South Warwickshire Local Plan

Gwrthwynebu

Gypsy and Traveller Site Options

ID sylw: 56013

Derbyniwyd: 28/07/2013

Ymatebydd: Jonah Buckley

Crynodeb o'r Gynrychiolaeth:

The meeting and heated discussion at Aylesford School about the proposed site showed that the criterion that the site should 'promote peaceful and integrated co-existence between the site and the local community' would most definitely not be met.

The local infrastructure is already overloaded following extensive development over the past 10 years (Chase Meadow Estate and Tournament Fields Business Park) eg local schools, surrounding roads, social facilities and doctors would not be able to support Gypsy and Traveller sites.

The development would have a dramatic and adverse impact on how the town is viewed, negatively impacting tourism (including the Racecourse) and wider local economy. The potential risks of diseases being transferred from non-vaccinated animals to thoroughbred race horses would negatively impact on the racecourse, its operations and future investment.

Testun llawn:

Dear Sirs,
I am writing to you as a resident of Chase Meadow to object to one of the proposed Gypsy and Traveller Sites, specifically the land at Budbrooke Lodge, Racecourse and Hampton Road (site GT11).

Firstly, after attending the meeting at Aylesford School about the New Local Plan, and the proposed Traveller Sites, it became clear that a direct conflict with the Planning Policy for Travellers Sites was very much in evidence in the room- I refer of course to the point that the location of the site should 'promote peaceful and integrated co-existence between the site and the local community'. The heated discussion and the views of the residents that were put forward that evening show that this requirement would most definitely not be met!

Secondly, I feel that the local infrastructure in The South-West Warwick area is already at overload point due to the extensive development that has happened over the past 10 years on the Chase Meadow Estate and Tournament Fields Business Park. Again, I believe that this conflicts another requirement of the Planning Policy- the local schools, surrounding roads, social facilities, and the doctors (I say this with a pregnant wife who finds it difficult enough to contact her midwife as it is!) would not be able to support one or more of these sites in the locality.

As for the impact of the site(s) on 'Historic Warwick' itself, another direct conflict with the Planning Policy requirements is that the site(s) will have a dramatic and adverse impact on how the town is viewed and will doubtless negatively impact Tourism to the local area, particularly the Racecourse, and the numerous local businesses who rely on it for their trade.
The racecourse is one of the town of Warwick's biggest investors, and draws many race goers and tourists. Also, another point to note is that the recent stable block developments the racecourse have made for owners to prepare their race horses would be within a short distance from the proposed sites. There are potential risks of diseases being transferred from non-vaccinated animals to thoroughbred race horses. This will potentially discourage the owners themselves from bring their horses to Warwick!

I sincerely hope that you will consider the points I have made (and no doubt many others have also raised) and the potential consequences for the area, if the plans were to go ahead.