Gypsy, Traveller and Travelling Showpeople Development Plan Document
Search form responses
Results for Mr Keith Runacres search
New searchNo answer given
The policy is acceptable but implementation is the problem. Defining what makes a site suitable is not covered and no guidance as to where comment can be made has been given.
No Strong views.
Para 109 states a preference for sites to be located close to facilities such as schools and health services. The Brishings site (C4S (017)) as proposed does not meet these requirements. The surgery is at full capacity, assess to the site is restricted by narrow roads, access to local schools is impossible unless personal transport is used i.e Car. Previous applications for Planning permission have all resulted in rejection on the grounds that the site is "Unsustainable". As such it is unsustainable now and should be removed from the site list.
See my comment under the previous heading. Access. Access has to be via Green Lane which is currently unsuitable for HGV or large lorries because of it’s width. Similar access restrictions have applied to previous applications for planning permission all of which have been rejected not just on the grounds of access but because the site in “unsustainable”. None of the policies consider the impact of a Travelling Community on the current residents of Langley village. The additional of a travelling Community will greatly increase the amount of traffic using the local roads which are already heavily loaded as are other essential services such as waters and electricity supplies. The Brishings site would need considerable development if it is to be used as the council intends, not the least of which is, utility services, roads, landscaping and hardstanding/foundations. Such work would impact badly on the following: Langley Village. Langley village is predominantly village of single and 2 story building surrounded by agricultural and wooded area. The introduction of multiple mobile homes and/or temporary caravan sites would not be in keeping with the rest of the village and ruin the character of the rural village setting. Roads. The current road structure surrounding the site is either very busy (Leeds Rd) or extremely narrow |(Green Lane). During development there would be considerable disruption to Langley residents and a considerably increased risk of accident at the junctions Green Lane/Leeds Rd, Green Lane/Heath Rd and Heath Rd/Leeds Rd. Furthermore, the linking road, Shepherds Way, between Green Lane and Heath Rd, is frequently restricted in width by parked vehicles and terminates in at a junction with restricted visibility making is particularly dangerous for exiting traffic. Utilities. Currently, electricity services are prone to interruption on a fairly regular basis, albeit for relatively short periods. However, should those supplies be further loaded, the expectation can only be more interruption for possibly longer periods. The impact of addition water and gas usage plus additional waste water disposal should be considered. Flood risk. Any additional “Run-off” water from a new build site will only exacerbate any potential problem of surface water flooding in the surrounding area. Leeds Road has flooded in the past in the dip between Green lane and Heath road. With the effects of global warming producing more intense rainfall, the flood risk for Langley Village as a whole, will increase. Developing the Brishings site will only increase that risk. Previous Planning Applications. In the past there have been 4 previous applications/re-applications to develop the Brishings site; they have all been rejected. They have all been rejected on the following grounds “Unsustainable location as existing settlement has very few services”. Local Surgery Since 2016 there has been constant development of large housing estates along the A274 within the vicinity of Langley. Namely: Ragstone Fields, The Nurseries, The Rosewood Estate (800 Houses with only a small proportion completed), Bicknor Wood and Warmlake Orchard. There are just 2 local surgeries serving these estates: the Wallis Surgery in the Parkwood estate and Orchard surgery in Langley. All doctor’s surgeries are under extreme pressure and addition resident in Langley may not easily be able to register locally in view of the extremely large and growing numbers already registered. The reasons given for repeatedly rejecting the Brishings site development will not have changed and would therefore apply equally to any development for use as a site of Gypsy, Traveller and Travelling Show-people. Given the foregoing comments/objections I believe the site should be removed from further consideration under the Regulation 18a Development Plan Document.
No answer given
The policy is acceptable but the Brishings site does not meet this policy requirement so should not be considered
I agree the policy but the Brishings site does not meet these policy requirements in paras a, b, c, e and g. as the sites has been listed as "Unsustainable".
Your example of a Tree system layout does not seem appropriate however the decision would be yours.
