Dear Sir/Madam

Ref: Planning application for change of use of land to Traveller Site
with associated development.

As a result of the a meeting of the Well Hill Residents Association we
would like to make the following objections, and request the following
considerations and clarifications and would seek the planning departments
reassurance on the following:-

Clarifications
--------------

1. With regard the plan submitted by the applicant we note that the scale
of the caravans (16-25 ft in length) are not drawn to scale on the plan,
therefore we would ask that the applicant to issue a new plan which shows
the density of the proposed development more accurately than the one
submitted thus far so as it can be viewed by residents. We also note that
it is hard to see to scale what allocation within the site for required
parking there is.

2. We note that in the applicants Supporting statement it is claimed that
the existing hard standing was laid by the previous owner, the previous
owner in question claims that this is not the case and was laid by applicant
and that he informed the council of this, we were under the impression
that the enforcement notice was still in place and is now applicable to
the current owners subject to the outcome of this current fresh application.
In any respect the Residents Association would object to the current state
of the site as it is.

3. We note that in the applicants Supporting statement item 1.6 describes
the site as a ''good 90 m west of the m25'', we calculate that the site
is actually slightly less than 90 m if the measurement is taken from the
nearest sited caravan to the M25. And therefore this statement is slightly
misleading.

4. New developments in Well Hill have usually carried weight in favour of
refusal due to the lack of public services. Enquiries by the resident
association as to the improvement of public services such as the extension
of a bus route have led nowhere. Given the small scale of the site and the
assumption that three caravans require three vehicles to move them, plus
any additional vehicles for other family members together with work related
vehicles, and in consideration of the lack of public transport in the area.
Is the site adequate for such provision or will additional vehicles need
to be parked off site? In either case should this not be made clear in the
application with regard parking facilities?

Objections
----------

Firstly it should be noted that the Well Hill Residents Association is
committed to supporting and promoting the designations applied to the area
including and not limited to its status as an A.O.N.B, and those areas
designated as Special Scientific Interest. When it comments on planning
applications, for all types of planning, special care and often advice is
taken with this regard.

1. Well Hill Residents Association in the past have objected to applications
made without due consideration to Planning Policy Guidance note 24. (PPG 24).
Certainly residents seeking developments in this proximity have had to
undertake noise readings to support their applications. An application nearby
carried out the requisite noise assessment and it was found that his site
fell into NEC C and D, denoting permission should be refused. We note that
the applicant has not undertaken any noise assessments and therefore in the
interests of health of the applicants and equal treatment for all residents
we must maintain an objection on this point until such noise assessments are
undertaken.

2. Likewise Planning Policy Guidance note 23 (PPS23) on Planning and
Pollution Control has also been a factor in other residents applications and
therefore we must object until an Air Quality Assessment is undertaken in
the interests of the health of the applicants and equal treatment of all
residents.

3. With regard Greenbelt and A.O.N.B, The Residents Association does not
accept that there are other caravans in the locality or at the very least
considers this statement misleading. If there are, then they are within the
existing curtilage of existing buildings. The area concerned is a greenfield
site not in the existing curtilage of existing buildings and with only recent
development, itself subjected to an enforcement order. Therefore irrespective
of other caravans it is still to be considered inappropriate development in
the Green Belt.

The site is surrounded by deciduous hedgerows which in the winter months do
not provide adequate concealment. The replacement of such hedgerows with
conifers would be contrary to the surroundings. Also it should be pointed out
that ''Openness'' is more about the lack of development than what you can
actually see, therefore any development has an impact by the very fact it
exists, therefore the applicants suggestion of hedges ''allowed to grow a
little higher to screen views of caravans'' does not address the matter of
''openness'' indeed it is contrary to it. So therefore is conflicting with
Green Belt Policy.

Well Hill is also the nearest rural area to Orpington and Chelsfield
conurbations and close access from the M25 and A21, and is valued by a great
number of walkers, cyclists and horse riders for its views and openness. It
is the ''gateway to the A.O.N.B. ''. This is the fundamental purpose of Green
Belt and indeed its designation as an A.O.N.B, we feel therefore especially
as this is a Green Field site its development is to the detriment not only of
residents but the wider community. Especially as the site can be viewed,
especially during winter when the leaves are absent from the trees, from a
number of view points on higher ground and from the public footpath network.
And once again this has weighed heavily on the Residents Association comments
on other planning applications and therefore with regard not only to equal
treatment but specifically its leisure value, we are compelled most strongly
to object on these grounds also. We also give weight to the fact that the
management of this land has already changed, and would prefer it to be
returned to its original condition in line with the enforcement order that
either is or was in place.

4. We would also draw attention to ''The Good Practice Guide, designing Gypsy
and Traveller sites 2008''.

The application does not make any reference to the storage of propane gas,
there is no mains gas supply within approximately a mile of the site. It must
be of concern to the residence association that this is a safety issue and
must be addressed.

Well Hill is designated a ''Dark Area'', As the site entrance is on the corner
of Firmingers Lane and Rock Hill Junction, the need to have additional lighting
is likely to be required given the guidelines. Also that light emitted from
the Caravans themselves has to be given due considration, again given this is a
Green field site outside the curtilage of existing buildings this is also
detrimental to the areas designation.

The guidelines also recommend that a site should have more than one entrance,
this site does not comply and to comply the destruction of ancient hedgerow
would be required.

Also we note that a cesspit is indicated in the plan, PPG4 calculates that 3
people will produce 9000 litres of waste in a 2 week period, there are seven
people indicated to live on this site, that would require a typical waste
emptying tanker to attend the site every week. Possibly more often if the
Cesspit is of small capacity. We suspect that the current Cesspit was installed
with one Caravan in mind and not three, so clarification is also sought with
this regard. This in addition to the additional traffic the site will generate,
please see ''Considerations/Reassurances'' Also note that access to the site is
classed ''Unsuitable for Heavy Goods Vehicles''

Further more the land on which this site occupies is designated ''Environment
Agency Groundwater Protection Zone 3'' Other applications have been weighted
with the following statement ''Potable supplies are therefore at risk from
activities at the site and all precautions should be taken to avoid discharges
to the ground during construction and subsequent operation''. Given that frequent
visits will be required to the site as suggested by PPG4. And given that Well
Hill in winter snow is not accessable to most vehicles, any delay in emptying
there is an obvious risk of overflow and putting at risk potable water supplies.
We would bring special attention that an impoertant part of the Ecology of Well
Hill is its numerous natural Springs, therefore this point is especially relevant.

5. With regard to the larger part of the Well Hill Area being designated an area
of Special Scientific interest the Residents Association has for many years
campaigned for local residents and business to give regard to wildlife, Well Hill
is one of the few places where such protected species such as Bats, Field mice,
Badgers and others and a great number of bird species are still in abundance.
Therefore we have asked residents to maintain and not interfere with local
habitats, not only those close to dwellings but those some distance from dwellings
belonging to local landowners. We have promoted schemes to enhance and maintain
this diversity, such as those promotions provided by Sevenoaks Council to provide
free natural and local native hedging plants and extensive planting of natural
hedging has been undertaken as a result. In Well hill over a 135 meters of new
natural hedgerow has been planted since 2006. Further hedging projects are
potentially to be undertaken this autumn to ultimately replace field fencing. We
are again concerned that this specific locality is a Green Field site some
distance from any residence of any density and the development itself is very
close to existing ancient hedgerow, which is contrary to the position and
advice/requests given to local residents and would be detrimental to a number of
species currently occupying this habitat, some of which are protected. Therefore
we must also object on these grounds.

Considerations/Reassurances
---------------------------

1. Residents have often raised concerns about heavy lorries and large farm
equipment and although we pass regard to this matter to Kent Highways, we would
like to point out that residents already have some issues with the type of traffic
using these two narrow lanes, (Firmingers and Redmans Lane), given the description
of the applicants business, and the fact that it is a junction, this will add to
residents anxiety.

2. The access to the site is shared by a number of residences some distant up an
already poor condition track way, we note that an additional track way laid
directly from the entrance to Fountain Farm is subject to an enforcement order for
removal. In the interests of those residents also utilising this entrance, will
provision be made for them for the additional wear and tear to the entrance as a
result of this application if approved, Especially as noted earlier the increase
of traffic over this entrance is likely to be significant and detrimental to
existing residents. Also has it been established that the Applicants have the right
of way over this entrance way, we understand no searches were undertaken prior to
the land being purchased and obviously neighbour disputes are something the
Residents Association is keen to avoid.

3. Is it likely that restrictions will be placed upon the site as to business use,
thus generating further noise, disturbance, and vehicle activity, and if so is it
likely that these will be enforceable.


Yours Sincerely
Well Hill Residents association