Representation by Peter Robinson
- Date submitted
- 24 September 2020
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
1 Environmental damage will be done to the area of the site, which will not be met by mitigations. Nature does not work like this. 2 Damage to the local area will equally not be mitigated by poorly thought through efforts. You cannot equate removing an established tree by planting another. There is a nett. loss of millions of species. 3 The Quality of Life, much spoken about these days will be hugely reduced by both site preparation and building, and the later operation. 4 Tourism and local visitors, the most important source of both current income and future growth in this special area, will be decimated, and is unlikely to recover it's potential, perhaps ever. 5 The quoted Economic benefits from this proposal are not quantified. This is poor economics, given that there is no explanation either of what Growth is lost elsewhere, or what Growth might equally be speculated should this project be cancelled. We know almost nothing in terms of Evidence in the case of the former, but very much more for the latter. In fact, of course every party to the Quality of Life for the inhabitants, and to those who just visit is the subject of enormous efforts from the smallest Band B, to the major Local Government involvement.