Gypsy, Traveller and Travelling Showpeople Development Plan Document

Disagree

I write to formally object to the inclusion of Site C4S (008), The Lodge, Water Lane, Thurnham, within the Gypsy and Traveller Development Plan Document. I am a local resident of the Bearsted/Thurnham area within Maidstone Borough. My objection is founded on clear conflicts with national planning policy, the Maidstone Borough Local Plan Review 2021–2038, Kent County Council highway standards, and the statutory duty relating to the Kent Downs National Landscape (previously Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty). The allocation of this site would result in unacceptable harm to highway safety, the natural and historic environment, residential amenity, and local infrastructure. It is, therefore, neither suitable nor sustainable and should be rejected for the following reasons outlined below; Highway Safety and Site Access Water Lane is a narrow, single-track rural lane with a 60mph national speed limit with very limited passing places, substandard geometry, poor forward visibility, and only partial pedestrian footway. The road fails to meet basic highway safety expectations for intensified use. The proposed allocation would inevitably lead to increased vehicular movements, including towing vehicles, large vans, HGV-type vehicles and heavy machinery for the delivery and siting of static and touring caravans. In certain places along Water Lane the carriageway is only 3.6m wide thereby providing insufficient space and turning/manoeuvring area to permit residents to easily take caravans on and off the site. This is fundamentally incompatible with Kent County Council Highway Design Guide standards, which require developments to demonstrate safe and suitable access for all users. The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) paragraph 116 states that development should only be prevented on highway grounds where there would be an unacceptable impact on highway safety. In this case, the constraints of Water Lane mean that such an impact would be unavoidable. Highways standards require that highways should be wide enough that a large static caravan can be delivered by a large goods vehicle to all pitches. Furthermore, NPPF paragraph 115 requires that safe and suitable access to the site can be achieved for all users. Given the width constraints of Water Lane, the lack of footway, the presence of vulnerable road users, and the inability of the lane to safely accommodate increased traffic volumes or vehicle size, these requirements cannot be met. The seriousness of these concerns is reinforced by the tragic fatalities of Mr & Mrs Corkery that occurred on an adjacent and materially identical rural road less than 0.5 miles away, highlighting the very real and proven dangers of inadequate infrastructure in this area. To knowingly allocate a site that would intensify use of such roads would be irresponsible and contrary to the Council’s duty to promote highway safety. Trees, Landscape and Environmental Protection At the entrance to this site are three mature English Oak trees designated as T1, T2 and T3 protected by Tree Preservation Order No. 14 of 2007. Within the confines of this site are areas designated areas of Woodlands with TPOs designated W3 consisting of Common Ash, Willow, Sycamores, Poplars, English Oak, Field Maple and Hawthorn. These trees are a significant landscape feature and contribute materially to local character, biodiversity, and ecological resilience. Development of this site would place these protected trees at unacceptable risk, whether through direct loss, root protection area incursion, changes in ground levels, or compaction from vehicle movements and hardstanding. This directly conflicts with the Maidstone Borough Local Plan Review 2021-2038 LPRSP15, which requires the protection and enhancement of the natural environment, including trees subject to preservation orders. It is also inconsistent with NPPF paragraph 187, which requires development to protect and enhance valued landscapes and features. Kent Downs National Landscape (formerly AONB) Setting and Landscape Harm The site lies on the very edge of the Kent Downs National Landscape and forms part of its immediate rural setting. Under Section 85 of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000, Maidstone Borough Council has a statutory duty to have regard to the purpose of conserving and enhancing the natural beauty of the Kent Downs National Landscape (previously AONB). Policy LPRSP4 of the Maidstone Borough Local Plan Review 2021–2038 gives great weight to conserving landscape character and scenic beauty when considering new settlements in AND around the Kent Downs National Landscape. The introduction of caravans, hardstanding, lighting, fencing, and associated infrastructure would cause substantial harm to the rural character of the area and the setting of the AONB. This is further reinforced by NPPF, which affords the highest status of protection to AONBs, whereby paragraph 20 requires that great weight be given to conserving landscape and scenic beauty. The proposed allocation fails this test and would result in lasting and unjustified landscape harm. Policies LPRSP9 (Development in the Countryside - Kent Downs National Landscape and its Setting) and LPRQD4 (Design Principles in the Countryside), seek to protect landscape character, public amenity, and enjoyment of the countryside. Most notably stipulating that; “ 6.140 The council has a statutory duty…including the great weight afforded in national policy to its conservation and enhancement. Within the National Landscape, the Kent Downs AONB Management Plan 2021 – 2026 provides a framework for conserving and enhancing the natural beauty of the area. The council has adopted the Kent Downs AONB Management Plan and will support its implementation. Open countryside to the immediate south of the National Landscape forms a large extent of the setting for this designation. In Maidstone, this is a sensitive landscape that is coming under threat from inappropriate development and is viewed as a resource that requires conservation and enhancement where this supports the purposes of the National Landscape. 6.141 The council will ensure development proposals conserve and enhance the natural beauty, distinctive character, biodiversity and setting of the AONB, taking into account the economic and social well-being of the area… 6.142 New development in the National Landscape should demonstrate that it meets the requirements of the national policy… 6.143 The above considerations apply to the setting of the Kent Downs National Landscape. The Management Plan state that the setting of the Kent Downs National Landscape is the land outside the designated area which is visible from the National Landscape and from which the National Landscape can be seen… 6.144 The foreground of the National Landscape and the wider setting is taken to include the land which sits at and beyond the foot of the scarp slope of the North Downs and the wider views thereof…the setting of the Kent Downs AONB is ‘broadly speaking the land outside the designated area which is visible from the AONB…Having due regard to the purposes of the designation is part of the council’’s statutory duty under the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000. National policy (NPPF and NPPG) states that great weight should be given to conserving landscape and scenic beauty in the National Landscape. The duty is relevant to proposals outside the boundary of the National Landscape which may have an impact on the statutory purposes of the National Landscape…incompatibility with their surroundings…movement, reflectivity and colour are likely to affect impact…The Kent Downs AONB Management Plan advises that ‘where the qualities of the National Landscape which were instrumental in reasons for its designation are affected then the impacts should be given considerable weight in decisions. This particularly applies to views to and from the scarp of the North Downs’ ” Flooding and Drainage Constraints There are known and ongoing flooding issues at the southern end of Water Lane, demonstrating that the local drainage network is already under significant strain. Additional development on this site would increase surface water run-off through the introduction of hardstanding and intensified use, exacerbating existing problems as well as affecting highway safety. This conflicts with Issue 8 - Managing risk of flooding from all sources of the Maidstone Borough Local Plan Review Summary Document, which requires developments demonstrate appropriate drainage and ensure that flood risk is not increased elsewhere. It also conflicts with NPPF paragraphs 170-172, which directs that development should not increase flood risk and should be steered away from areas with known drainage constraints. Infrastructure Capacity, Amenity and Character Infrastructure and local services in Bearsted and Thurnham are already under significant pressure, including roads, healthcare provision, education, and community facilities. The allocation of this site would add to these pressures without any identified or deliverable mitigation, contrary to the principles of sustainable development set out in NPPF paragraph 8. In addition, the likely increase in noise, activity, artificial lighting, and movements of larger vehicles would materially harm residential amenity and the tranquillity of the countryside. This conflicts with Policy LPRQD1 (Sustainable Design) of the Maidstone Borough Local Plan Review 2021– 2038, which requires development protect the amenity of existing communities. It also evidently contravenes LPRQD4 (Design Principles in the Countryside), as it would indeed negatively impact on the appearance and character of the landscape. Policy LPRENV3: Caravan storage in the countryside would also be in contravention with such a concentration of sites within and around the Kent Downs National Landscape and it’s setting. Ecology, Protected Species and Public Rights of Way There is a well-established presence of bats within the wider area, and given the semi-rural nature of the site, the presence of mature trees (including three protected English Oaks), hedgerows, and suitable foraging and commuting corridors, there is a reasonable likelihood of protected species being present. While it cannot be confirmed with certainty at this stage, the characteristics of the site and surrounding landscape indicate a realistic prospect of Great Crested Newts occurring within the vicinity. In accordance with the precautionary principle set out in NPPF paragraph 187, and Policies LPRSP14(a) (Natural Environment) and LPRSP15 (Principles of good design) of the Maidstone Borough Local Plan Review 2021–2038, land should not be allocated where there is insufficient ecological evidence to demonstrate that protected species and their habitats would not be harmed or where impacts cannot be adequately mitigated. A public footpath runs along the eastern boundary of the proposed site and is regularly used by ramblers and dog walkers alike for public right of way providing access to the Kent Downs National Landscape. The introduction of a traveller site at this location, with associated activity, noise, lighting, fencing, and increased vehicle movements, would significantly detract from the rural character and tranquillity experienced along this route. This would materially harm the recreational value of the footpath and the setting of the Kent Downs National Landscape, contrary to Policy LPRSP2. Principle of Gypsy and Traveller Provision I recognise and support the principle that Gypsy and Traveller families must be provided with suitable, safe, and deliverable sites in accordance with national and local policy. However, the existence of need does not override fundamental planning constraints, nor does it justify the allocation of sites that are demonstrably unsuitable. The Maidstone Borough Local Plan Review 2021–2038 includes specific criteria-based policies for Gypsy and Traveller accommodation which require sites to be appropriately located, safe, and capable of being adequately serviced without causing unacceptable harm. In particular, it requires that sites: • Have safe and convenient access to the highway network and not result in unacceptable impacts on highway safety; • Be capable of accommodating the type and volume of traffic likely to be generated • Avoid areas subject to flooding or other environmental constraints; • Protect landscape character, the natural environment, and the setting of the Kent Downs National Landscape; • Not result in unacceptable harm to the amenity of neighbouring communities; • Avoid packing undue pressure on local infrastructure and services and services. NPPF paragraph 11 requires that development be sustainable, and paragraph 36 stipulates plans are ‘sound’ if amongst other criteria, they are consistent with national policy. Allocating a site that is unsafe, environmentally harmful, and incapable of being adequately mitigated does not represent sound planning nor fair provision. Site C4S (008) clearly fails to meet these criteria. The severe access constraints, flood risk concerns, proximity to the Kent Downs National Landscape, presence of protected trees, and lack of infrastructure capacity render the site non-compliant with numerous local and national policies. Conclusion For the multitude of reasons set out above, Site C4S (008) is wholly unsuitable for allocation within the Gypsy and Traveller DPD. It conflicts directly with the NPPF, and is demonstrably noncompliant with the Maidstone Borough Local Plan Review 2021–2038, Kent Highway Standards, Tree Preservation Orders, and the Council’s statutory duty to protect the Kent Downs National Landscape. I therefore urge the Council, in the strongest possible terms, to remove this site from the DPD and crucially refuse its allocation.