to the detriment of the environment and the present population.
    - Jean Adlington
  • You are surely aware that Amesbury is simply creaking at the seams; every facility from schools to chemists are unable to provide the service they should. The banks have all but fled the town; the Police are completely indifferent to the wishes of the citizens, and the Doctors’ surgeries either can’t, or won’t do their jobs. And yet, and yet, these massive conurbations are about to be foisted upon us. Sadly, our Town Council appear to be depressingly indifferent and in refusing to pick up cudgels and address this unique (unique as in the biggest threat to Amesbury to date) issue and are sitting on their hands, concealing their inactivity by citing, once more, that they have no responsibility and cannot influence such proposals; the Town Council are ignoring the fact that they represent the lowest level of government in this poor benighted Isle, the first tier in processing citizens’ concerns. They may well be unable to affect much that is arrogantly dictated by Wiltshire County Council, but they have some 3 x Wiltshire Councillors amongst their stewardship yet all, all, are currently silent. They have an opportunity to display leadership, drive and energy and appear to be squandering it; time will not wait. I am appalled that they have done so little; clearly it is now down to the common man to protest via this medium. There is also the aesthetic, cultural and natural angle: we live in a particularly pleasant part of England; it has already been blighted by the huge housing projects at Archer’s Gate and King’s Gate, with countless dreary, little boxes with their miniscule gardens contributing to a less than inspirational presence; hardly the architects’ finest hour, and yet there are now to be more! Amesbury’s social venues are also depressingly limited - despite the planners’ promises - no cinema complex or swimming pools here! And surely Solstice Park has reached its peak - please, no more. If I wanted to live in an urban and industrial hellhole I’d move to Swindon. Lastly, there is the subversion of democracy; where is the public consultation in all this – apart from a poorly advertised presentation? Why should this simply be seen as a fait accompli? Why should we, the citizens of Amesbury be totally ignored and thus disenfranchised? And why does the local MP not get involved? What else is he actually for? So this begs the question: have Wiltshire County Council actually already decided in favour of this and are merely going through the “democratic” motions to appease their own machinery and us “awkward” or “difficult” citizens?
    - Brian Stoddart
  • Viney's Farm is located on top of the River Avon, one of the nation's chalk streams. The river has deteriorated in quality over the years due to increased pollution coupled with the increased extraction of water from the river. This has been caused by the pressure that a rise in Amesbury's population has placed on the river. Placing houses right on top of the river would cause a further marked deterioration of the riverine environment. Viney's farm also has a rich diversity in its flora and fauna. Given that I am an all round naturalist that has bird watched on the site since 1988, I can speak with some authority on this matter. The recent influx of people into the Amesbury area means that it is no longer possible to get a Doctor's appointment face to face and even a telephone appointment takes an inordinate amount of time to arrange. It has also brought a strain on dental services locally. The local sewage infrastructure cannot currently deal with the increased pressure under which it is being placed. This can be evidenced by the occasional stench of excrement and faecal matter flowing from the drains on Boscombe Road Amesbury. Currently the increased volume of traffic has led to a severe deterioration of local road surfaces which will be further exacerbated. The rush hour traffic has increased markedly over the years, resulting in more traffic queues at rush hours and increased air pollution. The continued building without a corresponding development of the local infrastructure and services makes all of these developments inappropriate. Particularly as the current phases of development have not yet been completed and we are yet to see its full impact. I understand that Viney's Farm is owned by an extremely rich property developer, if this development goes ahead this person with inflict more misery on the people of Amesbury in order to gain money he doesn't need and whose wealth insulates him from the problems that local residents will suffer as a result of this development.
    - Mark Andrew Barrett
  • Amesbury does not have enough welfare facilities now. Agreed the new development has additional facilities but we don’t have enough with these included. The roads are not sufficient with current usage and with an additional housing estate- dangerous and harmful to environment. The country side can’t afford this expansion as we are taking away sustainable land from our multi green rewarding landscape.
    - Dale Garner
  • As a resident of the Woodford Valley, living in a very small property that abuts Church Bottom in Middle Woodford, I strongly object to the proposals for the development of Vineys Farm and High Post. Our road structure through the Valley can in no way support the additional vehicular traffic that would inevitably be the result of development of these two sites. In places, particularly through Lake, the C42 becomes a single track highway for the over-large vehicles and coaches that come through; and indeed the Wishford Road, leading from the C42 to the A360 is very much a single track road, particularly through the residential lower end. It goes without saying that if these two developments go ahead, residents and employees alike will use the roads through the Woodford Valley as rat runs and THE ROAD STRUCTURE IS NOT ABLE TO SUPPORT THIS. In addition, Vineys Farm is a tenanted farm. Has the owner/developer considered the loss of livelihood for his tenant?
    - Mary Wilson
  • The Journal reported on this on 16 March . Like many others I attended both of the Public Consultations put on by Classimax and fronted by a PR company. In additions to there being vocal demonstrations outside each meeting, specifically for the Solstice Park meeting I listened to resident after resident complain about the impact of such an unwanted development . I asked the PR person if a single person at either meeting had expressed any support for the proposals and the answer was a clear "no". Despite this , the article in the Journal has the following sentence : The spokesperson said the extension could create more than 2,000 jobs for the area and feedback from its July 2022 exhibition showed "very limited concerns". This is not how I saw it . After all the objections and all the detailed and high quality reports this campaign has submitted to Wiltshire Council it would reflect not just massive public opinion but evidential cases on all planning fronts that this proposal plus the others for Vineys Farm and High Post are kicked into touch by Wiltshire Council by simple NOT including them in the new Local Plan.
    - Peter Curtis
  • This area is one of the few places of accessible countryside for walks from Amesbury and this development would take that away.
    - Freya B
  • The river Avon is already being degraded by over extraction and indiscriminate release of raw sewage. This is a rare and precious resource and should not be damaged further which will happen with increased population.
    - Keith Davies
  • Surly this is overdevelopment, there is severe lack of schools and doctors that cannot cope with the current rate of development let alone adding to it.
    - Dennis Fletcher
  • Dear Mr Botterill and Ms Clampitt-Dix, I write to yourselves to inform you of my objections to the proposed development of sites at High Post North and High Post South, Salisbury and Viney’s Farm, Amesbury. I just cannot believe that these sites would even be considered for any development. These areas are obviously in the Greenbelt and the High Post developments would create a tendril from Salisbury and Old Sarum extending directly out towards Amesbury. If the Viney’s Farm area was also developed it needs no stretch of the imagination to see in the future, the joining up of the two settlements of Salisbury and Amesbury and an excuse to also develop land to the East of the A345. Where will this end and what would be the purpose of such a development? There are many sites within the environs of Salisbury much more suitable. This proposal smacks to me of the landowner blatantly profiteering from the privilege of owning agricultural land, which they either can’t or don’t choose to farm. You as a representative of the population of Salisbury and its environs have a duty to point out to the Ministers and government departments calling for “x” tens of thousands of new houses to be built, that development of a “block” of land to them is the irrevocable destruction of areas of outstanding natural beauty and ecological importance. Not to mention also the duty you have to the residents of Salisbury and the surrounding area and district, for their wellbeing and mental health in being able to have the opportunity to experience and appreciate what is left of the British countryside. There seems to me to be a desire by some parties to create conurbations mimicking the towns and cities around London and the like, where the green spaces between settlements gets smaller and smaller. I sincerely oppose these developments and ask for you to raise my concerns to those proposing this idea. Yours very sincerely, Andrew Daniell
    - Andrew Daniell
  • In addition to the above grounds I have a deep concern that the Vineys Farm proposal would threaten the continued use by MOD of the Boscombe Airfield. The housing proposed would sit very close to the flight path and its accompanying noise. Notwithstanding its age (100 years+) the new residents would inevitably complain and question flight activity. If Boscombe were then released by MOD, more MOD and Qinetiq jobs would be lost.
    - Philip Osment
  • I have lived in the area since 1981. Over the last 40 years Amesbury has expanded out of all recognition. Most of the housing in the archers gate development is being sold to people moving from the South East, many of whom still commute east to work. Like most people I thought the Archers Gate development, once completed, would be the last major development for the town. I was shocked when I heard about the Vineys farm proposal as i couldn't believe that anyone could care so little about the countryside to contemplate such a development. The High Post developments will also ruin the countryside for all those who live in the Woodford valley as well as for the countless others who enjoy walking, cycling, running, riding or just admiring the views in the valley. An extension to the Solstice Park is not required. The existing park has not been fully developed yet after all these years. I could write a lot more.
    - Jan Belza
  • We do not have correct facilities in place to accept more people in Amesbury.
    - Clive Cleghorn
  • Building houses on Vineys Farm is going to add to air and noise pollution and also severely affect the natural wildlife of the area. This is something that we cannot afford to do. We have already lost a lot of natural habitat with the houses built at Archers and Kings Gate.
    - Sarah L Smith
  • My objection to this development is Amesburys facilities can not cope with all the houses beening built .only two Drs surgeries.2Dentist .and the amount of traffic .the roads are already in need of repairs.what about the wild life that lives there .Roe deer .peewits.stone curlers.lizards badgers.Hares .grass snakes .and all the birds .There's not alot of shops to cope with this amount of houses .sewers will overflow .And Trees will go what about are carbon footprint .For the 40+ years I have lived here I can look out of my kitchen window and see the trees and the fields and I don't want to look at houses .
    - PamelaHeydon
  • I am particularly concerned about the River Avon, which is of immense ecological value. It cannot cope with more runoff from built-up areas, where the rain is no longer absorbed into the ground and from there into the aquifers as it always has been, but instead ends up running more or less directly into the river. This applies both to the potential housing and industrial units themselves, and to the new and widened roads required to service these developments. It will be bad for the animals and plants in the river, and increase the likelihood of flooding both upstream and down. In addition, the lack of secondary school provision, and the already overstretched medical and dental facilities in the area make these developments untenable.
    - Ben Eveling
  • I am objecting to the development proposals at Vineys Farm on the grounds that it exceed the 350 houses proposed in the Wiltshire strategic housing plan and the site is in an ecologically sensitive area, coming. right up to the banks of the River Avon. Development of this scale will result in pollution of the river, added pressure on the amenities in Amesbury and further large increase in traffic on both the A345 and the lanes surrounding the proposed site
    - Lawrence Easley
  • We need to protect the wildlife surrounding Amesbury. I have lived here for all of my 50yrs, and I have seen development running out of control, in the last 15yrs hundreds more homes year, after year, it's unsustainable. Resisdents feel crowded out, with the industrial estate getting bigger, and bigger, and ever more homes being built soon there will be no green space at all.Please, please stop this development !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    - Samantha Mills
  • Not enough infrastructure for what Amesbury has already
    - David Edward Annetts
  • The current infrastructure and facilities can’t cope with the existing number of homes. Spoil the Avon Valley and it’s environment.
    - Paul Langridge
  • This area is one of the few places of accessible countryside for walks from Amesbury and this development would take that away.
    - Freya B
  • As a life long resident of 63 years, Amesbury has deteriorated from a town with considerable local varied central shops and character. In the last 30 years most of the shops and infrastructure including its own Police Station, have diminished despite the population doubling. The main cause being out of town development and massive crammed housing developments without adequate parking and roads that are simply insufficiently wide given amount of on road parking caused by the former, allied with out of town superstores. Some areas of these housing developments have turned into ghettos of crime and anti social behaviour. The latter being caused in a significant part by the considerable lack of additionsl recreational, social, welfare, emergency services police etc.. infrastructure. in summary Amesbury has and is being overloaded and overpopulated. The proposed development of Viney's farmland is driven not by demand or need but by greed. It was obvious that when the farm was purchased, it was done so purely not to continue farm production but to buy it at farmland prices and then to use/sell at hugely more commercially profitable development purposes with total disregard to the environmental, ecological and social impact of destroying this historic and ancient beautiful natural landscape of flaura and forna, forests argesand wildlife. Additionally there has been flooding in the low lying town centre landscape and inability of infastructure to cope with the additional surface run off and waste water because the higher naturally permeable draining land having been replaced by non permeable highways, buildings houses and driveways. A further adverse impact being to the River Avon that runs through Amesbury and already suffers from continual effluent discharges into it from coomercial/industrial sites, two existing large sewage works and multiple surface water outfalls. Undoubtedly the river is polluted and toxic, and the proposed development will only make matters worse.
    - Simon Kuczera
  • The most worrying aspect of these two proposed developments is that if they are approved then there will be almost continuous housing between Salisbury and Amesbury. It would only be a matter of time before the remaining gap would be filled in and a vast area of pristine green countryside will have vanished for ever. Their location along the top of the escarpment will also greatly multiply the light pollution already compromised by the Chemring factory. The developments will also be visible from miles around and would be another scar to an area of outstanding natural beauty. Furthermore, the huge number of proposed houses will stretch the local service facilities such as medical Surgeries and Schools to the limit. They are not wanted here and are only motivated by profit. If accepted, the local countryside will change for the worse and will never be the same again.
    - Simon Folkes
  • my wife and I have to use the doctors and pharmacy. With archers gate and kings gate the infrastructure in Amesbury is not fit for purpose now. If you are going to let the new development go a head be for they start building, infrastructure must go in first . But we know they will not put it in because it costs to much
    - Christine & Thomas Harvey
  • Lack of all facilities regarding health care and general Supermarkets are not big enough Too many houses already built and loosing its nice views Traffic is building up also
    - Arrron
  • This is yet another poorly thought through application that should be rejected by the council on multiple grounds. There is no appetite for any of the proposed expansions by anyone locally due to issues such as increased traffic, a lack of local amenities, poor road conditions, pressure on existing services (both private and public) to name but a few. If Wiltshire Council care in the slightest about Salisbury, Amesbury and the surrounding villages then these plans must all be rejected.
    - Tim Green
  • Very soon Amesbury and Salisbury will be one, large urban sprawl. Already so many houses have been built with very little infrastructure provision in terms of schools, roads, surgeries and so on. Added to that we have lost so much of our beautiful countryside. Enough is enough!
    - Hugh Vivian
  • There are thousands & thousands of empty houses, office / retail premises and abandoned property that should be investigated & re purposed instead of just chucking up new houses. It’s lazy management of housing and a money making opportunity for those involved.
    - Lisa Robson
  • The local infrastructure already can't cope with the local population. These proposals will further impact on this. I'm a cyclist, the local roads have increased in traffic significantly over the last few years. There is the potential impact of the Tunnel development to contend with as well. I saw a kingfisher last week when cycling through the valley. Will the kingfishers and other river wildlife, such as otters, survive these building projects?
    - Hel Boots
  • We moved here 3 months ago as we absolutely fell in love with the beautiful walk along the river and all along by vineys farm. It’s so beautiful and such lovely quiet countryside, and wildlife. It would be absolutely devastating to see a housing development ruin this beautiful walk which is the only one I can walk to from my house. We would definitely move away from amesbury if this development goes ahead. I truly hope that this development gets turned down.
    - Heidi burrows
  • Amesbury is already hugely over developed. We are desperate for more doctors, dentists, chemist, schools and decent roads. The heavy HGV traffic is already ridiculous along inadequate roads eg Chambers Avenue, Boscombe Down. We were promised this would not be a cut through/rat run to avoid the town - they lied. Vineys Farm site is a beautiful place to walk and see nature at its best. Why build on it. Also why destroy valuable farming land when we are being urged to produce more food and import less, it's criminal. So many things wrong with this plan, Amesbury residents have seen enough building now. Please put a halt to this.
    - Dawn Ford
  • mj6zo0
    - Dont click me: https://racetrack.top/go/hezwgobsmq5dinbw?hs=c67cf7c3a558af4f105337febe0a62ec&
  • These large developments will cause devastation to the beautiful surrounding countryside. This area of Salisbury and Amesbury does not have the capacity to take on more traffic which will be a danger by its pollution and congestion through the narrow roads which are a cycle route.The toxic waste will end up in our valuable chalk streams causing untold damage as the drainage system already cant cope, hence all the flooding when it rains, and the light pollution will destroy habitats and will be seen for miles. They are poorly thought out concepts. Surely the wonderful city of Salisbury should be modernised and old buildings converted first before ripping up valuable untouched land.
    - Frances Rasch
  • The hospital waiting times are bad now. Adding more houses to aalisbury will make it worse.
    - Natalie Clifford
  • Building 850 - 1000 next to chalk stream River is not acceptable.
    - John Ridgeway
  • This is one of very few walks in Amesbury, avaliable also for disabled people. We don't have to built on every farm, just not profiting from agriculture and selling the land.
    - Katarzyna Starosta
  • Too much expansion, damage to wetlands near archers gate is harming bird populations. Loosing all our greenland to overdeveloping.
    - Chantelle Crowley
  • A dreadful proposal, the River Avon would be an open sewer and totally ruined with that amount of new homes to say nothing about the lack of medical resourses, schools. This part of Wiltshire is becoming like Greater London.
    - Peter Kiy
  • It's affecting our right to green space, countryside and we're not a big city, we're a rural area
    - Mrs Nicola Mann-Rae
  • Beyond the fundamental objections outlined above I think development in & around the Avon valley should be prevented until a coherent & satisfactory approach to protecting the river has been settled upon. The multiple chalk streams flowing into Salisbury are unique, globally rare and play a major part in the cities identity. We should cherish and enhance them not surround them with unnecessary development
    - James Hayward
  • I'm 43 I've lived Allington originally as a child and amesbury as an adult and it makes me sooo sad and angry they want to build more houses. It used to be rolling green hills and beautiful countryside with so much wildlife. And now it's been ruined by Kings Gate and now this proposal of this new build. We are not a city we are a small town. We are ruining habitats of so many animals. They will have nowhere to go. It wasn't long ago a distressed scared muntjac deer was racing around think it was Denton drive. This should not be happening Amesbury is already looking like a concrete jungle. Please do not go ahead with this build. I am fully against this build.
    - Sara hartley
  • There is no reason to build on these sites whatsoever. There is no increase in the local medical infrastructure, doctors, dentists and opticians. What with the recent addition of the armed forces housing development taking place in the local area as well, Amesbury is now being swamped with extra traffic and shoppers already. Is Vineys Farm up for sale? Does the current land owner have a say in this matter? 850 possible extra cars to cope with, this could even get doubled or even tripled if there are families going to move into these homes. That is over 2500 extra cars to cater for. This would also affect the local wildlife, especially by the River Avon as this is a designated SSSI.
    - Alec Revelle
  • Existing infrastructure can’t cope with the current population, inadequate dental services, GP surgeries and pharmacies, insufficient schools. The roads are very congested with long queues at peak times and holiday traffic trying to avoid the endless tailbacks on the A303 through Amesbury. Larkhill and Shrewton are suffering enough already from traffic using these roads as rat runs. The area just can’t take anymore, let alone allow building on a valuable greenfield area. The fish and wildlife on this land and river should be protected not driven out to make way for unwanted and unneeded housing.
    - Liz Hill
  • The river Avon running through Amesbury is a great oasis from the busy roads and hectic life around it to build on the only wild and natural area left it is all wrong on every level. We do not need any more housing the village can not sustain anymore in this area there is already too much traffic around the village. This is the only green area left here we don’t want to loose it because once it is gone we will never get it back.
    - Carol Nicholls
  • The plan to develop the beautiful countryside at Vineys farm is shameful and depressing. The land at vineys farm represents a pristine example of the kind of countryside we are fortunate to have in Britain. Peaceful, tranquil, full of beauty and home to many, many species of birds and mammals. I use the tracks daily for running early in the morning and see hares, deer, red kite, buzzards, herons, kingfishers, barn owl and woodpeckers. I hear a cuckoo in spring. And this is just what I get to see and hear. This land and the river absolutely must be protected and cherished, and not sold by a wealthy landowner living in Monaco. I suspect he or she had acres of private land to enjoy during lockdown, when getting outside once a day was so critically important for mental heath. I continued to run on these tracks during the lockdowns and got much solace from the space, fresh air and beauty. I will do what I can to protest this disgraceful plan. For example, join a protest outside of work hours or at the weekend.
    - Anna Tooth
  • The threat to our rivers is never been greater. We must not allow the continued destruction of these important rivers and watercourses.
    - Martin Chennell
  • Our planet is already splitting at the seams and making unnecessary changes will damage it even more, as a small community we should be doing everything we can to decrease our footprint, making small changes is more important than ever and Wiltshire council can encourage this by evaluating their plans and stopping them from happening
    - Chey Taylor
  • I object because: * The run off from the proposed development at Viney's Farm will flow into the River Avon and pollute it, causing harm to fish, river flora and insect life. This is environmental vandalism. * The light pollution from this development will affect the countryside right across the River Avon and into Salisbury Plain. Once again, this is unacceptable environmental damage in a beautiful and protected part of our countryside. * There is no plan to improve the infrastructure of the roads, that are already at capacity at certain times of the day. The consequence is more noise pollution, and slower traffic and more climate warming from the increased use of vehicles. * It appears that the proposal at Viney's Farm is from a tax exile who is prepared to damage the countryside for his benefit. * The development will steal one of the main footpaths that the Amesbury residents use for exercise and fresh air. * The custodians of the countryside and Wiltshire Council should be encouraging the use of the countryside for exercise, not not reducing the opportunities to get out and about especially during a pandemic - and for that matter any future pandemic. * The proposal is too close to Stonehenge - a world heritage site. The resultant damage will be unacceptable.
    - Jane Phayre
  • This is for corporate profit and deliberate destruction of wildlife habitat, without trees, plants and all wildlife we are dead. The amount of traffic in these areas and the lack of spaces in local schools, dentists, doctors.
    - Antony Langham
  • The proposed plan would have a hugely detrimental effect on the area proximate to a World Heritage site and the potentially irreversible harm to the river Avon with run off from roads to be built on current green fields.
    - Sophie Mazzier
  • Lack of facilities - no schools, no doctors, no recreation for adults / teenagers, roads cannot cope with that amount of extra traffic, lack of town parking, insufficient policing, pollution, insufficient hospital facilities, no local jobs, destruction of a well used nature facility. Build housing and hope for the required infrastructure to catch up is unacceptable.
    - Mr P S Odendaal
  • I'm far too angry to write a coherent message at the moment, but be assured you will be hearing back from me BIG time..🤬
    - Beville John Hutchinson
  • There are too many houses already under construction in this area and it is destroying the local environment.
    - Philip Longhurst
  • Leave the countryside alone! It’s beautiful out there! Already so many empty houses around the country! Concentrate on fixing them up instead!!
    - Trudy newton
  • Clearly my objections are ticked. We have blessed to have beautiful countryside and doesn’t not need anymore building on or around it destroying it
    - Michelle Turner
  • Amesbury has doubled in size already with the new archers gate and Kingsgate devolopments, Kingsgate is still being added to. This influx of new family's from this and from the military coming back has led to overworked, oversubscribed, understaffed medical facilities, schools and dentists. We were promised new doctors surgeries years ago when the Raleigh crescent area was built, we were promised doctors surgeries when Kingsgate was built "where are they". We are suffocating our small town which does not have the infrastructure to support any more houses or business parks. The noise 24 hours a day , dreadful vibrations which rattle our properties while the past and current work is happening at solstice Park , light pollution and fast traffic we have to put up with is unbearable. Porton Road is currently 40mph speed limit, which is ignored Should be reduced, we have a narrow very uneven footpath outside our retirement park, this is unsafe, the dropped kerb outside our entrance which residents in wheel chairs and mobility scooters have to use makes them have to be go out on the road, taking their lives in their hands, with more traffic and huge lorries which would happen if there was more building at solstice Park a fatality will happen.
    - Rosy Bevis
  • With damage already having to have been repaired to the Avon historic bridge this could cause further damage with increased traffic. Also damage wildlife habitate unnecessarily putting many species at risk we can't continue to monopolise on free space just we can we need to enhance awareness of what lives on the river Avon and surrounding
    - Briony Johnston
  • The greed of the landowner to put houses so near to the river, and the lack of infrastructure - especially medical and educational. As a former resident of Amesbury I feel that enough new builds have appeared, without adding even more.
    - Joanna Douglas-Withers
  • Amesbury has done more than it's fair share already. Our quality of life is going DOWN.
    - Susan Scott
  • We need housing but in the appropriate place. On the banks of one of the most iconic chalk streams in the country is not acceptable.
    - Derek Patterson
  • The chalk Downland around Amesbury is scientifically significant with many endangered birds and insects as well as is the palaeolithic neolithic and bronze age landscape unique worldwide. the vineys farm development would be immediately adjacent to bronze age barrows and could potentially destroy archeologicaly significant sites for future generations yet to be uncovered. the landscape around Amesbury could be seen as an asset to Wiltshire and has the potential to bring in international tourists, Stonehenge is already well known however many of the other sites are of great interest to tourists. Greater access to this unique countryside immediately adjacent to a worldwide known world heritage site is what is best. Rather than further property development adjacent to the a345 an a road which already is unfit for the amount of traffic it receives.
    - Brendan Fletcher
  • I feel that this area is already over developed and further housing cannot be supported. It will also destroy natural habitat for wildlife which is already endangered by what has already been built. I also think that the only reason that these sites are being built on is greed by Wiltshire Council to get more revenue in a popular area which is not in their doorstep.
    - Nigel Jered
  • Too much expansion, damage to wetlands near archers gate is harming bird populations
    - Jamie Taylor
  • Amesbury is a town community, we were fine before kings gate even started to be built, archers gate was acceptable ish at a push. Stop trying to make us bigger than we can cope with. There is just not enough schools, doctors, dentists etc as it is with the current expansions and you want to build more! The walk from Amesbury and down the track to the Rec near Vineys Farm is stunning, lots of wildlife there and this will be lost if you start digging up the fields. This is not what we need for our community. Enough is enough now, stop before it’s too late. The traffic is crazy as it is and the A303 will become even worse. I am a local childminder and we love the area we have, the places we have to visit and nature/environment is one of the things at the forefront of what I teach the children in my care and my own. Building more will take away yet another place we love to go.
    - Sally Ronchetti
  • We have seen a huge increase in the amount of commercial and domestic building in this area. This includes the increase in the building of homes in Amesbury at Archers Gate and expansion of military housing at Bulford and the increase in military personnel with the drawdown from Germany which has taken place at Bulford and Larkhill. This certainly is not a gripe at our wonderful service personnel just a point that the population in the area has already increased substantially any further increases in housing and the resultant multiple car households will exacerbate the situation These proposed plans will increase the amount of people and cars on the roads which includes major A and B roads in the local areas which at times are at capacity and not built for this amount of vehicular volume. People are already struggling to find doctors surgeries and dental practices to register as patients. Will Salisbury District Hospital be able to cope with a huge influx of potential patients. Can our local schools in Durrington and Amesbury cope with the arrival of many more families
    - Paul Ashman
  • Amesbury is to small to add all these extra people we do not have the facilities.
    - Judith Morris
  • With each new housing area built in Amesbury extra medical and dental provision has been promised, this has never happened, no doubt the same would happen with any new plans. Surgeries are already overloaded with patients having difficulty getting appointments. Whilst new primary schools have been built there is no extra provision for secondary education, where will any new children go to meet the Government's instructions to stay in education until the age of 18?
    - Mrs Susan Sargeant
  • Our planet is already splitting at the seams and making unnecessary changes will damage it even more, as a small community we should be doing everything we can to decrease our footprint, making small changes is more important than ever and Wiltshire council can encourage this by evaluating their plans and stopping them from happening
    - Chey Taylor
  • The site at Viney's Farm is a beautiful agricultural field and meadow that leads down to the river. Putting houses into such a spot will risk contamination getting into the river. Every house that is built here adds to that risk. These fields and meadows are rich with wildlife. Please do not allow more developments to destroy these habitats. Amesbury is a small town and its amenities in terms of schools, medical and dental services is already under severe pressure. Archer's Gate Development is still growing and already it is very difficult to get a dental or doctor's appointment. If even more housing is added, it will be nigh on impossible. Amesbury and Salisbury have already built many, many houses in the last 10 years. We should not allow this number to keep rising up and up until South Wiltshire is one huge concrete conurbation.
    - Jan Stringer
  • A survey by Wiltshire Council of developments approved in the last 20 years will show that literally thousands of houses (& industrial developments) have been built in the Amesbury/Salisbury area. Over 95% have been built on previously greenfield sites. The landscape of S. Wiltshire has now been seriously scarred forever, seriously damaging the natural environment and habitat, and amenity to residents and visitors. Loss of fields = serious loss of food production at a time when it is critical that the nation grows more of it's own. The landscape which varies from World Heritage sites, SSSIs, Conservation Areas, and fabulous long views over it, has been thoroughly damaged. No serious attempt has been made to develop roads to cope with the huge increase in traffic (other than a few roundabouts which facilitate the spewing of this traffic on to existing roads), and local transport routes and links are distinctly limited. The effect of all of this has been little short of vandalism, yet the residents of S. Wiltshire are now being expected to put up with yet more pressure and degradation in all these areas. It is not acceptable.
    - Ian Stevens
  • I attended the Woodhouse Developments exhibition and having seen what they are planning, I urge you to use your office and authority to stop this. This development would irreversibly damage the river area, and the border to the SSSI. it is a treasure of an area which is widely used by hundreds of local families, and the plans (which include building a pub/cafe on the river bank) would completely destroy this. The pub is on a site currently without a road, so that would be built, with all the associated infrastructure, and there would be even more litter and pollution that there already is. There is no need for an extra facility there - there are 5 cafes within half a mile, and 4 pubs. The houses that are planned are in excess of the Wiltshire Strategic Plan for Amesbury, and it is environmental vandalism to put them in this area. Out local services would also not cope. I already cannot get a dental place, and have to wait 3 weeks at least for a doctor's appointment. Please come and visit this site, and the river walk personally so that you can see what damage this would do to an area that is teeming with rare wildlife, especially birds.
    - Mrs Deborah Thorne
  • Amesbury has now got plenty of housing I work at the medical practice in Amesbury and it can't cope with any more patients. Also it would ruin the country side, that part of Amesbury is un spoilt by housing, not ever piece of land can have housing. Leave it alone, let us enjoy living in the country, rather than turning us in to a city.
    - Jane Buckland
  • I live in the Woodford Valley and the roads are very narrow so to have additional traffic coming through our villages will be detrimental not only to the residents but wildlife, cyclist and horse riders. It will be used as a cut through especially when the outer roads are busy.
    - Karen Deighton
  • Amesbury is already struggling to cope with the lack of facilities and adding any new properties is reckless and unnecessary.
    - Heard Ashley
  • The Iconic Hampshire Avon is already under unsustainable pressure from abstraction, pollution and agricultural run off. This development would have massive adverse impact on the whole of the riverine environment.
    - Peter Le Duc
  • These developments are entirely inappropriate, destroying the nature of our area, overburdening traffic systems and local services which are already beyond capacity.
    - Miles Ashley
  • We have already lost so much habitat to rare and endangered spices in Amesbury, this would finish them off,cits criminal, not to mention the effect it will have to the public byway where can walk in peace and quite in a natural environment, much needed for mental and general health.
    - Sue Hart
  • Local facilities for health and dental care cannot support the increase in demand that would be caused by this proposal. Similar instances of housing developers trying to build in other local villages is happening with no consideration for the lasting impacts to the local residents or the environment. Investment to local resources should be carried out first to ensure that the community can absorb the impact of any popular increases.
    - Craig Anthony
  • I strongly object to this proposal. We don’t have the infrastructure or facilities to sustain another development on this scale, the roads around Amesbury are already busy and sometimes gridlocked. Local doctors and dentists are overloaded, they state there will be a new medical centre built but where are they getting the GPs and Dentists from, there is already a shortage. Also, the damage to local wildlife, plants and the river would be devastating. It is about time the council stood firm and stop bowing to the rich landowners and developers who are only interested in how much money they can make. It is disgusting!
    - Y Bendle
  • These developments will not be supported by the local social, medical and educational facilities which are already struggling. Additionally, there is serious danger to greenfield sites, threatened wildlife and the River Avon. It would spoil the view from Stonehenge, and there is no need as Wiltshire has already met and exceeded the building target.
    - Abi Discombe
  • Pollution of the Hampshire Avon will be highly increased.
    - John Vuagniaux
  • Wiltshire has exceeded it's quota of new housing, and any further new developments are not needed in sensitive areas such as Vines Farm. There is insufficient employment in this area, for the proposed number of dwellings. Therefore the increased volumes of traffic will increase the levels of congestion and pollution. The area proposed is a unique area of countryside full of diversity, this will be destroyed, where as it could be a area for the existing population to enjoy, and excercise in, as there is limited access at this point in time. There are limited medical and educational facilities in the area, including hospitals. No further building should take place until these issues are fully resolved.
    - Andrew Reed
  • A345 already congested not just rush hours. Facilities for young children and teenagers nearby so they dont have to get parents to take them all the time. Not enough schools, doctor surgery's, dentists.
    - Julie Davis
  • I am particularly worried about the run off and pollution threat to the River Avon one of the finest natural chalk steams and ecosystem in the country
    - Matthew Gimlette
  • Amesbury lies very close to the historic sites of Stonehenge and Woodhenge yet has NEVER been allowed to benefit from this proximity. Tourists from all over the world visiting those sites rarely visit the town, thus financially, business in the town gain nothing from tourism. The town has grown rapidly since it was the village I first got to know in the 1960s. The infrastructure has not kept pace with the rapidly expanding housing developments surrounding Amesbury and further developments will do little to add to the quality of life to those living in the area. The planned housing would do great harm to the natural environment and destroy what locals see as an area of outstanding beauty. It would, to me, to be a criminal act to not allow the people of Amesbury and their families of the future to grow up in an Amesbury that still, just about, retains the charm of what once was, a local village and now a town that can hardly cater for the vast increase in population over the last few years. To add to that burden by more housing, roads, traffic and the resulting polution is a step way too far.
    - Peter Thomas
  • I travel on the A345 (Amesbury / Salisbury) road every day. This road sees increased traffic year on year. This and the addition developments along the road increase journey times. Any accident or breakdown on the Salisbury ring road or on the A345 cause huge tailbacks. The road is not suitable for the current levels of traffic without increasing this further. There should be no increased housing until there has been a wholesale change to the major trunk roads through Salisbury and the surrounding Townes and villages.
    - Lawrence Bryant
  • At what point will Amesbury be conjoined to Salisbury? How does the sewerage and electricity infrastructure cope? How will the developers future-proof provision for electric car charging, etc?
    - Angus Shield
  • These residential developments will create havoc on the Woodford Valley roads. The road outside my cottage can barely cope with rush hour traffic as it is as the road is narrow and dangerous for two vehicles to pass. There isn’t a footpath for pedestrians and their lives are put at risk with the speeding cars. It also a cycle route and cyclists are also at risk from even more vehicles. Agricultural vehicles are now finding that double parked cars in Upper Woodford are hindering their passageway. I have had two cars come through my fence in the last few years putting me and my family at risk, apart from the damage done. Please stop these developments…..
    - Peter Southward-Dixon
  • Needs more services and infrastructure before more housing is built. Medical services etc. Often the existing roads struggle with the traffic on them now and their condition is deteriorating. We should be building more housing near to sites where people work to cut down on workers having to commute too far.
    - Heather Barnes
  • Enough is enough! If every house built to date had been planned to high environmental standards with solar roofing, eco boilers and with cognisance of flood planes, I would have less objections. However, currently this just seems to be houses for housing sake to meet Government targets and does not add value to the community. Once agricultural land is gone it is gone for ever. 2022 has to be the year we seriously consider not doing further damage to the environment and ensure we are able to feed our population. For example, Salisbury hospital has already had a RED alert this year, I have no knowledge of additional medical facilities and little increase in public transport to accommodate the additional population.
    - Chris and Sue Thain
  • How much more of our green and pleasant land do these greedy developers want to ruin? If this was in answer to a perceived need, then perhaps it might be necessary to give less weight to the obvious disadvantages, but these proposed developments would be more likely to cause problems than to solve any. Neither Vineys Farm nor the proposals at High Post are natural developments of existing communities, but would be more like dormitories for travelling commuters.
    - Stephanie Down
  • This development would have a devastating effect on the wildlife and ecology of the nearby River Avon chalkstream.
    - Andy Bowditch
  • This is a case of huge overdevelopment of the town of Amesbury. and its local area. The new developments of housing in Amesbury and are already a dormitory town for residents to travel to work in Andover Basingstoke and Salisbury. The land already allocated for business and manufacturing at Soltice park by the A303 still has a lot of land not built on or planned to be used. The requirement for more valuable and extensive greenfield land to be used for more business and housing is not there in this part of Wiltshire. We should be trying to get people to travel shorter distances to work and school etc and put housing where there is this need.
    - Susan Heggie
  • The ancient tracks and unspoilt countryside which have been used for many purposes including recreation and mindfulness will no longer exist! Locals already have problems with medical centres and chemists! Our beautiful River Avon won’t cope with the sewerage discharge and overflows! The thought of housing etc on our cherished countryside is totally shocking and unbelievable!
    - Jane Luce
  • Amesbury already suffers from a lack of infrastructure to support the growing population in terms of medical facilities (doctors and dentists) and schools. The current ever expanding development of Solstice Park is already adding increased HGV traffic to the area.
    - Mark Tandy
  • This is an overdevelopment of an already over developed area, this will ruin the appeal of the area and reduce the already struggling ecology. We have only recently benefitted from the return of red kites and wild deer to the area as well as various other wildlife such as water voles and various insects this will bave a large impact on this and the rest of the wildlife of the area. It will reduce options for walking and enjoying the countryside as well as putting strain on local facilities that are already struggling with increases in A303 traffic and other local developments.
    - Morgan Widgington
  • Climate change is already fast affecting our planet and it is developments such as these which are contributing to the problem. Amesbury has expanded almost beyond recognition in recent years and the prospect of further development is appalling! More specifically, the area in question is one of natural beauty; a beautiful landscape which needs to be protected, as do the wildlife that inhabit it! This land is enjoyed by many local residents and is so important for peoples wellbeing, particularly in the challenging times we now face. Local facilities simply cannot cope with any further expansion and an already struggling Salisbury Hospital and emergency services could potentially be putting lives at risk. Increased traffic in local areas is proving problematic for all concerned, not to mention the pollution it is creating in the process. There is a responsibility to consider future generations and what continually destroying the countryside could mean for them.
    - Alison Long
  • I guess I'm too late but have only just seen this. Please tell me where this has got to so far
    - Alexandra RAWLINSON
  • Let’s think about the environment not someone’s pockets.
    - Jo Garner
  • what is the real demand for housing in this area over the next 10-15 years and what percentage of the existing new build housing stock and landbanks already earmarked for construction can fulfil this demand- how reliant will the owners of these new houses be in local employment ( is there enough employment to bring new workers to the area who will need these houses or might they go elsewhere to find work) +/or is the transport infrastructure including roads that are already overstretched able to cope with the massive growth in local population?
    - A Hope-Lustman
  • We now have very high summer temperatures, this is all due to climate change, yet here we have greedy developers wanting or turn this beautiful area into some sort of hell whole of a brick, concrete and tarmac scene, now that really is going to help along climate change. In the plan there is an area where many house are going to be built very, very near the river, just think of the run of from the roads and rubbish from this build will end up polluting our beautiful river, we need to protect our farmland, the animals, birds and many insects that we need to survive in this country also the pleasure I get watching the birds of prey flying above me, listening to the birds calling to each other and watching the changing of the seasons when out walking each day, even the wild flowers how they change by month trough out summer, this will be all totally destroyed, my whole world of being out just breaks my heart if this goes through and there are many others who feel the same, no wonder mental health is such an issue, too many developers are destroying our countryside. Saying we need more homes. We don’t we need to curb people coming onto this county and also stat looking parts oh towns where older buildings are left empty and many brown side are left. There is much infrastructure already in towns, eg no need to have a car,can walk ( keep people fit) shops, pubs Drs etc all with in reach without having to widen all build more roads, what more could be so simple. Our farms need land to grow crops for this country so we don’t have to keep relying on other countries for our food and keeps emissions down too. So a very big No to this new build and the one by Solstice park, and at high post. That’s also farm land too.
    - Anne Tweedy
  • Building in heavly populated areas is already a mistake, already struggle to get doctors appointments. This will also increase pressure on Salisbury hospital. Traffic in Salisbury and Amesbury is massive, there will be increased traffic through the towns when the tunnel finally get ls built.
    - Shane Harris
  • Over crowded not enough facilities now let alone any more
    - Clive Brindley
  • I am writing to add my objection to the proposed developments around Amesbury and High Post. There has been more than enough development in recent years, dramatically increasing traffic in the Woodford Valley and surrounding area. It is at saturation point. The infrastructure cannot support any more increase in the local population. The beautiful countryside, rich with history, heritage and a wonderful eco-system is being slowly and determinedly eroded for the sake of profit. What an absolute disgrace that these further applications are being considered. There is no consideration for local people, no thought for safe guarding the rich heritage that we all have a duty to preserve for future generations. These applications must be turned down for good, otherwise this lovely area will be ruined for no benefit other than to the developer.
    - Caroline Winstanley
  • This will change amesbury massively.. virtually doubling us in size..the detrimental effects on wildlife will also be huge..our wildlife are being forced into tiny pockets of land, all for money and greed..to say this development development will be beneficial to the people of amesbury is absolutely laughable..
    - Michael pierce
  • The infrastructure of Amesbury cannot cope with any more housing, the GP surgeries are swamped the chemist can't cope and the schools are already struggling due to the army rebasing project. The roads are chaos at the best of times and don't need anymore traffic and on a personal basis I find the loss of our countryside seriously depressing
    - Earley
  • Water infrastructure needs addressing before the continuation of any further building
    - Jackie Robins
  • Amesbury is already at saturation point. Increased medical facilities proposed for Archers Gate were never achieved. Kings Gate is being developed without additional infrastructure, apart from a junior school. Amesbury's limited facilities cannot cope now. The local roads are in a terrible state: how are they expected to cope with all the additional traffic? Our countryside is unique and very precious....once destroyed it can never be replaced. The people of Amesbury deserve better. Would this happen north of the Plain? I doubt it.
    - Patricia Allen
  • Do not destroy the beautiful countryside in the name of so called needed housing. There should be a priority to develop brown sites in order to build new homes. It is beyond belief that that there is even a discussion to build homes on these pristine green sites. I wonder who is getting rich by allowing this to proceed?
    - Alastair Gilmour
  • There a very few areas of natural beauty left in the country side . The pollution both light and chemical will affect the eco system . There are enough empty offices warehouses on land that has already been developed that can be converted.
    - Darren slavin
  • Our roads are already conjested. Our hospital, doctors surgeries, clinics, educational establishments struggle to cope. This needs to be taken into consideration before building more housing
    - Jenny Goodship
  • Enough building in our area ! Overstretched amenities, clogged roads and threats to the environment and ecosystems. How many of these new houses are bought by "buy to let" investors, how many are actually NEEDED ? Stop killing our countryside, and stop building over farmland as the world enters a period of global food scarcity, due to the actions of Russia and the war in Ukraine.
    - Edward Bailey
  • I strongly object to these applications. The conversion of farmland to industrial units runs totally contrary to the Woodford valley's rural nature and it's designation as an SSSI. The developement will massively increase the flow of traffic through the valley's narrow and already congested roads, further endangering the lives of the children attending the school in Middle Woodford and the many walkers and cyclists who use the valley roads. I note that the proposed developments will dominating the visual amenity in a prominent hill top location. The proposed location of a police station at High Post is ridiculous, located as it is 4 miles from the major population centres of Amesbury and Salisbury. Its remote location and the infrequent public transport links mean that almost all staff and visitors will have to use private vehicles to access the site, putting further stress on already overcrowded rural roads. Furthermore staff and visitors will have virtually no local amenities to access. These proposed developmants are totally unnecessary as there are many existing under-utilised industrial zones in the area which should be put into use first. These developments should also be viewed alongside the many residential developments underway and planned in the Salisbury/Amesbury area which threaten to destroy the rural character of the area and represents extreme over-development.
    - Neil Cosburn
  • There are already more new build estates than we can serve in Amesbury. The site of the farm is amidst beautiful green and peaceful countryside. You should be developing ugly land, not ruining our countryside walks and valuable natural habitats. This is a disgusting idea, you should be ashamed of yourselves. It's all about money and greed isn't it.
    - Ms A J English
  • Why do we need to build on green belt land plenty of land in wiltshire owned by military and not being used why not there won't be long and the country won't be able to support itself
    - Ivan King
  • The Hampshire Avon is a unique national treasure which is sadly much under appreciated. It is under immense stress already, with abstraction, run off pollution and climate change. Any projects upstream directly impacts on the entire length. It would be criminal beyond belief not to protect this globally important and rare ecosystem.
    - Edward widdup
  • The Amesbury area has already seen a massive increase in population which cannot currently be supported by the infrastructure and has damaged the ecology of the area. Not only the building of Archers Gate and the adjacent sites but the re-basing of the military had caused extensive issue: Care Services ( GP’s particularly cannot currently cope and I personally know that they are leaving due to these pressures) Road Use ( massive increase in usage and type of vehicles using the roads , causing pollution, noise 24x7, delays) Ecology ( not only the loss of homes for wildlife but the additional noise and change in environment) Sustainability ( the existing estates in the area have become in-suitable due to the poor build quality and lack of space, particularly for parking ) The only reason I can see that the council would approve what appears to be a completely in- appropriate scheme is to increase their revenue at the expense of local people , therefore I object to this application
    - Nigel Jerred
  • Our aquatic ecosystems are a vital part of our countryside and they need more protection. Why build right on the edge of a River rather than well away from the area and protect what little remaining wildlife areas we have in our country.
    - Stewart Greenwood
  • It's vital that the council listens to local people who know the area and understand exactly how bad the situation is in Amesbury. How will it cope with thousands more residents and the increased traffic. But that's not all. The river is so special and already suffering the affects of overdevelopment. Flooding is also a problem. Take away the land where rainwater soaks away and it will only get worse.
    - Sophy Buckley
  • From the traffic pollution to the sheer population overcrowding, the air we breathe ! I have lived here forty years and with everything that has been built there is no quality to life improvement. Where are the health qualities? Buildings only bring more people; the health service can't look after those already here. The roads don't allow the traffic to drive without damage to their vehicles. We have only introduced minimum wage employment. yet property values at the highest. the only expansion that this area needs for the sake of the human race and wildlife is more trees! Concrete is 100% carbon the more we poor onto and into the land the quicker the human race will perish!!!!! The population is going to decrease over the 50years.
    - Lee Knott
  • Large estates such as this will inevitably result in pollution to the River Avon and destroy much of the widlife along the bankside.
    - Graham Bailey
  • I am shocked and depressed to read of proposals to build on Viney’s Farm right up to the banks of the Avon. Amesbury’s colossal expansion in the years I have lived five miles away has seemed incongruous for such a small town which exists without a sixth form or even normal youth and family facilities. It is obvious to Wiltshire residents living in the area that Amesbury has more than reached capacity with the building programme of the last 15 years. More shocking is the proposed destruction of the environs of a famous chalk stream, this is something a Wiltshire resident should not even have to debate. This area is very special, it’s where orchids, cowslips and numerous wildflowers grow, stoats, skylarks, kestrels and kingfishers thrive, please act environmentally and responsibly and reject this proposal.
    - D Jones
  • The Solstice Park extension is a field that has notices up saying please keep out “birds nesting and environmental conservation” in place. How can this possibly now be used for industrial development. It also has several tracks and byways running along side of it. The old Amesbury to London byway going up to the A303 will run right through the middle of the original Solstice Park and this extension. Amesbury can not cope with what is already here and as for local employment most of the job vacancies advertised state that transport is available from Southampton. That is not rally local employment is it.
    - Susan lewis
  • King's Gate estate is not even completed yet. Do we need more housing in Amesbury already? Where is the evidence for this/ Do we need to lose valuable farmland when the world is already about to suffer from famine because of the war in Ukraine and food prices are going through the roof? Amesbury is not suited to constant expansion without a great deal more infrastructure such as a much bigger secondary school, another primary school, better health services, better shops and parking etc. Are the developers going to contribute to these?
    - Catharine Knight
  • There should be no more building in Amesbury: Not enough doctors surgeries Not enough dentists Inadequate roads Harmful to ecology, important wildlife including many birds local to the area Inadequate mid & senior schooling
    - Anne Reade
  • The river is a precious thing and must be protected ! Build some where else ! I lived in Salisbury , for many years
    - Garry Blinkhorn
  • The council can’t fix the roads that are existing at this moment without any others being built. When I moved here it was nice, now certain parts have just became a permanent building site and apart from one school there was nothing else built. No extra shops, no extra dentists/ Drs.
    - Simon Day
  • Loss of farmland when there is an international food crisis High Post development will increase traffic through the Woodford Valley which already has high levels of traffic on its narrow roads meaning it is not safe to walk on the roads (school children cannot walk to school)
    - Catharine Knight
  • This would add considerable traffic to the area and especially London Road route in Amesbury which is used as an alternative to the a303. We have had car damage on this stretch of road from unsuitable and Heavy use. Infrastructure in Amesbury and local amenities are already stretched and this would add further pressure. Job and labour markets are difficult in this area and I question the sustainability of new business in the area without a workforce to provide
    - Jennifer robinson
  • This proposal is not wanted and not justified. The local medical and educational infrastructure is unable to properly support the local population as it is, without adding to it. Viney's Farm and the proposed development at High Post must not go ahead. We have lost too much of the countryside around Amesbury over the last 20 years and further development will only add to the detrimental environmental impact. The high density building at Archers Gate and Kings Gate show what what these so called affordable homes really look like. Enough is enough.
    - Steve Weston
  • Our planet is already splitting at the seams and making unnecessary changes will damage it even more, as a small community we should be doing everything we can to decrease our footprint, making small changes is more important than ever and Wiltshire council can encourage this by evaluating their plans and stopping them from happening
    - Chey Taylor
  • THE AREA HAS ALREADY BEEN HIGHLY DEVELOPED, THE ROADS HAVE BECOME EXTREMELY BUSY AND ANY FURTHER DEVELOPMENTS WILL STRETCH AN ALREADY OVER BURDENED INFRASTRUCTURE GP PRACTICES ARE STRUGGLING TO COPE AND THE NHS HAS PROBLEMS KEEPING AND ATTRACTING NEW GP'S. THIS WHOLE DEVELOPMENT IS BASED ON GREED NOT NEED
    - Kim Withey
  • I have been a member of Salisbury and District Angling Club for 25 years. The club owns water beside proposed Viney’s Farm development. The Avon is an extremely delicate and rare ecosystem. The club has carefully improved this stretch of river over several decades despite increases in phosphates from creaking sewage works. The rural nature of this area will be destroyed by this proposed development. Salmon breed here. It is an extremely beautiful stretch of river and this development will destroy it. I will do anything necessary to stop this insane proposal.
    - Josh Grinling
  • Over the 20 years we have lived in the Woodford Valley we have witnessed a significant increase in traffic with no discernible improvement in road infrastructure to compensate for it. As a regular dog walker in the Valley it has becoming increasingly more dangerous. In the absence of any possibility of such infrastructure being improved, given the Valley is adjacent to a world heritage site and is replete with SSSIs and Conservation Areas in the vicinity, underlining its natural beauty, increase of the housing and commercial properties proposed will only make it more congested. In the last few years there have already been a number of accidents where drivers have driven far too fast, the latest of which has only just occurred in Lake. Increase in congestion = a fatality wating to happen. The ribbon effect of such vast developments will accelerate the increased erosion of the local wildlife, somewhat ironic given the efforts Wiltshire Council has previously gone to to preserve it’s natural beauty. We understand that the sewage infrastructure in this part of Wiltshire is already under strain, occasionally necessitating the outflow of sewage in the riverine system. Developments of this scale will only make such an outcome more frequent with the consequent harm to the environment. Finally, it is interesting to observe that one of the main developers does not live in the country and shows little interest in the community in which he purports to live…
    - Richard Winstanley
  • Amesbury has been over-developed in the last 20 years, the increased population has had a significant impact on local services and supporting infrastructure. The proposals will cause significant harm to both the landscape and the well being of local population, increased pressure on the highways system (A303 in particular, which after 25 years has still not been resolved!!). These are greenfield sites used for the production of foodstuffs and need to be preserved at all cost.
    - Peter Bendle
  • For the last 30 years I have been a very frequent visitor to Amesbury and the surrounds. I have got to know the area well and made many local friends. I am not against progress and benefits of development to an area. However Viney farm is a step too far. The Stonehenge area has a high profile and area boasts preservation and ensuring that the area is safe from unsympathetic development. The river itself is a precious resource and a frail river ecosystem. No matter how you dress up the development at Vineys farm it will have a negative impact on the river, the infrastructure and the mission to preserve the area. The amount of homes equates to about 3000 added to the population at a time when local services are stretched and all the positive work done by conservationists will be seriously undermined I ask you to seriously reconsider the plans
    - Baz Reece
  • This land should be used for agricultural and recreational purposes. Particularly at this time when international events make clear that our country needs to be more self-sufficient in food production. Amesbury does not need more housing or growth. And it is the residents in Amesbury and surrounding villages who would have to live with and suffer the effects of these proposed developments. So our views should weigh more heavily than those of developers whose sole motivations are financial.
    - Keith Evans
  • How long before there is no more no more green land to build on. We are constantly taking the habitats of our wildlife and then persecuting them when they come into ours. It's got to stop!
    - Jane Harris
  • The area has seen too much development too fast. It cannot cope with anymore now.
    - Simon Buckley
  • oThe proposal of substantial development on Vineys Farm :- this is one of the very few areas we have for nature to thrive in and around Amesbury and for everyone to enjoy the un developed natural environment .Natural not man made parks and green areas ! The development is way too close to the river and woodlands ! The proposal of a riverside pub would be nice as an additional to pubs/ restaurants in built up areas ie in the middle of a housing estate but it MUST be made accessible to everyone not just those that can walk some distance ….car park and easy access! I am surprised that the builders would be allowed to develop something like this these days !In my opinion the development of a pub is a “idea” that the builders have no real intention of going ahead with as they said to me they would probably scrap it ( one less facility for the public- one lees headache for the developers!!!) A riverside walk - one already there if they had not noticed! Are they going to enhance this ? If so how ? Precious farmland is going to be taken away ! Wildlife disrupted! Hundreds more people in the area and no facilities for them! Amesbury needs a sports facility ie a swimming pool and sports / leisure centre to accommodate the expanding population. Bungalows,nursing home - great ! Affordable housing for local youngsters would be great please ! But keep the building well away from the riverside area . A school for 100 children of junior age - can’t comment as not aware of how our local schools are/ will cope . Archers gate is now turning into a not so desirable area.Stop mixing some very expensive houses alongside social housing ! Not everyone gets on together and never will .This is an idealistic scenario and not realism! How about some community workshop type areas - allotments , group meeting places , men in shed work places .
    - Julia Piper
  • Amesbury has seen a lot of development in recent years including the addition of over 1500 houses. It is under resourced already with medical, schooling and social services all being stretched to the limit. The surrounding area to Amesbury is rural. The Vinneys Farm site would cover a particularly beautiful area which is home to many birds and other wildlife and a popular location for local people to walk and enjoy the countryside.
    - Rebecca Burke
  • I strongly object to any further development of Amesbury and its surrounding areas. Kings’s Gate hasn’t even finished their final phase yet, and already the developer vultures are circling, eager to turn our countryside into cash. In addition to the objections above, I’d be particularly fascinated to hear exactly how all of the resultant traffic will be dealt with? The local roads are already worn to the point of having caused damage to my car in two occasions, Salisbury regularly has standstill traffic on approach to the retail park. Traveling to Southampton requires and extra 30 mins leeway in most occasions. The roads as-is are not fit for purpose! How will throwing a few thousand more regular travelers at them help? If such proposals as are being discussed were to be considered for a moment, it would only show how out of touch with residents needs/wishes decision makers are. We’ve already recently had a church forced on us we didn’t want, at least that didn’t come at the cost of irreplaceable habitat…
    - Graham Murphy
  • It’s an absolute joke to propose new housing when the existing medical and dental facilities are already overmatched.
    - Andrew Desroches
  • All three developments have the capacity to put unsustainable pressure on the Hampshire Avon Special Area of Conservation. The rivers salmon population is already on a knife edge and the newly released Chalkstream Restoration Strategy has highlighted that the only way to protect these rare and iconic ecosystems is to reduce the abstraction of water from the chalk aquifer and invest in improved waste water disposal. Until Wessex Water and OFWAT have addressed these fundamental issues how can there be more unsustainable development in these highly sensitive locations?
    - Andy Thomas

Other objectors

Clare Timperley, Wendy Ellis , Charlie Beckford, Shirley Hollis, Alexandra Watson, Laura Ansbro, Charlie Fletcher , Mary Astor, Stuart Holland, Ben Cook, Andrew Lake, Manuela Tiley, Mark Christian, Victoria Plank, REES Les, Pauline Doyle, Andrew Gilmour, CHRISTOPHER PARKINSON-BROWN , David Lee, Mandy Coull , Jeannette Clough, Sheila Gibbings, Tanya Jones, Michael Robinson , Alex woodruff, Jamie huddart, David Bayliss, Glynn Pirie, Karl Royer, Nichola Styliano, Lee Weston, Tom Burrows, Alex Hearn, Ria Holt, Manuela Tiley, Nicola Griggs, Sue Money, Miles Ashley, H Fletcher, Rachel Bishop, Ian Pollard, Laura Stevens, Elton Woodhead, Eliott jenkins, Jo Adamson , G M TOWLE, David Steggel, Edward Potter, Mia Stukins, Lorna Hutchinson-Pratt, Clare Tunnicliffe, Marie Downton, Zoe Smith, Cleo Murphy-Hogg, Cliff maple, Georgina brown , Louise Hutchinson , Benedict Wiltshire, Deborah Beagin, Tammy Sibley, Laura Rigiani, Tracey Southey, Linda Starkie, John Mccarthy, Heidi Poole, Lola Eveling, Lili Patterson, Sarah Potter, Adam Woods, Melanie Payne, Daisy Eveling, Sarah Metcalfe, Stoyan Suvandjiev , Niamh Campbell, Nina Shearer, Sarah Pike , Derek Patterson, Graham Jackson, Victoria Le Sueur, Tom Moloney , Peter Vallet, Gareth King, G Walker, Caron Merritt, Oonagh Egerton, Duncan, M Notton, Iona Balls, myles yates, Duncan Smith, Penny Buckley, R J P Jordan, Caroline West, Grace thompson , Carol Craggs , Tane Mladenovic, Eliott Jenkins, Jane Greensitt, James Littlejohn, Jason randall , Andy Merritt, Jake, Mike, Annie Murphy, Kev Gowing, Susan Paton, Nichola Stylia , Michaela Konig, Lisa, Nicole Tynan , Jennifer Chapman, Gregory Howard, Charlotte Ryan, Dennis Robins , Steinar Jakobsen, Susie Vivian, Georgia Vivian, Danny Smith, Zoe Smith, D T peace, Megan Anthony