Testun llawn:
In response to the proposal to create a new site for the travelling community at Oaklands Farm on the Birmingham Road, I object for the following reasons:
Lack of infrastructure
Although the area around Hatton Park does have a bus service, this only runs once per hour and not at all on Sundays. Such a poor service will hardly encourage travellers to use public transport in order to get into Warwick or Leamington, with the result that they will either drive or travel on foot along a busy road (A4177), having to cross the A46 roundabout in the process, adding to local congestion.
Hatton Park has one small, local shop to service the residents. It is not adequate and will struggle to cope with any influx of new residents.
The local school at Ferncumbe is already oversubscribed, with the result that local children are unable to be accepted. It is obviously highly desirable for all local children to receive an education, but many of the local schools are unable to cope with present numbers, let alone with an increase in numbers. Apparently expansion has been explored and found to be impossible so where will any new children be schooled?
Likewise the local hospital is already at full capacity with no further room for expansion. It would find it very difficult to cope with an additional group of people with their own needs, including maternity care, health visits, etc. There is no dentist or GP surgery at Hatton Park at present so any new residents will be forced to turn towards Warwick, where services are already strained.
There are no other amenities on Hatton Park for new residents to use, which scarcely seems to fulfil the criteria set out for the travelling community.
Road safety
The proposed site at Oaklands Farm is right beside a main road (A4177), plus it is sited fairly close to a bend in the road and close to existing access points to the Shell garage and the turn into the lane leading to Ugly Bridge. The road becomes extremely busy, particularly at rush hour, and these points are already under heavy pressure. The road will struggle to support the additional traffic here. Access for large, slow-moving trailers will be particularly poor and lead to an increased risk of accidents.
In addition, any children located on this proposed site will be right beside a busy road, which they will have to cross to reach Hatton Park or walk along in order to reach Warwick. The danger of accidents will rise accordingly.
Canal safety
The proposed site at Oaklands Farm is right beside the canal. In fact, the site is penned in between the main road and the canal. Again, if children are present on the site then they will inevitably be attracted to the area beside the canal when playing and this will involve a greater risk of accidents and potential drownings.
Impact on local community
Apparently the council has already objected to the existing site and its current use as a farm. Whilst most of its activities seem to be entirely in keeping with a rural/agricultural way of life, it appears that some objections have been raised to some aspects. If the farm is converted into a site for travellers, surely this will only worsen matters. The travellers will need to work and to use this land for their employment, which will in all likelihood be more industrial than the existing fairly rural activities and which will inevitably have some impact on the surrounding area and the appearance of the site.
We will have little control over any environmental impact on a beautiful amenity in the form of the canal. It is very heavily used both by locals and visitors, especially in summer and fine weather. Any deterioration in the visual appearance of Oaklands Farm will have a huge impact on the attractiveness of the canalside and towpaths, resulting in a reduction in the numbers of visitors to the stretch and making use of the facilities such as the cafe and the pub.
The countryside should generally be protected from changes which will have such a huge impact on the natural and historic features of the community. The canal in particular will be seriously affected by such a change in its intended use, and this will have serious repercussions further up the canal towards the Hatton Arms & visitor centre if it is allowed.
The development will have a particularly serious impact on the local houses and roads leading towards the junction for Warwick Parkway. The small cluster of houses on the roadside near Oaklands Farm will be in serious danger of being taken over by the travellers' site. The new site will be separated from the existing houses by only one small field and there must be a huge risk of danger of encroachment with such a small buffer between the two plots, in addition to noise pollution from any activities carried out by the travelling community which will be to the detriment of the current residents. The size of the proposed site will unfortunately overpower the small number of houses in their community.
I further note that:
There is an inconsistency as the Council classes the proposed Gypsy and Traveller Site as Grade 3 agricultural land that as such should be protected from development by the development of brown-field sites; as well as designating it 'Previously Developed Land' when selecting those potential Gypsy and Traveller Sites that are most suitable for development.
A key argument used by the Council for the rejection of Site 2 as a development site for houses was its proximity to the canal. Therefore the same criteria must also be used as an argument to reject the proposed Gypsy and Traveller Site.
Similarly a planning application concerning storing caravans at this site was recently rejected by Warwick District Council and by an Inspector at appeal, which is clearly completely incompatible with the designation of this site as a proposed Gypsy and Traveller Site.
How is it that the proposed Gypsy & Traveller Site, that opens onto the busy A4177 and is immediately adjacent to the proposed site for 70-90 new houses, is preferred over the Kites Nest site that is very much more isolated and not on a main road?
The proposed Gypsy and Traveller Site puts the longstanding businesses of the owner of the site at risk and reduces the value of the remaining land, with obvious negative consequences, which raises the possibility of the taxpayer being required to pay compensation for this.
In addition the proposed Gypsy and Traveller Site would separate and dominate the longstanding community of 14 homes recognised to exist by the previous Inspector.
Finally, the comment concerning the "urban feel" of the land in question is completely wide of the mark. The section between the A4177 and the canal contains 14 private dwellings and a petrol station. The dwellings mostly have large gardens backing onto the canal, and the plot in question is actually known as "Oaklands Farm", which is hardly an urban feature. It appears that the presence of a main road and a filling station allows the Council to refer to this area as "urban", which is not the case at all. It has an extremely "rural" feel which is why the residents feel so strongly about this proposed development.