I am writing in response to the proposed Gypsy and Traveller sites in the parish of Bishops Tachbrook.


6/20 of the proposed sites are situated in and around our beautifully peaceful village. A village which has very few resources among which are a church, a small grocers shop, a hairdressers a sports and social club and a small primary school. We have a mobile library and a mobile chip shop on occasions.


Due to our limited resources within the village most locals commute outside of the village to work. This begs the question as to where the gypsy and travelling community are going to find work locally?

The school is almost always over subscribed. It's a single form entry and is always at full capacity. We question that the school has enough resources to cope with additional pupils from the Gypsy & Traveller community if they are allowed to set up camp within our village. The school relies on help from parents who give up their time to come in and help teachers and read with pupils. With over 81% of gypsy and traveller children's parents being illiterate I question who will provide the extra support that the children will need if their own parents are unable to provide that support.

Local Secondary schools are also over subscribed, leaving us with concerns that there will not be adequate provision for the current population of the parish.

The local doctor's surgery again is very small and only open for five half days and as it's already difficult to get an appointment I question how additional families would fare and again this would put the surgery under undue pressure.

As there would currently be no sewage, water, electricity or gas to the proposed sites the cost to connect them up will be huge, as well as putting the existing services under strain they will not be of sufficient size to take the extra load.


As my family live near the fields at the top of the village where there are Bats I feel concerned that any plans to build or site travellers would deter the bats from their natural habitat.

There is also a very limited public transport option.

GT03 is very remote and not in reach of major amenities.

GT04 again is very remote.

GT05 has access onto a very busy road, with cars travelling at speed. This would be dangerous to introduce caravans turning into the site, and pedestrian access is dangerous. I would argue that to even build a footpath alongside that road would be dangerous and there is no footpath to reach any facilities. This site would also have a negative visual impact on the approach to historic Warwick and therefore effect local business dependent on tourists in a negative way. There are also listed buildings on that site in need of protection.

GT06 very remote and again no pedestrian access.

GT09 has no pedestrian access and again a negative visual impact onto visitors to Warwick.

GT10 is close to the Blind National Breeding Centre and I would question the risk of disease from un vaccinated pets and animals belonging to the gypsies.

GT15 is on the banks of the Tachbrook. As most travellers seem to be able to earn an income on site I would question that the proposed site could cause a chance of pollution to the brook which is unacceptable.

In general all these sites have no adequate bus stops, and are on busy roads.
No path or pavement to walk anywhere and cycling is dangerous on busy commuter routes.
Children cannot be allowed to stand on a busy road to wait for transport to school.
Whilst I appreciate that the council is under an obligation to provide some permanent pitches I strongly feel that the sites chosen are unsuitable.

The sites would provide undue strain on local resources that are already stretched to capacity. At a recent meeting a fellow villager asked a planning officer where the occupiers of the proposed thousands of new build homes would work - an answer could not be given.

Please do not hesitate to contact either myself or my husband should you require any further verification of our objections.

I wish to register my objection to the proposed Gypsy Traveller site near to Harbury (GT02, GT04).

My concerns are as follows.

1. The strain on local amenities. Our doctors surgery and village school is struggling to meet the needs of the community at it's current size. To add more families to this would require a large investment of public money (which given the current economic climate is unrealistic) to adequately meet the needs of the local tax payers.

2. There are currently no footpaths and very limited public transport options close to the proposed site. This will mean that another significant investment of tax payers money to make it safe for the inhabitants of the proposed site.

3. The fosse way is a saturated travel network. The volume of traffic already traveling to jaguar land rover, and Aston Martin at Gaydon results in challenging and sometime dangerous travel environments for families taking their children to school in Leamington or Warwick during the commuting hours. If you add a gypsy settlement at the proposed sites along the fosse way you will be invertible be adding significantly to an already struggling transport system. This will result in treacherous traveling conditions and more accidents as well as potential loss of life.

These reason make it inappropriate for the site to be positioned along the fosse way and close to Harbury.

I would be very interested to hear your thoughts on the above points.

I am writing to object to the proposal to establish a Gypsy Traveller Site on the Fosse Way under Reference GT03.

My concerns are:

Rural and Environment

That the proposal will visually impact the approach to Harbury and the Fosse Way, in addition to visualy impacting the approach to the Harbury Fields Campsite, an established business in very close proximity to the proposed site and also the approach to Harbury Rugby Club, in the same vicinity.

The proposed site has no utilities such as Water supply, Mains Electricity or Gas

Wildlife will be affected by this proposal, and their habitat damaged

Perhaps most importantly, any resident of Harbury will confirm the serious flooding that occurs annually at that junction of the Fosse Way and in the adjoining fields, at exactly the point where the site is proposed. The water level can be between 6 to 12 inches across the road and into those exact fields, and is slow to drain.

Travel

The Fosse way is an extremely busy A road with a poor accident record. The increase in traffic from the site directly accessing the road would increase the accident risk on this section. Jaguar Land Rover is close by, with a consequent high traffic volume.

There is no public transport, bus etc, accessible from the site. Having fast moving traffic suddenly stopping on the Fosse way to wait for a bus to stop, or to turn out of GT03 as above and have to accelerate will lead to accidents.

There is no path or pavement anywhere in that area, along this busy A road, and cycling would be extremely dangerous.

Pedestrians and in particular children would be at risk standing at the side of this road waiting for transport to school.

The nearest Doctors surgery is operating at full capacity, with no availability for a substantial increase in new patient numbers.

Local primary, secondary and junior schools are also at capacity.

Harbury has already seen a large number of new homes built on the village boundary with more to come. This is already straining the resources of the village in terms of parking, shops and facilities

In summary I feel that due to the Environmental concerns, Safety concerns and in addition the flooding risk as above, it would be entirely inappropriate to establish any kind of site in this location, and I would ask that you give my concerns your most serious consideration.

I am writing to object to the proposal to establish a Gypsy Traveller Site on the Fosse Way Harbury Lane junction under Reference GT04.

My concerns are:

Rural and Environment

That the proposal will visually impact the approach to Harbury and the Fosse Way, in addition to visually impacting the approach to Chesterton Windmill, an established site in very close proximity to the proposed site.

The proposed site has no utilities such as Water supply, Mains Electricity or Gas

Wildlife will be affected by this proposal, and their habitat damaged

Perhaps most importantly, any resident of Harbury will confirm the serious flooding that occurs annually near that junction of the Fosse Way in the adjoining fields, at exactly the point where the site is proposed. The water level can be between 6 to 12 inches across the road and into those exact fields, and is slow to drain.

Travel

The Fosse way is an extremely busy A road with a poor accident record. The increase in traffic from the site directly accessing the road would increase the accident risk on this section. Jaguar Land Rover is close by, with a consequent high traffic volume.

Please note that the cross roads directly next to the site and providing access is one of the most dangerouus junctions on the Fosse Way. There have been multiple accidents at that point due to the nature of the Fosse Way immediately before, effectively a semi blind corner, and it is also very difficult to see oncoming traffic when trying to cross. The traffic is also travelling at 60 mph at this point as the semi blind junction is preceded by a relatively straight section of the a road. This junction is considered dangerous enough for the council to have been obliged installed a speed camera on one side of the approach specifically to try to reduce the number of accidents.

Approaching the junction from the south, traffic also approaches another semi blind bend just beforehand, but this time with ther are often cars stationary in the road waiting to turn right. The Fosse Way is narrow and there is nowhere to go. This has resulted in multiple rear end collisions and injuries.

There is no public transport, bus etc, accessible from the site. Having fast moving traffic suddenly stopping on the Fosse way to wait for a bus to stop, or to turn out of GT04 as above and have to accelerate will lead to accidents.

There is no path or pavement anywhere in that area, along this busy A road, and cycling would be extremely dangerous.

Pedestrians and in particular children would be at risk standing at the side of this road waiting for transport to school.

The nearest Doctors surgery is operating at full capacity, with no availability for a substantial increase in new patient numbers.

Local primary, secondary and junior schools are also at capacity.

Harbury has already seen a large number of new homes built on the village boundary with more to come. This is already straining the resources of the village in terms of parking, shops and facilities

In summary I feel that due to the Environmental concerns, Safety concerns and in addition the serious safety concerns of the Fosse Way Harbury Lane junction as above, it would be entirely inappropriate to establish any kind of site in this location, and I would ask that you give my concerns your most serious consideration.

Quote site GT04 and GT03
Dear Sir/s we feel the proposed sites are inappropriate , Firstly Fosse Way cannot cope with the traffic that uses this road, you can wait 20 minutes plus to get on to it at around 8am in the morning. It is dangerous. Also middle road has flooded several times , leaving fosse way un passable.

I wish to record my objections to the above proposed sites near Harbury. I consider both these proposed sites to be inappropriate because of the following;-

1. Local Amenities.

These are already at full capacity levels and certainly primary, junior and secondary schools would be unable to accommodate extra numbers.

The same could be said of doctors surgeries.

2. Travel Problems.

Both sites are on a High Risk travel route with more than 10 serious accidents in the last three years. The roads around these sites are extremely busy, especially The Fosse Way with the prospect of even busier traffic Jaguar/Landrover at Gaydon. There are few, if any, bus stops and providing these would be an added danger for road users. With no paths nor pavements it would be dangerous to walk anywhere, and cycling would be equally hazardous. Children would be in real danger.

3. Environmental matters.

The proposed sites will have a devastating effect on mains sewerage and drainage in local villages who are experiencing problems already. The cost of providing and maintaining additional capacities to meet increased usage would be colossal. Both proposed sites are in a flood risk area and are regularly flooded in winter times. This would, not only, be very inconvenient but could lead to expensive legal claims.

To summarise, I think it would be unwise and extremely costly to choose either of the sites and for the reasons listed I trust these sites will be rejected.

I wish to object the proposed site GT02 Fosse Way/B425, GT03 and GT04 Land at Barnwell Farm for Gypsies and Travellers.

My comments and concerns are as follows:

1. Access to Local Amenities
- The nearest doctors surgery appears to be Harbury which currently struggles to support the village itself, it certainly does not have capacity for an influx of new patients.
- Likewise with the nearest primary, junior and secondary schools these are also at full capacity.

2. Travel
- The proposed site is on a high risk travel route with more that 12 serious accidents in the last 3 years and is especially dangerous where the Fosse Way meets the Harbury Lane crossroads.
- There are no bus stops available on the Fosse way and because of the volume of traffic providing one would be unsafe for other road users.
- The Fosse way is already a very busy and dangerous road, especially from the increased Jaguar/Land Rover traffic.
- More importantly there are no paths or pavements to walk anywhere and cycling on the Fosse would be very dangerous when the road is already used as a busy commuter route.
- And children cannot be allowed to stand on a busy road to wait for school transport.

3. Rural Environment
- The proposed site has no mains gas, mains sewerage or drainage.
- It is a flood risk area, often flooding at the end of Middle Road, Harbury Lane fields.

Having looked at the plans for the sites near Harbury I wanted to write in with my objections to the areas selected for the following reasons.

Harbury village is busier than ever. With the recent (and continued) addition of houses by the park it's noticeable how much more activity there is.

It's harder to park, and as someone who lives right in the middle of the village I frequently have people parking over my drive meaning I'm stuck in my car while they go to the shop. If residents of the new traveller sites frequent the shop, this problem will be worse.

The doctors surgery often has a week lead in time to get an appointment.

The school and nursery also seem quite full. My daughter is at nursery and although I don't have numbers, I notice how many cars there are at drop off and pick up (despite calls to walk to school). This problem would only get worse as you couldn't expect children from the traveller site to walk all that way.

Accessing the land looks like it would be from the fosse. I think it would be much better to access the sites from the Whitnash side for easier access into Leamington that has a lot more resources to cope with demand.

GT03 and GT04 seem too isolated compared to other sites and I think an unfair amount of pressure would be put on Harbury resources. Especially considering they are still building alongside the park.

Harbury really needs pause on new residents while resources catch up to demand.

I write to strongly object to the above plans. These sites are totally unacceptable to local residents. The crossroads in the Fosseway is LETHAL thanks to a huge traffic increase. I am afraid the intended residents for these sites destroy the beauty and tidiness wherever they go. They must not be allowed to ruin the countryside in this area.

Dear Sir/Madam


Re: LETTER OF OBJECTION
Sites for Gypsies and Travellers (Local Plan Document June 2013)

I write to object to the plan to establish Gypsy and Traveller sites as outlined in the above document. I have detailed the reasons for my objection below.

Warwick District Council has not provided any evidence that these sites are actually needed or any evidence as to why so many sites are needed. In fact the documentation supplied on your own website 'Evidence of Local Needs and Historic Demand for Gypsy and Traveller sites in Warwick District' and 'Gypsy, Traveller and Travelling Showpeople Accommodation Needs Assessment: Warwick Final report' suggests that 2-3 TEMPORARY sites of 15 pitches for the WHOLE of Warwickshire would be sufficient to cater for the needs of Gypsies and Travellers.

I refer to sections 5.2 and 5.3 of 'Evidence of Local Needs and Historic Demand for Gypsy and Traveller sites in Warwick District:'

Section 5.2 states the "figures demonstrate that, even when organised events are included, the average number of days spent in the district is low. The average number of days per visit overall is 6.2 and the average number of vans per encampment at any time is 8.7.

Section 5.3 states "All gypsies and travellers recorded were transitory and either moving from one part of the country to another, visiting family locally or attending an organised event, after which they left the district."

Section 5.5 includes a table of responses provided by 8 Gypsies and Travellers in which they were asked whether they would prefer a permanent or temporary site. Only 2 of the 8 responses indicated that they would like a permanent site.

So why are you proposing mainly permanent sites of at least 15 pitches when the above evidence quite clearly shows that permanent sites of this size are not needed.

I refer again to section 5.5 which states "The district council's own records comprise questionnaires completed or partially completed by gypsy and traveller groups when they arrived in the district. Since February 2008, eight such questionnaires, all from Irish travellers, have been collected. It is very difficult to get them completed since there is reluctance on the part of the travelling community to give information and distrust of council representatives. Information is also difficult to obtain for each of the families or individuals travelling together and sometimes one person will answer on behalf of the entire group. The questions posed assess the welfare needs of the individual, but some questions are pertinent to their more general needs. One of the questions asked relates to the desirability of a permanent site and where this would best be located for this specific group of travellers."

Q1. Why has WDC spent considerable time, money and resources formulating a plan based on evidence that is not statistically robust as it is based on responses provided by only eight people. This plan should be dismissed on these grounds alone.

Q2. Why has WDC spent considerable time, money and resources formulating a plan to benefit a group of people who clearly are not interested as they are unwilling to co-operate enough to even complete a questionnaire?

In section 5.6 it states "Advice obtained from the Gypsy and Traveller Officer at Warwickshire County Council based on the above information, indicates that a transient site would need to be made available, of an adequate size for ten vans to ensure that there would be sufficient space to accommodate a figure higher than the average number of vans recorded historically in the district at any one time."

This document concludes "From the data collected, it can be concluded that demand is low and transitory in nature. Even given the highest average number of days spent in the district this is no higher than 12 days. The average number of vans per visit is less than 9. To ensure that a site is provided of sufficient size to accommodate more than this average and accommodate the majority of encampments, it is concluded that there is a need for a transitory site to accommodate 15 vans. It is not considered necessary to accommodate the highest number of vans that has been recorded as these are extreme events and not a regular occurrence."

Q3. Why has WDC spent considerable time, money and resources producing a plan that proposes mainly permanent sites when the advice of your own Gypsy and Traveller Officer is that only ONE TRANSIENT site is required.

I refer to section 3.5 of the document entitled 'Gypsy, Traveller and Travelling Showpeople Accommodation Needs Assessment: Warwick Final report.' This includes a table that presents an estimation of the size of the Gypsy, Traveller and Travelling Showpeople population and 'states using the best information available we estimate that there are at least 124 individuals or thirty-three households in the study area' i.e. Warwick District.

This document is based on a study sample of only 43 families. Again this is not statistically robust.

Q4. Why has WDC spent considerable time, money and resources formulating a plan that proposes 31 sites when the current population of Gypsies and Travellers is so small?

Statistics from the 2006 Irish census in the Republic or Ireland also does not support the need for so many sites. In the census only 22,369 people identified themselves as Irish Travellers. Of these, only 1,460 lived in urban areas, a clear indication that Irish Travellers do not actually want to live in rural locations. Yet despite this, the majority of proposed sites are in rural locations.

From the location of the proposed sites, it is also clear that Warwickshire District Council has not consulted with Stratford-Upon-Avon District Council. You are proposing six sites within the small parish of Bishops Tachbrook which does not take into account the fact that due to the amount of identified green belt land within the Stratford-Upon-Avon district; the majority of their 52 proposed sites will have to be located to the north west of their district which borders very close to the parish of Bishops Tachbrook.

This plan also does not take into account Warwickshire District Council's own Local Plan - Revised Development Strategy Document June 2013 which proposes 12,000 new homes, the majority of which are located South of Warwick and Whitnash. The impact of this will be a significant increase in traffic and noise pollution in the very locations where you are proposing to put the Gypsy and Traveller sites.

With reference to all the above information I have provided I request that Warwick District Council provide evidence to justify both the location and number of proposed sites.

Site GT03 Land at Barnwell Farm, Harbury Lane
Site GT04 - Land at Harbury Lane, Fosse Way

Road Safety/Road Access - The area of the Fosse Way close to these two sites has already been identified as a dangerous road. Road users are warned of this by signs that inform them of how many people have been killed on the road and speed cameras have been installed in an attempt to slow traffic down. Road users will often travel at high speed and take risks due to the relative straightness of the road. An increase in slow moving traffic such as caravans on this road will only result in more accidents. The intersection of Harbury Lane and the Fosse way is particularly bad and traffic will back up here at peak times of the day.

The volume of traffic south of Warwick and Whitnash where this site is located will also increase greatly as outlined in the Local Plan - Revised Development Strategy Document June 2013

This site does not meet the criteria laid out in Section 7.3 of the document that states the following is required, "Safe access to the road network and provision for parking, turning and servicing on site;"

Visual Aesthetics - These two sites will be clearly visible from the Chesterton Windmill. This site is visited daily by members of the local community and visitors to the area who enjoy this peaceful site with wonderful views of open fields. This wonderful view changes with the seasons meaning the site is visited all year round.

This site does not meet the criteria laid out in Section 7.3 of the document that states the following is required, "Sites, which can be integrated into the landscape without harming the character of the area."

The view from Chesterton Windmill also looks out over the remains of a Roman settlement.

This site does not meet the criteria laid out in Section 3.5 of the Local Plan - Revised Development Strategy Document June 2013 where a specific principle under the key element of Environment is to protect high quality landscapes, heritage assets and other areas of significance.

Site GT05 - Land at Tachbrook Hill Farm, Banbury Road

Road Safety/Road Access - The Banbury Road is a very busy road and at peak times, traffic will back up and it can be very difficult to make a right hand turn onto this road from either the Oakley Wood Road or Mallory Road. Adding slow moving traffic such as caravans onto this road will increase the risk of incidents and add to the current traffic problems.

Today whilst travelling along the A46, I found myself in a long queue of traffic, travelling at less than 10mp for approximately 15 minutes. The reason for the build-up of traffic was three traditional style Gypsy caravans and horses on the road.

The volume of traffic south of Warwick and Whitnash where this site is located will also increase greatly as outlined in the Local Plan - Revised Development Strategy Document June 2013.

There is also no pedestrian access to this site.
This site does not meet the criteria laid out in Section 7.3 of the document that states the following is required, "Safe access to the road network and provision for parking, turning and servicing on site;"

Noise Pollution - The south of Bishops Tachbrook village suffers from noise pollution from the M40. This site would lie even closer to the M40 so would suffer from even worse noise pollution.

Noise pollution as a whole will also increase greatly in this area due to the impact of the Local Plan - Revised Development Strategy Document June 2012 that proposes thousands of new homes within the same parish of Bishops Tachbrook.

This site does not meet the criteria laid out in Section 7.3 of the document that states the following is required. "Avoiding areas where there is the potential for noise and other disturbance;"

Visual Impact - Mallory Road is the main road into the older original section of Bishops Tachbrook village.

Banbury Road is the main road used by visitors approaching from junction 14 or 15 into Warwick which is a historical town attracting visitors from all over the world.

This site does not meet the criteria laid out in Section 7.3 of the document, that states the following is required "Sites, which can be integrated into the landscape without harming the character of the area."

Schools - Bishops Tachbrook nursery and primary school run at full capacity and already have a waiting list. With six Gypsy and Traveller sites proposed for this small area, it would be impossible for the school to take on the significant number of extra students that would come from these sites.

This site does not meet the criteria laid out in Section 7.4 of the document that states the following is required to fully comply with provisions for sites "avoids placing undue pressure on local infrastructure and services;"

Site GT06 Land at Park Farm, Spinney Farm

Road Safety/Road Access - This site is situated very close to the Banbury Road, Warwick bypass and junction 14 of the M40. All of these roads are extremely busy especially at peak times of the day when drivers experience long tailbacks. There is also no pedestrian access to this site.

The volume of traffic south of Warwick and Whitnash where this site is located will also increase greatly as outlined in the Local Plan - Revised Development Strategy Document June 2013

The site does not meet the criteria laid out in Section 7.3 of the document that states the following is required. "Safe access to the road network and provision for parking, turning and servicing on site;"

Noise Pollution - This site would suffer from noise pollution due to its close proximity to junction 14 of the M40.

Noise pollution as a whole will also increase greatly in this area due to the impact of the Local Plan - Revised Development Strategy Document June 2012 that proposes thousands of new homes south of Warwick and Whitnash resulting in a substantial increase in the volume of traffic in the area.

This site does not meet the criteria laid out in Section 7.3 of the document that states the following is required. "Avoiding areas where there is the potential for noise and other disturbance;"

Visual Impact - The Banbury Road is the access road to the historic town of Warwick.

This site does not meet the criteria laid out in Section 7.3 of the document that states that the following is required. "Sites which can be integrated into the landscape without harming the character of the area;"

Schools - Bishops Tachbrook nursery and primary school run at full capacity and already have a waiting list. With six Gypsy and Traveller sites proposed for this small area, it would be impossible for the school to take on the significant number of extra students that would come from these sites.

This site does not meet the criteria laid out in Section 7.4 of the document that states the following is required to fully comply with provisions for sites. "avoids placing undue pressure on local infrastructure and services;"

Site GT09 Land to the north east of M40 and south of Oakley Wood

Road Safety/Road Access - This site is surrounded by the M40 and Warwick Bypass (A452), all of which are very busy roads and there is no pedestrian access to the site.

The volume of traffic where this site is located will also increase greatly as a result of the Local Plan - Revised Development Strategy Document June 2013 which proposes 12,000 new homes south of Warwick and Whitnash, many of which we are told are required for people who will work in Coventry and therefore travel on these roads on a daily basis.

This site does not meet the criteria laid out in Section 7.3 of the document that states the following is required. "Safe access to the road network and provision for parking, turning and servicing on site;"

Noise Pollution - This site would suffer from noise pollution due to its close proximity to junction 14 of the M40.

Noise pollution as a whole will also increase greatly in this area due to the impact of the Local Plan - Revised Development Strategy Document June 2012 that proposes thousands of new homes south of Warwick and Whitnash resulting in a substantial increase in the volume of traffic in the area.

This site does not meet the criteria laid out in Section 7.3 of the document that states the following is required. "Avoiding areas where there is the potential for noise and other disturbance;"

Visual Impact - The Banbury Road is the access road to the historic town of Warwick.

This site does not meet the criteria laid out in Section 7.3 of the document that states that the following is required. "Sites which can be integrated into the landscape without harming the character of the area.;"

Schools - Bishops Tachbrook nursery and primary school run at full capacity and already have a waiting list. With six Gypsy and Traveller sites proposed for this small area, it would be impossible for the school to take on the significant number of extra students that would come from these sites.

This site does not meet the criteria laid out in Section 7.4 of the document that states the following is required to fully comply with provisions for sites. "avoids placing undue pressure on local infrastructure and services;"

Site GT10 Land at Tollgate House and Guide Dogs National Breeding Center

Road Safety/Road Access - This site is bordered by both the M40 and the Banbury Road. There is also no pedestrian access to the site.

The volume of traffic in the area where this site is located will also increase greatly due to thousands of new homes proposed to be built south of Warwick and Whitnash as outlined in the Local Plan - Revised Development Strategy Document June 2013.

This site proposed does not meet the criteria laid out in Section 7.3 of the document that states that the following is required. "Safe access to the road network and provision for parking, turning and servicing on site;"

Noise Pollution - The site would suffer noise pollution from the M40. Noise pollution as a whole will also increase greatly in this area due to the impact of the Local Plan - Revised Development Strategy Document June 2012 that proposes thousands of new homes south of Warwick and Whitnash resulting in a substantial increase in the volume of traffic in the area.

This site does not meet the criteria laid out in Section 7.3 of the document that states the following is required. "Avoiding areas where there is the potential for noise and other disturbance;"

Visual Impact - The Banbury Road is the access road to the historic town of Warwick.

This site does not meet the criteria laid out in Section 7.3 of the document that states the following is required. "Sites, which can be integrated into the landscape without harming the character of the area.;"

Business Impact - This site holds the national breeding centre for guide dogs. There is a risk of their breeding dogs being introduced to and infected by diseases carried by pets belonging to the Gypsy and Travelling communities.

Site GT15 Land to east of Europa Way

Road Safety/Road Access - This site is located near to Europa Way. This is a very busy road and at peak times experiences long tail backs in both directions. This road is so busy that there is a proposal to turn this into a dual carriageway road. There is also no pedestrian access to this site.

The volume of traffic where this site is located will also increase greatly as identified in the Local Plan - Revised Development Strategy Document June 2013 which proposes thousands of new homes in the area south of Warwick and Whitnash bringing with it a huge increase in the volume of traffic in the area.


This site does not meet the criteria laid out in Section 7.3 of the document that states the following is required, "Safe access to the road network and provision for parking, turning and servicing on site;"

Environment - This site is located close to the Tachbrook and as the sites are also designated as places of work, there is the risk of pollution from this site into the Tachbrook.

I request that you register my objection to the above sites and review your current Local Plan.

Please acknowledge receipt of my letter by return post and keep me informed of this matter.

I realize that some gypsy and travellers would like permanent sites and, if these can be organised so that they pay the relevant rates etc., I hope a good site can be found. I am against a "not in my backyard attitude" but I object to the sites GT03 and GT04 for the following reasons:
1. In connection with access to local amenities, the nearest doctors' surgery and schools are already at capacity. These are also in the Stratford District area and not the Warwick district.
2. The sites are on a High Risk travel route, where no bus stop is available and providing one would be unsafe for road users. The Fosse way is already busy and dangerous from increased Jaguar/Landrover traffic. Children can't stand on a busy road to wait for transport to school and there is no path or pavement for pedestrians or cyclists.
3.The proposed site has no mains gas, sewerage or drainage and the site is a flood risk area.

I WOULD LIKE TO REGISTER MY OBJECTIONS TO THE PROPOSED NEW TRAVELLER SITES (GT03, AND GT 04). I COULD LIST MANY REASONS WHY I THINK THE SITES SHOULDN'T BE IN WHITNASH BUT I WILL RESTRICT MYSELF TO THE FOLLOWING
WE ALREADY HAVE ONE AT THE END OF GOLF LANE WHICH IS USED AS A BASE FOR BUSINESS OPERATIONS. I HAVE HAD AT LEAST TWO INCIDENTS WITH THE SITE RESIDENTS. I WAS WALKING MY DOG WHEN ONE SITE RESIDENT WAS DRIVING DOWN THE TRACK HE GOT OUT OF HIS TOYOTA PICKUP AND SAID IF I DIDNT MOVE QUICKLY HE WOULD PUNCH MY F***ING HEAD IN. I REPORTED IT TO THE POLICE. MY CHILDREN'S RABBIT WAS ATTACKED BY THEIR DOG ON ANOTHER OCCASION. WHAT WILL BE PUT IN PLACE TO STOP FURTHER INCIDENTS?
IT ALSO SEEMS THAT WHITNASH IS SEEN AS AN AREA WHERE ALL THE DEVELOPMENTS CAN BE DONE, WARWICK GATES HAS ALREADY DOUBLED THE BUILT UP AREA HERE. WHY DOESNT NORTH OF THE RIVER TAKE ITS FAIR SHARE.
I FEEL THAT WHITNASH IS SEEN AS A LESS DESIRABLE PLACE SO ANY PROBLEMS CAN BE DUMPED THERE

Dear Sirs,
I write in connection with the proposed gypsy/traveller sites GT03 (Barnwell Farm, Harbury Lane) and GT04 (Harbury Lane, Fosse Way) and would like to register my concerns about the plans.I believe my concerns are practical and relevant.
Both sites are on very busy roads. This site GT03 accesses on to the very busy Harbury Lane and its junction with the Fosse Way. There have been many accidents here in recent years and the suitability of vehicles (especially bulky or slow trailers) exiting on to the road should be taken into account. The access for GT04 is at an already dangerous junction where visibility is poor and traffic speed is high, a combination arising from the Middle Road junction and traffic slowing for the petrol station and railway bridge.
Both roads lack a pavement and having walked along Middle Road myself, including at night, it has no lighting and is very busy, and a pedestrian has to be careful.
In relation to site GT03, I also have concerns about local archaeology connected with the Roman town nearby, the extent of which is not fully documented but which is known to include extensive connected remains across a wide area on either side of the main Roman site. I would request that the Barnwell Farm site should be surveyed properly to establish any such remains (an interesting exercise in any case).
The local village school in Harbury has been oversubscribed in recent years and has required expanded classes in a one-off accommodation that cannot be repeated. This may lead to problems in accommodating further children outside the main village catchment in future years.
Finally, Site GT04 in particular has been the scene of flooding in the last year and a half, including meltwater that spread across the Fosse Way from the surrounding fields and which led to dangerous driving conditions and a soggy experience for pedestrians. The residents of the nearby caravan site and houses will be able to confirm the extent of this.
I hope that the above information can be taken into account when the final plans are being made.

Dear Sir,
We wish to register our objection to the proposed use of the above sites.
Our objection is based on lack capacity of public amenities eg. schools, medical facilities and traffic congestion. With the expansion of the Gaydon manufacturing site, traffic is already overloaded and dangerous at the 2 junctions nearby.

see attached

I am writing to say how upset I am that Bishops Tachbrook has been chosen as a potential site for travellers. I cannot believe how close the sites are to village housing and how many there are. I believe these sites will be highly unsuitable for traveller families being so close to a busy main road , no proper facilities ie sewage running water and also no foot paths to the local village. Surely you are putting these people in danger?
Schools are already over subscribed and full to the brim how do you plan to educate these children and what sort of pressure will they put on our small village school? Surely there are other sites in the area more suitable or closer to better facilities ?
What also worries me is these sites over expanding. It's all well and good allocating a certain number of families to the land but what happens when they do g stick to the rules and move loads more people in? Who governs that and what can they do to get them to move on? It could turn into Dalefarm all over again. I have lived in this beautiful area for all my life and would hate to see it ruined by traveller sites getting out of hand!

I would like to lodge my objection to the proposed gypsy and traveller sites proposed for the Harbury area. Bernice Parker, CV33 9LR.
This correspondence, and any files sent with it are confidential and are solely for the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose, copy, distribute or retain this message or any part of it. If you are not the intended recipient please delete this correspondence from your system and notify the sender immediately.

This email message has been swept for the presence of computer viruses. However no warranty is given that this correspondence is free from any virus.

The Jephson Group comprises three Associations, all of which are non-profit making industrial and provident societies. Jephson Homes Housing Association is the parent of the Group. Jephson Housing Association and Marches Housing Association are subsidiaries of Jephson Homes Housing Association. All three associations are exempt charities and are registered with The Social Housing Regulator, and are members of the National Housing Federation.

Land at Barnwell Farm Harbury Lane

I would like to register my objection to the proposal that the above land be used for a traveller and gypsy site.

This is on the junction of two extremely busy and dangerous roads. Fosse Way is already under pressure from increased traffic due to Jaguar Land Rover, and Harbury Lane is now also used by buses to and from the National Grid site. Traffic from Leamington F.C. pours out onto the same road at regular intervals, already causing problems.

Local amenities such as the doctors and schools are already at capacity.

There will be a huge visual impact too, and I feel we should be retaining as much farmland and countryside as we can with a view to minimising the damage to wildlife.

I do not feel that this land is a suitable option for a site of this nature.

Please accept this as my OBJECTION TO:

Reference: Proposed Sites for Gypsies and Travellers
GT03 Land at Barnwell Farm, Harbury Lane
GT04 Land at Harbury Lane, Fosse Way

For the following reasons:-

1. Access to local Amenities:
* The nearest doctors surgery has no capacity for the influx of new patients.
* The nearest primary junior and secondary schools are already at capacity.

2. Travel
* The site is on a High Risk travel route with more than 12 serious accidents in last 3 years.
* No bus stop is available on the Fosse Way and providing one would be unsafe for road users.
* The Fosse Way is already busy and dangerous, especially from increased Jaguar/Land Rover traffic to and from Gaydon.
* No path or pavement to walk anywhere and cycting is dangerous on busy commuter routes.
* Children cannot be allowed to stand on a busy road to wait for transport to school.

3. Rural Environment / Other
* The proposed site will have a visual impact from Harbury and The Fosse Way.
* The proposed site has no mains gas, mains sewerage or drainage.
* Damage to wildlife habitat.
* It is a flood risk area often flooding at the end of Middle Road, Harbury Lane and fields.

Ref. Proposed Gypsy & Traveller sites near Harbury (GT03, GT04)

I have been studying the proposal for the Local plan and draft policy for the criteria to assess traveller site suitability for Warwick District. The document provides a reasoned view and some direction on how the process will proceed.

I would however like to confirm my objection to the plans for the proposed sites near the Fosse Way and Harbury lane (GT03, GT04).

I regularly use this route and there are several compelling reasons why in my opinion the sites are not suitable. These include:

- Road safety. The crossroads at Harbury lane and the Fosse way is a very busy junction and extremely very difficult to turn onto the Fosse Way and over onto Harbury Lane. This junction is therefore already a high risk junction for traffic accidents. Both roads are busy during the day, but especially so at peak hours. There are no paths and the thought of individuals and potentially children near these roads is of serious concern and will potentially raise risks further.
- There is limited access to a GP surgery, schools or public transport.
- There is currently no public footpath on Harbury Lane which makes it a very unsafe and difficult road to walk on and also a difficult road to cross as a pedestrian trying to use local public services.
- The site is close to both Chesterton Windmill and the site of an old roman town. As important natural and historic features (photos are often taken facing west from the windmill) the sites would seem unsuitable.

In summary I do not believe these proposed sites are suitable as outlined above and I object to these sites on this basis.

Objection to proposed Gypsy and Traveller sites near Harbury - Site GT03

I wish to object to the proposed Gypsy and Traveller site at site GT03 and consider it to be inappropriate for the following reasons:

Access to Local Amenities
The nearest Doctor's surgery has no capacity for the influx of new patients
The nearest primary, junior and secondary schools are already at capacity

Travel
The site is on a High Risk travel route with more than 12 serious accidents in the last 3 years
No bus stop is available on the Fosse Way and providing one would be unsafe for road users
The Fosse Way is already busy and dangerous, especially from increased Jaguar Land Rover traffic
No path or pavement to walk anywhere and cycling is dangerous on busy commuter routes
Children can not be allowed to stand on a busy road to wait for transport to school

Rural environment
The proposed site will have a visual impact from Harbury and the Fosse Way.
The proposed site has no mains gas, mains sewerage or drainage
Damage to wildlife habitat
The site is at risk of flooding. The end of Middle Road, Harbury Lane and fields regularly flood at times of heavy rain.

General comments
I have lived in Warwick for over 20 years, and as a child grew up in Chesterton, Warwickshire. As a teenager I gave evidence to the Barn Hill Service Station inquiry; objecting to the loss of part of Chesterton Wood and the environmental impact to the hamlet of Chesterton and its wildlife. Obviously we lost that battle (thanks to Mr Heseltine) but I can drive past the M40 services knowing that I used the full process available to state my concerns at the time.

My reasons for comment on the Gypsy and Traveller site options follow that same logic; sites are needed but some sites are wholly unsuitable.

Also, my parents own 9 acres of land close to Middle Farm, Bishops Tachbrook which we use as a family for leisure purposes. The land has been planted with trees and native plants as a sanctuary for wildlife including foxes, badgers, deer, birds of prey as well as bees, butterflies and many birds.

Site Suitability - GT03 Land at Bamwell Farm, Harbury Lane COMMENT

I do not consider this suggested site to be convenient to a GP surgery, school and public transport;
there would be undue pressure on local infrastructure and services. It would be unsafe for pedestrian access to Harbury or Whitnash.

Site Suitability - GT04 Land at Harbury Lane, Fosse Way COMMENT

I do not consider this suggested site to be convenient to a GP surgery, school and public transport;
there would be undue pressure on local infrastructure and services. It would be unsafe for pedestrian access to Harbury or Whitnash.

Site Suitability - GT05 Land at Tachbrook Hill Farm, Banbury Road OBJECT

I do not consider this suggested site to be convenient access to a GP surgery, school and public transport;
The Banbury Road is still a very fast and busy road and there would not be safe access to the road network. It would be too dangerous for pedestrian access into Bishops Tachbrook to catch public transport or attend the GP surgery.
There would be adverse impact on the landscape and character of the area into historic Warwick. Also there are listed buildings on the site which would be adversely affected by building work.
I don't believe that this proposed site could be integrated into the landscape without harming the character of the area.
This proposed site would place undue pressure on local infrastructure and services.

Site Suitability - GT06 Land at Park Farm Spinney Farm OBJECT

I do not consider this suggested site to be convenient access to a GP surgery, school and public transport;
The Banbury Road is still a very fast and busy road and there would not be safe access to the road network. It would be too dangerous for pedestrian access into Warwick until the pavement starts at the junction with Barford Hill.
There would be adverse impact on the landscape and character of the area into historic Warwick.

Site Suitability - GT09 Land to the North East of M40 OBJECT

I do not consider this suggested site to be convenient access to a GP surgery, school and public transport;
The Banbury Road is still a very fast and busy road and there would not be safe access to the road network. It would be too dangerous for pedestrian access into Bishops Tachbrook to catch public transport or attend the GP surgery.
There would be adverse impact on the landscape and character of the area into historic Warwick. Also there are listed buildings on the site which would be adversely affected by building work.
I don't believe that this proposed site could be integrated into the landscape without harming the character of the area.
This proposed site would place undue pressure on local infrastructure and services.

Site Suitability - GT10 - Land at Tollgate House and Guide Dogs National Breeding Centre OBJECT

I do not consider this suggested site to be convenient access to a GP surgery, school and public transport;
The Banbury Road is still a very fast and busy road and there would not be safe access to the road network. It would be too dangerous for pedestrian access into Bishops Tachbrook to catch public transport or attend the GP surgery.
There would be adverse impact on the landscape and character of the area into historic Warwick.
I don't believe that this proposed site could be integrated into the landscape without harming the character of the area.
This proposed site would place undue pressure on local infrastructure and services.

There is the potential for noise and disturbance to the Guide Dogs National Breeding Centre and Tollgate Farm. This would not p
romote peaceful and integrated co-existence between the site and the local community. I would question the viability of the businesses already at this location should the site be developed as proposed.

Site Suitability - GT11 - Land at Budbrooke Lodge, Racecourse and Hampton Road COMMENT

This site would give convenient access to a GP surgery, school and public transport; and s
afe access to the road network.

There could be
adverse impact on important features of the natural and historic
environment as the Racecourse has varied habitats and ground nesting birds. It is difficult to know if the s
ite can be integrated into the landscape without harming the character of the area. It is also hard to decide if
peaceful and integrated co-existence between the site and the local community could be promoted. I am not sure if there would be
undue pressure on local infrastructure and services (including GP, dentist and school places)

I would question if this site is in a flood area. There is
the potential for noise and other disturbance.

Site Suitability - GT12 - Land North and West of Westham Lane OBJECT

This site may give convenient access to a GP surgery, school and public transport but I am not sure if this would be without undue pressure on the local infrastructure and services in Barford.

I would be surprised if this area does not have a high risk of flooding being so close to the Avon which certainly floods along the A429 towards Wellesbourne.

If there was inadequate GP, dentist, School provision then it would be difficult to promote peaceful and integrated co-existence between the site and the local community.

Site Suitability - GT14 - Warwick Road, Norton Lindsey OBJECT

This site may give convenient access to a GP surgery, school and public transport but I am not sure if this would be without undue pressure on the local infrastructure and services in Norton Lindsey. If there was inadequate GP, dentist, School provision then it would be difficult to promote peaceful and integrated co-existence between the site and the local community.

The access to the Warwick Road would be dangerous with blind bends and a notorious dangerous cross roads (New Road and Brittons Lane). It would be dangerous for pedestrians to walk into Norton Lindsey or Warwick along this road as the pavements don't start for some distance.

I would question the impact to the viability of the poultry business if this site was developed as proposed.

Site Suitability - GT15 - Land East of Europa Way OBJECT

This site would be inconvenient for access to a GP surgery, school and public transport. The nearest would be Heathcote/Warwick Gates/Whitnash. There is already a huge problem with the lack of school places as Warwick Gates has not had the school built that was required. This would put undue pressure on services and not promote the peaceful and integrated co-existence between the site and the local communities.

With the Tach Brook so close is the area at risk of flooding and could there be an adverse impact on the natural environment if the site was used for domestic and business operations. Europa Way is a busy road and it would be unsafe to access the road network on the gradual bend. There is no pedestrian access.

Site Suitability - GT16 - Land West of A429 Barford OBJECT

This site may give convenient access to a GP surgery, school and public transport but I am not sure if this would be without undue pressure on the local infrastructure and services in Barford.

I would be surprised if this area does not have a high risk of flooding being so close to the Avon which certainly floods along the A429 towards Wellesbourne.

If there was inadequate GP, dentist, School provision then it would be difficult to promote peaceful and integrated co-existence between the site and the local community.

Site Suitability - GT17 - Service area west of A46 Old Budbrooke Way COMMENT

I am not sure if this site would give convenient access to a GP surgery, school and public transport. If this was from Hampton Magna or Warwick the pedestrian access would need to be improved. Although there is a footpath across the A46 this is so busy it would be too dangerous for pedestrians especially children. I think the A46 is prone to flooding on the west side. There would be safe a
ccess to the road network for a vehicle to join the A46 from the garage slip road.

This site would only promote peaceful and integrated co-existence between the site and the local community if there was no
undue pressure on local infrastructure and services. Budbrooke School in Hampton Magna already has a problem with over-subscription because the new Hatton Park housing estate has never had a school built.

Site Suitability - GT18 - Service area East of A46 Old Budbrooke Way COMMENT

There is possible convenient access to a GP surgery on the Woodloes or Cape Road and schools/public transport in Warwick. Pedestrian access through the Racecourse would be a possibility. School, dentist and GP places would have to be increased in Warwick otherwise there would be undue pressure on local services and it would not promote peaceful and integrated co-existence.

There would be safe access to the A46 road network for a vehicle, There could be an impact on the natural environment of the Racecourse wildlife and habitat.

Site Suitability - GT19 - Land off Birmingham Road, Budbrooke, Oaklands Farm COMMENT

This site would provide convenient access to a GP surgery, school and public transport either in Hampton Magna or Warwick. There is pedestrian access along the Birmingham Road into Warwick and Hampton Magna. The speedlimit is lower on this stretch of the Birmingham Road to make the access to the road network safe. I do not know if the site is prone to flooding with the Gog Brook and Canal close by. There could be environmental concerns but businesses with high risk of pollution (farm/petrol station) operate from this stretch of the Birmingham Road at the moment.

To promote peaceful and integrated co-existence between the site and the local community there would have to be improvements to service provision, particularly schooling provision in Warwick or Hampton Magna as Hatton Park Estate already over-subscribes Budbrooke School.


Site Suitability - GT20 - Land at Junction 15 M40 OBJECT

20 years ago development at J15 M40 for a service station was dismissed by Mr Hesletine. I can't remember all the reasons but presumably they still stand for any type of development at this location.

This proposed site is inconvenient for access to a GP surgery, school and public transport. There are no footpaths into Hampton on the Hill or Warwick. There would be safe access to the road network for vehicles. Substantial investment for the provision of utilities (running water, toilet facilities, waste disposal, etc) would appear to be necessary for this site. There could be adverse impact on important features of the natural environment with the two water courses close by.

Peaceful and integrated co-existence between the site and the local community would not be achieved unless there is extra resource for local infrastructure and services improvements including school and dentist provision.

GT01 / GT02 / GT07 / GT08 / GT13
I don't have sufficient knowledge of the locations to comment.

I do not have any other suggestions for suitable land in the District

I write to object to the proposed plans for the traveller sites near Harbury.

Firstly both of the proposed sites are directly on the Fosse Way and or Harbury Lane, which are both already extremely busy and dangerous roads. The additional traffic which the sites would bring would only increase the risk of motor accidents on these roads, especially at the junctions of Fosse way and Middle Road and also at the cross roads of Harbury Lane, Fosse Way and Chesterton Road.

Furthermore the two junctions mentioned above are already horrendously busy at peak hours with traffic queuing for extremely long distances as vehicles struggle to turn into and out of Middle Road, Chesterton Road and Harbury Lane onto and from The Fosse Way.

My second area of objection is that I believe the area as a whole is already overcrowded with many people choosing to live within easy reaching distance to the M40 motorway. This has had an overcrowding effect on the education system as no new schools have been built to accommodate the mass expansion of property development in the last 20 years in our area. The development of these proposed traveller sites would undoubtedly cater for families with children who would need to go to school somewhere. But where would they go as all of the local village schools are already full.

Identified Gypsy & Traveller Site GT03 land at Barnwell Farm Harbury Lane
Whilst I understand that with a population increase more housing is required, I do not understand why Warwick District Council believes that the only option they have is to build all the proposed properties south of the river Leam focussing on the areas surrounding Warwick Gates, Bishops Tachbrook and Harbury Lane areas. This is not a case of 'not in my back yard' as I realise that some development will have to be in this area, however just using the excuse that the rest of Leamington north of the river, is green belt and therefore should not even be considered is totally unacceptable. Just because it is a complicated process doesn't mean that you should not challenge it.
I attended a meeting with representatives from the Planning and Highways departments on 16th July in Whitnash and came away with the impression that as far as these representatives are concerned the developments are a 'done deal' and we should not waste our time objecting. They did not listen or acknowledge the views of the concerned residents and at the Highways representative was unprofessional in the way he handled questions and should not be allowed to interact with the public again without significant training on how to handle public concerns. People were leaving throughout the meeting in disgust as the residents views were just brushed away and their concerns not acknowledged.
Forecasted Housing Numbers:
In the 20 years to 2011 the population growth was 18%. The Local Plan RDS is now proposing a further 20% increase in within 15 years requiring an additional 12,300 homes. Using projections based only on natural growth of the population and an allowance for migration only 5,400 homes are required. There is no need for the additional 6,900 homes.
Warwick District Council's own consultants G.L.Hearn gave an Economic and Demographic Forecast Study in December 2012, which in option PROJ 5 arrived at only 4,405 new homes being required. Why are you choosing to ignore this?
Warwick District has a low unemployment rate of only 1.7%. The 2012 Strategic Housing Market Assessment stated that overall 'Warwick District had a very good job-homes balance' and I do not see a driver for new homes to bring in new jobs being a valid reason.
Visual Impact of Development
Currently Bishops Tachbrook and the south of Leamington are just visible to one another. Building 2000 houses south of Harbury Lane and extending down the side of the Tachbrook valley will have a severe negative visual impact.
Whilst there is the proposal to build a country park which may provide some form of separation between Bishops Tachbrook and Warwick Gates, the house building proposed on the rolling countryside which makes this highly visible and negates the value of the Country Park.
The Planning Inspector who reviewed the current local plan in 2006 stated that Woodside Farm should not be built on now or in the future.
WDC's landscape consultant Richard Morrish in the Landscape Area Statement in 2009 referred to the land south of Gallows Hill and concluded "this study area should not be considered for urban extension and that the rural character should be safeguarded from development". So why has the district gone against that recommendation?
Local Infrastructure
Can the improvements required be delivered?

The Local Plan RDS does not contain any evidence to show that the proposed infrastructure improvements can be delivered from the Developer contributions through Section 106 and Community Infrastructure Levy.

With so much unnecessary housing concentrated to the south of the town centres the surrounding roads will end up severely congested.

There will be even more severe at pinch points, crossings of canal river and railways where there is no realistically deliverable solution to the problem.

Traffic Volumes
There will be a significant increase in traffic which the road infrastructure will not be able to cope with, especially in the villages.

Agriculture
The land south of Harbury lane is predominately high grade agricultural land and we are always being told to support our local farmers and consider the environment. Is it sensible for high quality land producing multiple crops per year to be built upon and what impact will this have on our environment?

In relation to the proposed gypsy site, I also have significant concerns on the impact to our community.

This site fails to meet the councils Local Plan Requirements & its preferred options because-
Health Facilities:
The GP Surgeries in Bishops Tachbrook, Warwick Gates, Whitnash & Harbury are already at capacity and would be unable to cope with an influx of new patients.
There is no dentist surgery in Bishops Tachbrook and other surgeries are already at capacity.
Education:
The primary schools in Bishops Tachbrook & Harbury are already oversubscribed & the Catholic Primary in Whitnash, St Josephs' has had to turn away Catholics with siblings already at the school as it has such a high application rate.
The educational needs of many of these children will mean that should a place be found for them at a local school they will need additional help to catch up, and this would have to be provided. Is the council going to supply additional funds to help support these children's needs and how will this be prioritised against the constant demand for funding? Will our taxes have to be increased to pay for these?
Given that the parents of many of these children are unable to read and write themselves they are not in a position to help children with their own learning and this identifies yet another pressure point. An adult who cannot read and write will have limited options on the jobs that they would be able to apply for. There are no employers within in the village of Bishops Tachbrook or Harbury which means that there is no immediate local economy for them to join with. Most villagers have to commute to work.
Infrastructure:
There are no pavements between the proposed site and the nearest village and this would be a great danger especially during peak travel hours and school run times.
There are no bus stops and no safe place for a bus stop to be installed.
This would force more traffic through the village of Bishops Tachbrook & Whitnash together with the additional traffic at major road junctions putting too much strain on an already busy junction onto a road where cars are travelling at speed.
Most of this plot does not have any Provision of Utilities
Given the proximity of 50mph roads next to this site what are the provisions for the safety and security of both people & animals?
It states in your Sites for Gypsies & Travellers page 9 last bullet point on section 7.4 the site should reflect the extent to which traditional lifestyles ( whereby some travellers live & work from the same location hereby omitting many travel to work journeys) can contribute to sustainability. I fail to see how our community can support the traditional lifestyle of travellers.
Environment Impact:
The proposed location is not in an area that can be integrated into the landscape without harming the character of the area which is stipulated as a Site Requirement within the WDC Consultation Document.
There is a potential visual impact on the approach to historic Warwick. This will damage the Tourist Industry which accounts for a large proportion of business transactions for both Large and Small & Medium Enterprises alike.
Therefore a site in this location will put undue pressure on local infrastructure & services.
I have read the council's document "Sites for Gypsies & Travellers" Local Plan helping shape the district.
As per my comments regarding the planned housing development, how is it those 15 sites are all placed south of Warwick & Leamington? The small village of Bishops Tachbrook has 6 of these within a mile of it, 2 are on its immediate doorstep. Potentially all of these sites could be approved and the very nature of our community and how the approach to our village would look would be irrevocably changed and the effect would be devastating to our way of life. This is not acceptable nor a reasonable request for the council to make.
There is no statement from the Gypsy Council of Great Britain or any other organising body on behalf of the Gypsy & Traveller community, within your brochure/document, that they wish to join our community in Warwickshire or anywhere else. Perhaps this is because they have no desire to permanently live here? What evidence does the council have that the gypsy & traveller community wish to use these sites as a permanently settled site with a fixed maximum number of 15 Pitches? You also do not state how many people are able to live within a pitch or who is responsible for the site. Due diligence has not taken place here. I appreciate that you state the Regional Spatial Strategy & commissioned Salford University to produce a report but you have failed to put any meaningful back up data into this document. Therefore I have to question the validity of the study as you have not put it in the information you are handing out. Where is the proof that so many sites are needed? Much needed data is missing here & the council are remiss in leaving it out.
You also state that the Gypsy & Traveller Accommodation Assessment shows a need for 31 pitches, 25 within the first five years & a further 6-8 transit pitches over the Plan period. Yet the brochure you have produced is only showing 19 of these. Why are you not identifying where all these sites will potentially be? Is the plan to add these to the ones for south of the river and avoid any impact to the north of the river as it is blatently your intention.
Your brochure has not been laid out in a way that makes for easy & understandable reading. For instance sites GT05 & GT09 in reality face each other on opposite sides of the Banbury Road yet in your document the numbers on the map are shown as far away from each other as possible and are shown in map form pages apart from each other & at different scales & angles. This also occurs for site GT06 which is opposite GT09. You are failing to make your documentation easy to read and this is misleading and in my view a deliberate attempt to mis-lead the impacted community.
I am extremely disappointed with the way that Warwick District Council is managing the consultation and the proposed development. I look forward to receiving a response to my objections and confirmation on the next steps.

see attached

see attached

I wish to object the proposed site GT03 and GT04 Land at Barnwell Farm for Gypsies and Travellers.

My comments and concerns are as follows:

1. Access to Local Amenities
- The nearest doctors surgery appears to be Harbury which currently struggles to support the village itself, it certainly does not have capacity for an influx of new patients.
- Likewise with the nearest primary, junior and secondary schools these are also at full capacity.

2. Travel
- The proposed site is on a high risk travel route with more that 12 serious accidents in the last 3 years and is especially dangerous where the Fosse Way meets the Harbury Lane crossroads.
- There are no bus stops available on the Fosse way and because of the volume of traffic providing one would be unsafe for other road users.
- The Fosse way is already a very busy and dangerous road, especially from the increased Jaguar/Land Rover traffic.
- More importantly there are no paths or pavements to walk anywhere and cycling on the Fosse would be very dangerous when the road is already used as a busy commuter route.
- And children cannot be allowed to stand on a busy road to wait for school transport.

3. Rural Environment
- The proposed site has no mains gas, mains sewerage or drainage.
- It is a flood risk area, often flooding at the end of Middle Road, Harbury Lane fields.

Please do not hesitate to contact me if you require verification of my objection.

see attached

As an ex-teacher who spent thirty years working for Warwickshire County Council, I feel I must raise an objection to the proposal to build a traveller's site on Harbury Lane. The traffic on Harbury Lane is at its heaviest at just those times when children are leaving for school and returning, and this must be a major concern for those making this decision. Also, to put children in a situation where their home and playing area is adjacent to the Fosse Way junction with Harbury Lane cannot be said to be in their best interests.

The main reason for my objection is that the local schools have no means of absorbing this increase in roll, which would mean that the children would almost undoubtedly face long journeys to schools outside the immediate area. As a teacher, I am convinced that it is important for children to be kept within their peer groups where possible, and to split these students up through putting them in this situation only adds to the problems they already face. It would be far better to place the traveller's site nearer to those local amenities which could service their undoubted needs.

I taught traveller's children during my career and made friends with traveller families as a result. Their needs and those of their children are ill-served if we plant them out in the middle of nowhere beside a dangerously busy road. I beg those responsible to take account of this and help the traveller families to find a suitable safe home.

I wish to record my objection to the above proposed sites near Harbury.
I consider both these proposed sites to be inappropriate because of the
following:-

1. Travel Problems.

Both sites are on a High Risk travel route with more than 10 serious accidents in the last 3 years.
The roads around these sites are extremely busy, especially The Fosse Way with the prospect of even busier traffic from Jaguar/Land Rover at Gaydon. There are few if any bus stops and providing these would be an added danger for road users. With no paths nor pavements it would be dangerous to walk anywhere and cycling would be equally hazardous.
Children attempting to get to school would be in real danger.

2.Local Amenities.

These are already at full capacity levels and certainly primary, junior and secondary scools would be unable to accommodate extra numbers. The same could be said of doctors surgeries.

3. Environmental Mattters.

The proposed sites will have a devastating effect on mains sewerage and drainage in local villages wo are experiencing problems already. The cost of providing and maintaining additional capacities to meet increased usage would be colossal.Both proposed sites are in a flood risk area and are regularly flooded in winter times. This would not only be very inconvenient but could lead to expensive legal claims.

To summarize, I think it would be unwise and extremely costly to choose either of the sites and for the reasons listed I trust these sites will be rejected.