Gypsy, Traveller and Travelling Showpeople Development Plan Document

Disagree

I am writing to formally object to the proposed traveller site under planning application C4S(017) The Brishings, located at C4S(017) which is directly adjacent to XXXX Treetops, shepherds way, Langley ME173LJ. And Green lane listed properties. My objection is based on the following considerations: 1. Immediate Proximity and Impact on Residential Amenity XXXX is directly adjacent to the field identified for the proposed development. The scale and nature of the proposal would result in a significant and unacceptable impact on residential amenity through increased noise, activity, lighting, and loss of privacy. The development would fundamentally alter the quiet, rural character of the area and materially harm the enjoyment of my home. 2. Drainage, Water Runoff, and Flood Risk Running between the proposed site and my property is an existing shared runoff water gully, which carries surface water from the field and discharges into the public sewer. Any alteration to the field, including hardstanding, loss of vegetation, or changes in land use, will directly affect water flow and poses a clear risk of increased runoff impacting my property. The proposal must demonstrate how surface water will be managed. The introduction of septic tanks in close proximity to residential dwellings and an existing watercourse raises serious concerns regarding pollution, groundwater contamination, and sewer capacity. 3. Highway Safety and Access Constraints The proposed site is accessed via a single-lane road with poor visibility at junctions. The road is too narrow to accommodate two vehicles travelling in opposite directions, already experiences congestion, and has no pavements. Pedestrian safety would therefore be severely compromised. The road is demonstrably unsuitable for increased traffic levels, particularly larger vehicles such as caravans, service vehicles, and towing vehicles. There is no safe or practical access for such vehicles, and the proposal would significantly increase highway danger for residents and other road users. 4. Infrastructure and Services Local infrastructure, including drainage, water supply, and sewage systems, is not designed to support development of this nature or scale. Proposals of servicing the site prare not in keeping with the locality and would have to be proven and guaranteed to be sustainable or adequate. 5. Environmental Impact and Loss of Biodiversity The proposal would involve deforestation of the site, resulting in the loss of established trees, natural habitat, and protected local wildlife, including species known to be rare in the area. This represents a clear conflict with policies aimed at protecting biodiversity and the natural environment. 6. Light, Noise, and Rural Character The introduction of artificial lighting, increased activity, and vehicle movements would have a detrimental impact on the rural character of the area. Noise and light pollution ,would extend into neighbouring residential properties, including my own, and would be out of keeping with the existing environment. 7. Lack of Mitigation and Alternative Sites The application fails to demonstrate how the significant impacts outlined above would be adequately mitigated. It is also unclear whether less sensitive alternative sites have been properly considered, particularly those not immediately adjacent to existing homes. This objection is based solely on material planning considerations and not on the personal characteristics of any group. I respectfully request that Maidstone Council gives full weight to the concerns raised above when determining this application.