BASE HEADER

I would like to put forward my opposition to the Proposed Gypsy & Traveller Site GT19, on the A4177 Birmingham Road.

I have tried to do this on your website, but have found it far too complicated, hence I have decided to put all my objections into an email.

Firstly, there seems to be confusion as to what is being proposed, as the Local Plan, which wants to add 70-90 houses opposite this area does not mention this additional proposition. Surely you cannot have 2 new development opposite each other at the same time? The huge combined effects of both proposed developments on local facilities are not being taken into account.

This is not a suitable area for development - the road is prone to flooding, and the traffic is already horrendous at rush-hour, trying to get to and from Warwick and Hatton Park. We have had numerous accidents on this stretch of road recently, and I know of 2 recent fatalities. My daughters travel to Aylesford School from Hatton Park on the school bus, and the bus driver was killed there recently, so we have seen at first-hand how dangerous this road is. It is ridiculous to consider adding to this danger by allowing cars to be regularly pulling in and out of this area, especially towing dangerous caravans.

It is noted that Budbrooke School is mentioned as the school that would have to take on extra children from the Traveller site. This school is not in a position to expand, as it is in special measures, so is not a suitable school to be taking on further expansion.

This land is designated Green Belt land. I was led to believe that there can only be development of this in genuine 'exceptional circumstances'. I certainly do not consider this to be such a time. There also seems to be inconsistency as to whether this land is Grade 3 agricultural land, which should be protected from development or not.

I would like to oppose the site on grounds of it's proximity to the canal. This makes it dangerous to those staying there, who are likely to have small children who could access the canal and potentially drown. Also, we enjoy walks along the canal, as do many residents in the area. We have paid a premium to live in a peaceful area near a peaceful stretch of canal, and I think this area and community will be ruined by dominating it with a Traveller site. We also do not feel it will be a safe place for our children anymore. It is also totally unfair to the community of houses that exist along the Birmingham Road adjacent to this site.

There are other suggested sites that aren't on such a visible location and a main road, why are these sites not made a priority?

I would also like to note that a planning application concerning storing caravans at this site was recently rejected by WDC and by an inspector at an appeal, so how can you then agree to designate it as a whole Gypsy & Traveller site there after that?

No information has been provided about the cost to us as tax-payers for the compulsory purchase of this land. Also, will we have to pay compensation to the poor site owner whose land will go down in value? Have WDC agreed to this - is this not contrary to the wishes of Central Government?

Why is the consultation period happening so fast? Does this not compromise the rights of residents under the new Localism Bill of 2011? It is completely inconsistent with the timescale for the provision of the site, which is stated to be as long as 5 years.

These are my oppositions to the proposed site GT19.