I write in objection to ALL the proposed preferred option sites for Gypsys and Travellers.

1. The number of sites being proposed is in question and 31 is considered too high. This needs to be validated and agreed before any further steps are taken.

2.The sites proposed are "permanent" pitches and I do not believe this is what the public or travelling community require.

3.Maintaining permanent sites practically and financially will be virtually impossible if not completely impossible in respect of collecting council tax, rent etc.

4.A far better solution for to address the issue would be to provide "transition" sites funded by the council. These could be used on a continual basis rather than by a single family. These sites could be located away from existing and new housing developments which is most likely to the benefit of both the Travelling community and local residents.

5.Whatever is done it will not stop the ad hoc sites springing up regularly in our local roads. However transition sites would certainly have more impact on preventing this occurance.

Please review your strategy before going down an incorrect and costly path that cannot be maintained functionally or financially in a cost effective manner.
If Travellers want "permanent" sites then they should seek affordable accommodation.