Gypsy, Traveller and Travelling Showpeople Development Plan Document

Strongly disagree

I am writing to formally register my strong objection to the above-referenced planning application for the development of a new traveller site at the bottom of Water Lane, Bearsted. I object to this proposal on multiple planning grounds, which include, but are not limited to, highway safety, infrastructure capacity, environmental damage, and the severe, irreversible impact on the residential amenity and intrinsic character of our village. 1. Highway Safety and Traffic Concerns The location at the bottom of Water Lane is fundamentally unsuitable for the proposed development due to the significant increase in traffic it will generate. • Road Narrowness: Water Lane is a local, rural/village road, which is often narrow, lacking sufficient pavements in sections, and was not designed to accommodate the high volume and size of vehicles associated with a traveller site (e.g., caravans, larger vehicles, and frequent domestic vehicle movements). • Increased Danger: The inevitable increase in vehicular movements, particularly turning and maneuvering onto or off Water Lane, presents a serious hazard for pedestrians, cyclists, and existing residents, significantly compromising highway safety. • Lack of Visibility: The location itself, at the 'bottom' of the lane, may suffer from poor visibility or sightlines, exacerbating the risks posed by increased traffic. 2. Infrastructure Strain on a Local Village Bearsted is a small, established village community with finite infrastructure resources. The addition of a new, high-density residential use will place an unacceptable strain on already stretched local services: • Schools and Health Services: Local primary schools and GP surgeries are already at or near capacity. This development would place undue pressure on these essential community services, detrimental to existing and new residents alike. • Drainage and Flooding: Given the mention of the site being at the 'bottom' of Water Lane, there is a legitimate concern regarding surface water run-off and potential drainage or flood issues, which the existing infrastructure may not be able to manage, impacting surrounding properties. 3. Detrimental Impact on Local Character and Residential Amenity The proposal will cause significant and demonstrable harm to the character of Bearsted and fundamentally disturb the peace and amenity currently enjoyed by local residents: • Loss of Village Character: The proposed site will result in the undesirable and inappropriate urbanisation of a currently undeveloped or low-intensity area. This permanent change is contrary to the established, tranquil, semi-rural character of Bearsted. • Disturbance of Peace (Noise and Light): The development will introduce unacceptable levels of noise and light pollution, significantly disturbing the existing peace of this small, local village. This is a crucial factor in residential amenity, and the proposal represents a loss of quiet enjoyment for surrounding properties. • Visual Impact: The development, including caravans, ancillary structures, and associated paraphernalia, will constitute a jarring and harmful visual intrusion into the landscape, contrary to local planning policies designed to protect the visual amenity of the area. In summary, the application fails to meet key planning requirements regarding highway safety and is demonstrably unsustainable in terms of its impact on local infrastructure and community cohesion. I strongly urge the Council to take these substantial concerns into consideration and refuse planning permission for application on the grounds that it represents an inappropriate and harmful development that would cause unacceptable and irreversible damage to the character and residential amenity of Bearsted.