Gypsy, Traveller and Travelling Showpeople Development Plan Document

Disagree

We wish to object to the proposal to include the Water Lane site in the proposed LDF. As residents of Bearsted for more than 50 years, and having used these local roads in Bearsted and Thurnham extensively by car, bicycle and on foot, our reasons for objection are as follows: i. Highway safety: Water Lane and all other nearby adopted roads are narrow, and have poor forward and rear visibility. There are no footways, with hedges on both sides, and very limited verge space. making this very hazardous for all road users. ii. Pedestrian safety. These are popular walking, running and cycling routes. Additional vehicle traffic and pedestrian traffic from a multi-vehicle occupation site would add to safety risks for all users. iii. Water Lane (as the historic name suggests) has permanent Springs issuing from the base of the North Downs escarpment of Lower Chalk underlain by Gault Clay. There are water flows which run permanently downhill towards Bearsted; these always freeze during winter to leave icy patches on road surfaces. Additional daily traffic from a large site built on hard standing will produce additional water spread across the carriageway. As a non-principal route this is very unlikely to be gritted in winter. Being higher in altitude than the lower village areas, the area receives higher snowfall and in severe winters Water Lane and surrounding roads are impassable, with drifting across the entire carriageway. iv Access:Any access would need improved visibility and signage with through considerably improved sight lines. v Ground Conditions in the area are very poor for building. The mixture of clay and Head, plus the need for extensive cut-off drainage will lead to construction and maintenance costs which are far higher than the accepted norm. Given all the above, we oppose the inclusion of this site in the the draft DPD and request that it be removed.