Object

Representation ID: 1593

Received: 01/10/2013

Respondent: C/O Navestock Parish Council

Green Belt land is slowly being destroyed and contaminated by travellers. There are no sanitary precautions on their sites and therefore all waste is discharged to surrounding areas such as ditches and wasteground. The regular dumping of rubbish and non control of sites. The land is becoming more and more undesirable- not what green belt is for. Navestock will becoe an undesirable village to live in soon.

There is a lack fo control over traveller sites.

Object

Representation ID: 1594

Received: 01/10/2013

Respondent: C/O Navestock Parish Council

Travellers flaunt their defiance of planning laws and regulations and dump their refuse and sewerage everywhere and pollute in their wake.
The Councils reluctance to enfore and put into place rules to protect the ordinary citizen/ tax payer will only lead to this practice being encouraged.

Object

Representation ID: 1595

Received: 01/10/2013

Respondent: C/O Navestock Parish Council

Our village is suffering badly from the traveller site. There is a constant dumping of rubbish. Travellers seem to get more leeway and rights that I a tax payer.

Object

Representation ID: 1596

Received: 01/10/2013

Respondent: C/O Navestock Parish Council

If the governments aim is to ensure fair and equal treatment for travellers, surely it must apply to the settled community as well? The incidences of rubbish dumping have increased and more recently there have been shootings.

Object

Representation ID: 1597

Received: 01/10/2013

Respondent: C/O Navestock Parish Council

I strongly object to the Traveller provision in the Plan for the following reasons:
1. flaunting planning regulations
2. rubbish being dumped in and around our areas
3. sites are unsuitable for th quantity and type of occupation and are without the essential sewage and rubbish facilities.

Object

Representation ID: 1598

Received: 01/10/2013

Respondent: C/O Navestock Parish Council

The sites in Navestock do not meet the stated criteria because they are nowhere near shops, shools, healthcare or public transport. The village is being destroyed by traveller sites as a result of rubbish on lanes and sewage in ditches.

Brentwood council has not made an accurate count of the number of pitches at these sites.

Object

Representation ID: 1601

Received: 01/10/2013

Respondent: C/O Navestock Parish Council

The proposed sites in Navestock do not meet the stated criteria. They are nowhere near shops, schools, healthcare or public transport. Our village is being destroyed by the travellers sites. The Plan does not provide an accurate count of sites. The sites we currently have in Goatswood Lane, Horsemanside and Curtis Hill Lane have destroyed the gb with tarmacing, paving and over urbanisation of these sites.
The Governments aim of fair and equal treatment for travellers should also be applied to the setled community!

Object

Representation ID: 1603

Received: 01/10/2013

Respondent: C/O Navestock Parish Council

i object to the Traveller provision plans as the village is being destroyed with rubbish on verges and ditches. The plan proposals will not help the situation. Does the Council know how many travellers there are in Navestock? Do the sites meet the necessary criteria? Why would the Council put a travellers site on the gb. Land that is supposed to be used for agricultural purposes? what effect will it have on local schools and heath care. I do not feel the interests of brentwood residents are being given fair and equal treatment (as the governments aim for Travellers)!

Support

Representation ID: 1604

Received: 01/10/2013

Respondent: C/O Navestock Parish Council

I support the proposal at the traveller site at Rye Etch but would requst that permission be limited to current family (and descendants). This small site whose occupants show proper respect for the area, the woodland and the visual impact has worked well in this area with the family fully integrated into village life.

Object

Representation ID: 1605

Received: 01/10/2013

Respondent: C/O Navestock Parish Council

I do object ot the further provisions for the following reasons:
1. Sites at Curtis Mill Lane do not meet the stated criteria in that there is no realistic access to public transport, shops or schools.
2. The Hope Farm site in Goatswood Lane (wrongly listed as Horseman Side by BBC) is an eyesore with acres of GB bureied under tarmac and brick. The occupiers sghow no respect for the rural environment.
3. Brentwoods count of sites/ pitches is unrealistic, fluctuating between 96 sites in 2012 (assuming 2 piches per site) reduced to only 105 pitches in 2013.