While no formal application has been submitted, please consider opposing the approved proposal by Derbyshire Dales District Council (DDDC) to locate a "temporary and seasonal” traveller site on the edge of our village, Middleton by Wirksworth as it will have a significant impact on the environment and community.

Before the formal application is submitted it would be good if local residents would contact their representatives to inform them of the feelings of the community. It doesn't need to be long and a short email may be more to the point. Below is a list of contacts and some suggestions you might like to use.

Email or write to:

The district councillors 

• lucy.peacock@derbyshiredales.gov.uk

• peter.slack@derbyshiredales.gov.uk

• dawn.greatorex@derbyshiredales.gov.uk

County councillor

• The DCC disapproved of all sites - they have influence over Derbyshire dales district council

• Dermot Murphy – dermot.murphy@derbyshire.gov.uk

Write to MP of Derbyshire dales:

• John Whitby   - john.whitby.mp@parliament.uk

It is important to include your full name, address, postcode and a contact telephone number in any communication, if you are asking the MP to act on y(our) behalf.

There are more than one significant reason why the site in Middleton is not appropriate. When contacting anyone it might be better to focus on one or two of the key issues rather than all of them as this reflects the breadth of feeling and is not so repetitive.

 Below are some suggestions which could be expanded upon. It far from an exhaustive list.

Key focuses 

• Proximity to the graveyard – inconsiderate, insensitive, visual and noise impact on peace and tranquillity – no place to reflect.

• the destruction of the natural beauty around the village, an  area of outstanding beauty – not a brown field site - destruction of habitat.  Loss of major vista from national park. Border a SSSI. 

• Safeguarding – there have been some historic issues with this.

• Not permanent not seasonal

• Cost – already predicted to be large – unrealistic no sewage costs or contamination costs or restoration costs

Some suggested wording you might want to copy or use in an email. A longer email example can be found at the bottom

Dear XXXX

I am writing to express my strong concerns about proposed Travellers’ Site on land north-west of the cemetery on New Road, Middleton. The whole proposal seems to break many of the planning regulations concerning the impact on the local environment. I am particularly concerned about ....

Use as you see fit

A

Environmental and visual impact - The proposed site lies within an area of outstanding beauty. It is virgin farmland, classified as a priority lowland meadow area containing hay meadow of unimproved grassland which provides habitats for many species. It is only a few hundred metres from a site of special scientific interest (SSSI), the Via Gellia woodland and from the SSSI nearby meadows. it also neighbours the local national parks. It lies within a SSSI impact zone. I cannot believe there are no other suitable brown field sites which could be developed instead.

B

Not temporary, not seasonal - I have no confidence that the proposed site will be temporary or seasonal. Derbyshire Dales District Council have been looking for a permanent traveller site for over 10 years.  The “temporary” sites at Matlock Station and Matlock Bath have been occupied for 6 and 3 years respectively.  We know from these sites that any non-compliance or issues with uninvited visitors take years to resolve. Additionally it is significant that there is no provision in the costings to restore the site to its original state after the proposed 2 years. Therefore, I cannot trust the assurances that the site will be temporary or seasonal. 

C

Proximity to the cemetery – The proposed site lying within metres of the cemetery is both inconsiderate and insensitive. In the village, with such a small close knit community there are families with several family members including children buried there. The cemetery is an important place of grieving as well as tranquillity. There is no realistic possibility of suitable screening in the near term and will have both a visual and noise impact which will destroy the peace of the cemetery. This is an “amenity” for the village, a place of quiet reflection and grief. It makes it a totally unsuitable location for a travellers' site.

D

Safeguarding - I am concerned about my personal wellbeing and safety. As someone who visits the graveyard and local woods, the likely closeness of untether animals (dogs) and of the already publicly raised safeguarding issues regarding the proposed family I am worried about the proposed sites impact on the well being of both myself and other residents.  I feel my own personal safety will be compromised and I will no longer be able to access and enjoy the local amenities (graveyard/woodland SSSI)   (if you have a dog you may not be able to walk it that way).

E

Cost - The cost to set up the site, which currently has no hardstanding, water, electricity or sewage, is estimated to be £135,000. In addition there is no costing for dealing with the lead contaminated land which would require a membrane or for building suitable banked screening with mature trees. If there is an intension of connecting to the sewage system it would require pumping waste uphill.  In addition, there will be considerable costs involved in maintaining the site. Even if that figure is realistic, it is worrying to us that there is no budget to return the site to its previous state once the purported two year period is up. This money would be much better spent on finding a permanent site.

While I understand that a formal application has not yet been submitted, I urge you to oppose any such proposal and do everything you can to ensure this does not go ahead to the planning stage and that the site gets recovered as a potential development. I look forward to hearing a response from yourself.