Gypsy, Traveller and Travelling Showpeople Development Plan Document

Disagree

I write to formally object to the proposed allocation of Site C4S-008 within the Gypsy, Traveller and Travelling Showpeople Development Plan Document (DPD) at Regulation 18c stage. This objection is made solely on planning grounds and relates to the suitability of the site, not to the principle of providing accommodation for Gypsy, Traveller and Travelling Showpeople communities. Conflict with the Spatial Strategy and Sustainable Development Objectives The allocation of Site C4S-008 conflicts with the spatial strategy of the Maidstone Borough Local Plan (2017), particularly: Policy SP1 (Sustainable Development Locations) Policy SP5 (Transport and Accessibility) Site C4S-008 is located in a poorly connected rural location, remote from essential services such as shops, healthcare, education facilities, and regular public transport. As a result, future occupiers would be heavily reliant on private vehicles for everyday activities. This approach is inconsistent with Policy SP1, which directs development to locations that reduce the need to travel and promote sustainable patterns of development, and Policy SP5, which seeks to minimise reliance on the private car. Unsuitable Highway Access and Transport Impacts The site is accessed via narrow rural lanes that are sub-standard in width and alignment and lack footways, street lighting, and adequate visibility. The proposed allocation conflicts with: Policy DM21 (Transport and Parking) Policy SP5 (Transport and Accessibility) The road network serving Site C4S-008 is unsuitable for the regular movement of: Caravans and towing vehicles Service and refuse vehicles Emergency vehicles The allocation raises unresolved concerns regarding highway safety, pedestrian and cyclist safety, and the ability of emergency services to safely access the site. No convincing evidence has been provided to demonstrate that these constraints can be adequately mitigated. Harm to Countryside Character and Landscape Site C4S-008 lies within a predominantly rural area, where development is subject to strict control. The proposed allocation conflicts with: Policy SP17 (Countryside) Policy DM1 (Principles of Good Design) The scale and nature of the proposed use would introduce a form of development that is urbanising in character, resulting in: Loss of rural openness Visual harm to the surrounding landscape Erosion of the established countryside character This would undermine the objectives of Policy SP17, which seeks to protect the countryside for its own sake, and Policy DM1, which requires development to respond positively to local character and landscape context. Impact on Residential Amenity The proximity of Site C4S-008 to existing residential properties gives rise to legitimate amenity concerns. The allocation is contrary to: Policy DM1 (Principles of Good Design) In particular, insufficient evidence has been provided to demonstrate that potential impacts arising from noise, activity levels, lighting, and general disturbance could be avoided or satisfactorily mitigated, as required by Policy DM1. Infrastructure Capacity and Deliverability Concerns The allocation of Site C4S-008 is not supported by robust evidence demonstrating that necessary infrastructure can be delivered in a timely and effective manner, contrary to: Policy ID1 (Infrastructure Delivery) There is insufficient clarity regarding: Local road capacity and mitigation Utility and drainage provision Waste collection and servicing arrangements In the absence of confirmed infrastructure solutions, the allocation of this site is premature and risks creating an unsustainable form of development. Inadequate Site Selection Justification It is unclear how Site C4S-008 has been assessed as suitable when it performs poorly against key site selection criteria, particularly in relation to sustainability, accessibility, landscape impact, and infrastructure capacity. The Council has not demonstrated that: A clear sequential approach has been applied; or Less constrained and more sustainable sites closer to existing settlements have been prioritised. This undermines the soundness of the proposed allocation. Conclusion For the reasons set out above, Site C4S-008 is not consistent with the Maidstone Borough Local Plan, nor with the stated objectives of the Gypsy, Traveller and Travelling Showpeople DPD. The allocation of Site C4S-008 would result in an unsustainable, poorly located, and harmful form of development. I therefore respectfully request that Maidstone Borough Council: Removes Site C4S-008 from the draft DPD prior to Regulation 19; and Reconsiders alternative sites that better accord with the spatial strategy, sustainability objectives, and countryside protection policies of the Local Plan.