Object

Representation ID: 64505

Received: 03/05/2014

Respondent: Mr Brian Slack

This document seems to ignore sites if they are allocated for other uses. However, the process should not be 'bolted on' to find easy-win, unallocated sites but part of a wider integrated process that considers housing/employment sites too.

This site has not previously been identified in Local Plan as a sustainable location for residential development. This together with its Green Belt status (which the government advises against developing and where traveller/gypsy development is classed as 'inappropriate') should be enough to class the site as 'Red' and not suitable for development.

Planning applications and appeals on the site have been continually rejected and the owners prevented from undertaking works on the site.

Use of the site for gypsies and travellers will greatly increase highway safety concerns with regard to access, visibility and road speeds. This has previously been a reason to refuse planning permission for a single dwelling on the site. The nature and volume of traffic in the area makes use of this site for gypsies and travellers dangerous particularly given the combined vehicle lengths of vans with trailers/caravans and the potential for such vehicle combinations to travel in convoy. Also there is no safe alternative access to the site. The proximity of busy roads is also a health and safety issue for gypsies and travellers living on the site, particularly traffic noise. The proximity of electricity lines would also be a concern.

The fact that the land owner is a gypsy should have no bearing on the site's classification. It should be classed as not suitable for development.

The undulating nature of the site would make any development highly visible from nearby roads. The characteristics of a gypsy and travellers site would be particularly unsympathetic to the local rural environment.

The site does not lend itself to integration as it would accommodate 45-60 people, representing a 25-30% increase in the size of the village, which would give an imbalance to the settled community.

For all of these reasons the site should be classed as 'Red'.