Object

Preferred Options for Sites

Representation ID: 64361

Received: 30/04/2014

Respondent: Mr John Holmes

Representation Summary:

dummy

Full text:

) I would like to comment on the proposed traveller site at GT19, Birmingham Road to which I strongly object. On the following reasons:

Natural Environment
The canal path makes for fantastic walks and this development would impact on the wildlife in and around the canal, within this area heron, kingfishers, swans are regularly seen and are protected, including their nest, under the wildlife and countryside act. This proposed development would disturb their environment.

Historic Environment
I'm amazed that a traveller site is being considered next to the Hatton "flight" locks in the green belt. Your proposed site would directly back onto the locks which were build in 1799. This really is one of the most fantastic parts of the British water ways and would cause a terrible loss to our beautiful historic canals and affect tourism to this local area.

Not only would this site be visible from the canal but also the road, and in a close proximity to the historic Hatton Park buildings. And the views of Hatton Park.

Road safety
The main access point is directly on to a fast moving road, caravans/ cars would be pulling directly onto the main road where there has already been a number of deaths.

This site would be boarded by this main road, I would assume that both children and pets could be located on the site and all that stands between them and a dangerous road is a hedgerow, which I'm sure the children would want to play in.

There are no provisions for parking and turning at the site. Therefore turning and any overflow parking would be on the main road. Decreasing the visibility of drivers and pedestrians crossing the road.

The "Ugly" bridge on the boundary of the proposed development isn't suitable for the regular use with heavy vehicles. And an increase in traffic would increase the danger for walkers crossing the blind bridge to reach the other side of the canal.

Finally with this area located at the bottom of the Hatton locks, which is 146 feet high I would have thought this could be subject to flooding?