Gypsy, Traveller and Travelling Showpeople Development Plan Document
Search form responses
Results for Mr Leon Holmes search
New searchThe balance of settled vs travelling community within a small village areas is incorrect with areas such as Ulcombe where the travelling community is starting to out number the settled. This does not provide social cohesion or a supportive community and leads to more division.
It seems against the vision to just extend existing sites as this will lead to an imbalance between the settled and travelling community which will not aid social cohesion. Also many of these rural sites such as those in Ulcombe do not have the appropriate infrastructure and availability of services to cater for large increases in population.
Surely this is not sustainable. Also many of the sites around the area are illegal or start that way. This policy seems to give part of the community to break planning rules but then get protection which is not afforded to the settled community. This does not provide a fair and balanced approach and leads to divisions in the community.
As commented previously, extended existing and creating new sites within the rural community is not sustainable or practical. There is a lack of facilities, services and infrastructure in these areas and increases in the travel population leads to an imbalance between settled and travelling communities which negatively impacts all.
Some of these sites are large in number and in the same areas as existing large sites. The council should in my opinion choose small sites evenly populated across the borough. Consideration should also be given to the loss of amenities to the existing community by putting additional burden and pressure on already stretched services.
I think generally the public sites mentioned are well maintained and settled and therefore this is a reasonable policy as they tend to provide good social cohesion. Size should be limited and the location should take into account the existing community.
Again as with the previous question, this would appear to be a sensible policy however I feel linking this to family by definition there is a suggestion of larger sites. Also in terms of the scale of the site in proportion to settled community the policy should consider the whole. Already in some areas the travelling community outnumbers the settled.
It's not just about the size of the individual site but the net increase this would bring to the area. Also it is not just about getting to medical facilities, schools etc, it is about the availability of these resources. This is the same for all developments. Not just those specially for the travelling communities.
Seems sensible. Sites as with all private and public spaces should be well maintained and considered the environment. Noise and Light pollution from sites should also be a consideration as this can have a negative impact on settled and other travelling communities.
