BASE HEADER

OBJECTION TO PROPOSAL OF A GYPSY SITE AT OAKLANDS FARM, WARWICK

I am happy to be contacted to discuss in more detail if required to do so.

This proposed site is in full view on the main A4177 route into historic Warwick. This will create a negative impact on the town's tourism and spoil the openness of the area. Screening off the area will not hide the site or lessen noise, it will only draw unwelcome attention and ultimately change and ruin the landscape.

Local Government Secretary Eric Pickles

Councils have received guidance from the Coalition during 2013 and who have categorically stated that the green belt should have the highest level of protection.

Have you considered the "diversity" of the area to make this proposal?

This development will blight the beauty and surrounding historical area of the canalside (Stairway to Heaven - 1799)

A key note is that there is a tight knit community in the immediate area; a gypsy site will overwhelm (VIRTUALLY IN BACK GARDENS) and outnumber the nearest residents and eventually consume the immediate area. This will not promote and integrate co-existence at any level. The rubbish recently left by travellers who had parked up opposite the Shell Station was disgusting and not something that residents or visitors want to see on the doorstep. (Newspaper reports state that they create noise, crime and violence, Dale Farm being an example with all the trouble that was caused - would you want them to be YOUR NEIGHBOURS?!!!!!)

OTHER REASONS ARE AS FOLLOWS:

1. ROAD SAFETY AND CONGESTION
* Well noted accident black spot route (A4177) (several fatal accidents over the last 5 years) and no mention of any additional safety measures which are essential.
* 40mph speed limit not adhered; the volume of traffic is increasing, already guaranteeing severe traffic problems, hence creating high risk for children crossing the road to and from school etc. (I have experience of this .........)
* Previous planning applications by the owner of Oaklands Farm have been refused one reason being because of the heightened risk to road users
* Access to site will be unsafe (it is bad enough getting out on to this road with a small car, consider the difficulties and risks involved with a caravan(s) in tow)



2. CANAL
* The dangers of deep water - an extremely high risk to children, particularly those not supervised
* Narrow boats (holidaymakers, will cease to park up close by, creating an impact on local businesses)
* Bird spotters, anglers, picnickers, walkers, runners, cyclists will avoid the area close to the gypsy site due to their publicised behaviour and lack of concern for others
3. HUGE IMPACT ON THE NATURAL AND HISTORIC ENVIRONMENT
* 'Stairway to Heaven', well known and popular visitor attraction and has historic canal heritage dating back to 1799 - detrimental to its heritage and its visitors!!!!
* Gypsy site will seriously affect local tourism
* Fear of crime (National Newspapers)
* Threat to peaceful 'way of life'. It is not racist to state that gypsy camps frequently cause an increase in crime and mess. It is a statement of fact. (Mail Online, January 2009).
* Poor street lighting
4. BAD IMAGE TO VISITORS
* Eyesore on approach to Warwick, sending out bad vibes to visitors as it is in full view on the approach to the historic town of Warwick
* Loose/dangerous dogs from the travellers may wander onto the road/canal, frightening people and causing accidents
5. HEALTH RISKS
* High risk of harmful emissions to those residing in caravans with pollutants from petrol station and the road - National News - avoid developments within 100m of a petrol station/dangers of combining road pollution - fatal cancer in children and the elderly
* Potential risk of Weill's disease if living conditions allow the spread of vermin, which is possible from the storage of food etc.
* Noise level from 24 hour garage (lack of sleep etc.)
* Warwick already suffers from pollution levels above European Guidelines on safety
6. LOSS OF GREENBELT

Planning policy for traveller sites states

Policy E: Traveller sites in Green Belt

"INAPPROPRIATE DEVELOPMENT IS HARMFUL TO GREEN BELT AND SHOULD NOT BE APPROVED, EXCEPT IN VERY SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES. TRAVELLER SITES (TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT) IN THE GREEN BELT ARE INAPPROPRIATE DEVELOPMENT. NO-ONE AT ALL IS AWARE OF ANY JUSTIFCATION TO OPEN SUCH A SITE AT OAKLANDS FARM"
* Endangering wildlife, (Kingfishers, water voles, protected slow-worms and grass snakes etc.) arable productivity and visual amenity
* Greenbelt cannot be replaced
* Inappropriate development
* The detriment to the ecology, wildlife and all local farmland clearly present numerous and very strong reasons to oppose this site
7. RISK OF FLOODING
* Flood plain on road adjacent to Oaklands Farm and with proposal of additional housing at Hatton Park this is likely to worsen
* Ditches overflow by Ugly Bridge - not suitable for a settlement
* Mouchel Report compiled for Warwick District Council April 2013 states "avoid development near canals as they can be at risk from flooding".
8. INFRASTRUCTURE
* Local stores limited in range of produce and higher in cost
* Local school is at capacity. (Also consider walking distance to local school, doctors etc.)
* Doctor's surgery is currently a full patient load (Again walking distance)
* Roads not able to sustain heavy/additional vehicles without thousands of pounds being spent
* Undue pressure on the local infrastructure and services

9. DEMOGRAPHIC
* Strong possibility that travellers will exceed the total number of residents in the immediate vicinity of Birmingham Road and will spread rapidly, hence taking over the area and turning it into a mess (great for people visiting the area!!)
*
10. EGRESS
* Entry to and from site poses risks to pedestrians and motorists as not suitable due to the high volume of traffic in the area and the movement of gypsy and travellers vans, caravans etc. will increase these risks
* Ugly bridge will require maintenance and support
*
11. RAILWAY EMBANKMENT
* Unsupervised children climbing the railway embankment and the nearby railway bridge will be an accident waiting to happen (just like the canal)


I trust that the above objections will be taken into serious consideration and the huge impact this will have on local residents and Warwick Town. I look forward to receiving updates at the earliest possible convenience. However, please also consider the cost to the general public of setting up this site; is this what we are paying our council tax for? Will the gypsy and travellers be paying council tax? and if not, why not?!