Gypsy, Traveller and Travelling Showpeople Development Plan Document

Disagree

I am writing to formally object to the proposed development of a Gypsy, Traveller and Travelling Showpeople site on Water Lane, Bearsted. My objections are based on the following planning considerations and the potential impact on the local community and environment. Location Water Lane (the proposed site) is a narrow rural lane, with minimal passing points. All year round it is wet due to surface drainage run off creating hazardous conditions and in winter months, when the water freezes, it is a very dangerous road to navigate. All of the above demonstrates that Water Lane is unsuitable for increased traffic and large vehicles - this would not only create traffic issues but an increased potential for road accidents. The road is used frequently by walkers, horse riders and cyclists, increasing traffic, particularly large vehicles that may struggle to stop quickly, puts local residents at serious risk. National statistics clearly demonstrate that at least 60% of deaths in road traffic accidents take place on country roads, by deliberately increasing traffic on a road not designed to take both the increased volume and size of vehicles, approval would be directly increasing the safety risk for local road users. Local / Rural Character The development would have a significant detrimental impact on the rural character and visual amenity of the Kent Downs Landscape. The fields, trees and countryside are part of what makes the area a place of tranquility, this would interrupt the landscape in a very obvious and direct manner. Given how the planning department have fought to protect this landscape from minor developments such as extensions to property, decking, outbuildings etc, I find it incredulous that such a development could even be considered. Environmental Impact The site contains hedgerows and wildlife habitats that will be disrupted if the proposed development is allowed. As stated earlier, Water Lane suffers from significant surface run off challenges which indicates that the land is not suitable for development. Drainage would be a problem and could cause contamination in water ways and even into the local area. The site also has several important Oak trees, which have TPOs - again the planning department have previously ensured that these trees remain protected and development amongst such trees is prohibited. I would question what makes this suddenly acceptable given Maidstone Councils stand on planning decisions previously. Local Resident Impact Residents of Bearsted would experience a loss of privacy, increased noise, increased traffic, strain on local services (Schools, Doctors), and light pollution. These factors would significantly affect the quality of life for existing households. In summary, Bearsted is known for its character and peaceful environment. This proposal fundamentally changes the nature of the community and village. It will increase traffic, put strain on services and fundamentally shift planning decisions as this will set a dangerous precedent of what will be allowed to be developed in the future. I urge the planning authority to reject this proposal and thank-you for considering the above points.