Testun llawn:
It is a fact that there are plenty of Caravan and camping sites in Warwickshire already authorised to take Touring and Static vans (Stratford upon Avon and Warwick Racecourse being just two of several in Warwickshire). If people want to stay in Warwickshire for 1 nights or even several months (or on a residential basis) there are established Caravan and Camping sites (with all of the facilities named on your document e..g toilets, showers, car parking etc) that are already set up for exactly that purpose. There are already laws in place to prevent owners of these sites turning people away on grounds of ethnicity if that was a reason for thinking these sites were not suitable. There are also many more pitches than the 30+ you are seeking to accommodate.
With regards to the two sites referred to in your document.
The current site on Kites Nest Lane is in breach of planning law and was occupied in very bad faith (Bank Holiday weekend when the planning office was shut etc). To even suggest legalising it by including it in the consultation document sends a terrible message to the residents of that site and anyone else thinking that way to get their own way is to do something illegal and then resist the law until such time as the law changes to suit them.
Similarly, the site near the Shell Garage in Hatton has been breaching the law for years with Caravans being occupied on that site in spite of it not being a licensed camping ground. To legalise this send a similarly bad message.
I am very disappointed in your approach which in my opinion gives support to those carrying out illegal activities.
Caravan and camping sites are not suitable for permanent residential use and planning permission for such a site is distinctly different to that for a permanent Gypsy and Traveller site. There are often reasons why a caravan and camping site may not be suitable for long term residents such as being located on a former landfill site or contaminated land. The Gypsy and Traveller community has a large number of 'homeless' people in that they have nowhere that they can locate their home legally. The Council is obliged to provide accommodation to meet the needs of all its residents (and those who wish to live in the district, but do not have a permanent base). Gypsy and Traveller sites are considered to be 'affordable housing' and as such attract a similar rent, council tax etc. to that of a Council rental property.
With regard to the site at Kites Nest Lane, it has been included in the consultation document as we have included all sites that have been suggested to us as potential sites for Gypsies and Travellers by the landowners themselves. The landowner here has suggested that this is a site for consideration and we have therefore, to be fair to all landowners, included it within the consultation document. This does not suggest that the site is supported by the Council and indeed it has consistently refused planning applications on the site at Beausale and pursued enforcement action, including through the courts. Officers have, once again, defended the refusal of planning permission at the second appeal recently.
The site on Birmingham Road is, as far as I can tell, a certified site that a number of other unauthorised uses have taken place at this site, however, these have been dealt with. The site has been proposed as it meets many of the criteria required for a suitable site for the use of Gypsies and Travellers. However, the results of the consultation and further work into its suitability will decide whether it is included in the next stage of provision.