see attached

I wish to register objections to the proposed Gypsy and Traveller Site ref GT03 on the following grounds: -

The site is more than 1.5 miles from any GP surgery. It is outside the catchment area of Harbury Surgery and the nearest is Warwick Gates Family Health Centre to which there is no convenient access and in any case I believe to be full.

The situation is similar for schools. The site is outside the catchment area of Harbury Primary which already has issues with too many children. There are schools in Whitnash (2 miles away) but with limited capacity.

There is very limited public transport.

The occupancy of the site is likely to generate hundreds of vehicle movements daily, many of which will aim to join or cross the Fosse Way.
This is a very busy road and is designated as a High Risk Route. Delays at the intersection are already a problem at peak times and the crossing is dangerous due to the high speed of traffic (despite speed cameras).

The proposed site has no mains sewerage, drainage or gas, and electricity is a limited rural line. BT considers the site too be too far from the Whitnash interchange to provide an adequate telephone service - internet connection will be poor and slow. Mobile phone services are mediocre at best.

The size of the site and number and variety of caravans and vehicles will make the site a prominent landscape feature which in no way can be regarded as integrated, and will damage the whole character of the landscape.

On behalf of Mallory Court Hotel, I strongly object to the proposed allocation of land at Harbury Lane site identified as GT03 land at Barnwell Farm, GT04 Land at Harbury Lane and GT05 Land at Tachbrook Hill Farm.

None of these proposed locations are sustainable or meet the criteria you have set out for a suitable gypsy and traveller location.

Mallory Court Hotel is the finest hotel in Warwickshire and the only one with a Michelin Star restaurant, which it has sustained for 14 years it is a significant asset in the area and has a wide range of local national and international visitors.

It brings substantial economic benefit to the local economy.

The hotel will suffer reputational damage if a gypsy and traveller site is allocated in the neighbourhood.

The hotel has recently been granted planning permission to build a Spa and additional bedrooms.

A gypsy and traveller site nearby is a threat to the hotel's reputation and the viability of further investment. Whilst this threat remains that investment will not take place, and over £10 million be lost to the local economy in the construction of the spa and the potential economic benefits that will bring to the area when it is in use and trading.

Your Local Plan preferred options document published in May 2012 sets out criteria for allocating a gypsy and traveller site.

You state that you have regard that a site can be integrated into the landscape without harming the character of the area, none of the sites I am commenting upon can be integrated into the area without harm and that harm includes the reputation of Mallory Court Hotel.

These sites will all have a visual impact upon the character and amenity of the local area.

The three sites referenced above are all located on a highway network that is unsafe for the type of use proposed, the Fosse way is particularly busy and has an increased traffic demand particularly with the success of Jaguar Landrover at Gaydon, there is no footpath or cycleways, to access these sites safely other than by motor vehicle, the roads are dangerous and could not be used safely by young children.

The nearest doctor's surgery has no capacity for the number of new patients that would arrive if these sites were allocated, the local schools are already at capacity and allocating these sites will put increased pressure on already scarce resources.

The sites appear to be located where there is no mains utility services - gas, sewerage or drainage which will need to be provided at a significant cost to this provision.

These sites are currently used for livestock and arable farming creating a gypsy and traveller site potentially could lead to further development and growth of facilities potentially alternative uses proposed leading to deterioration of the rural environment over time.

I am writing to convey my concern about the site of the new Gypsy site, I moved to Harbury with my family in September 2010 and have never felt more secure and safe ever since, we chose Harbury as it has a well serviced village location and very small amount of through traffic.
We moved from Headington in Oxford and had a Gypsy site about four miles from where we lived, also the Oxford city council re-housed some travellers on the estate we lived on. I have had a few dealings with travellers as I am a keen caravanner and have sold a few of my old Vans to gypsies, i found that they are quite agreeable people business wise once you can agree on a price for either an item they require or work they are offering to do for you, but on every occasion they have a severe lack of respect for local people and they Never tidy up the mess they make and the council will always be left to clear up the mess left by the travellers and a lot of unrest from locals will need addressing.
I believe that if the travellers need a site it should be much farther away from other communities, as they do not want to fit in with their surrounding, but wish to create their own living standards that others around them have to accept (even if the neighbours have lived in the area for a few generations).

I hope that I have not been too demeaning, as I have stated above, I have had a few dealings with travellers in the past, but in my knowledge they have very set beliefs and life structures that do not fit in with the surrounding area and population, I can be contacted on this email address and would like to know that my objection is satisfactory to be registered.

Dear Sirs

GYPSY SITE CONSULTATION ON BEHALF OF HARBURY SOCIETY

We object to the inclusion of the Sites GT03 Barnwell Farm and GT04 Land at Harbury Lane Fosse Way for the reasons listed below. The responses are the same for both of these areas of search, but to comply with your rules we include both separately.

Site GT03 - Barnwell Farm OBJECT

YOUR CATEGORY:-
Convenient access to a GP surgery, school and public transport;

We know that in the last few years Harbury School and Surgery have been under severe pressure.

YOUR CATEGORY:-
Avoiding areas with a high risk of flooding. This area floods badly. Harbury Lane has at times been impassable. The land is often under water for several days after periods of heavy rain and not just in exceptional weather. It is within the Environment Agency's Flood Zone. The Agency must be consulted about this risk and how this risk would be increased by development.

Any "hard" landscaping or development of roads, buildings, etc necessary for a Travellers' Site would serve to increase run-off.

YOUR CATEGORY:-
Safe access to the road network and provision for parking, turning and servicing on site;

The Bendigo Mitchell Crossroads are an acknowledged accident blackspot particularly for turning traffic. This problem is exacerbated by the numbers of workers travelling to and from Jaguar/Landrover at peak periods. The congestion causes long tail-backs for vehicles trying to cross or access the Fosse. The Peak Period starts about 7.15am and continues until 9.30am and again between 3pm and 6pm. At all times it is very difficult for even private cars to get across the junction and much worse at peak periods. Long vehicles and trailers turning here would present a very real danger at any time.

The District Council must take into account the County's traffic figures and accident statistics relating to this junction and the effect or otherwise of the County's past attempts to make the crossroads safer.

There must be a properly conducted traffic survey and safety audit of this junction in its present form and a full traffic study of sites GT03 and GT04 to demonstrate the effects of the vehicle movements generated from these sites on the background traffic, taking into account future traffic growth on the high speed route - The Fosse, and the designated Lorry Route - Harbury Lane.

Should either site GT03 or GT04 be considered for a Travellers' site then we believe that extensive remodeling of the junction to provide a roundabout would be necessary

YOUR CATEGORY:-
Avoiding areas where there could be an adverse impact on important, features of the natural and historic environment;

Development of either Site GT03 and/or Site GT04 would have an adverse impact on the views from Chesterton Windmill - an historic feature in the Warwickshire Landscape as lauded and acknowledged by the Europa Nostra Award given for its restoration.

Chesterton Windmill is a building of local, national and international importance and its setting should not be challenged or damaged by development.

It is an important tourist attraction much loved and photographed (see Google Images!).

But the windmill is only part of the historic landscape that could be compromised by development. Research by David Adams on the Roman occupation of the Chesterton Valley has shown that settlement extended beyond the present village of Chesterton, over Windmill Hill and beyond the Camp on the Fosse.

There are thought to be Roman and possibly earlier remains on the western side of the Fosse and these would need to be investigated and excavated properly before any further development were sanctioned.

Site GT04 - Land at Harbury Lane, Fosse Way OBJECT

YOUR CATEGORY:-
Convenient access to a GP surgery, school and public transport;

We know that in the last few years Harbury School and Surgery have been under severe pressure.

YOUR CATEGORY:-
Avoiding areas with a high risk of flooding. This area floods badly. Harbury Lane has at times been impassable. The land is often under water for several days after periods of heavy rain and not just in exceptional weather. It is within the Environment Agency's Flood Zone

The Agency must be consulted about this risk and how this risk would be increased by development.

Any "hard" landscaping or development of roads, buildings, etc necessary for a Travellers' Site would serve to increase run-off.

YOUR CATEGORY:-
Safe access to the road network and provision for parking, turning and servicing on site;

The Bendigo Mitchell Crossroads are an acknowledged accident blackspot particularly for turning traffic.

This problem is exacerbated by the numbers of workers travelling to and from Jaguar/Landrover at peak periods. The congestion causes long tail-backs for vehicles trying to cross or access the Fosse.

The Peak Period starts about 7.15am and continues until 9.30am and again between 3pm and 6pm.

At all times it is very difficult for even private cars to get across the junction and much worse at peak periods. Long vehicles and trailers turning here would present a very real danger at any time.

The District Council must take into account the County's traffic figures and accident statistics relating to this junction and the effect or otherwise of the County's past attempts to make the crossroads safer.

There must be a properly conducted traffic survey and safety audit of this junction in its present form and a full traffic study of sites GT03 and GT04 to demonstrate the effects of the vehicle movements generated from these sites on the background traffic, taking into account future traffic growth on the high speed route - The Fosse, and the designated Lorry Route - Harbury Lane.

Should either site GT03 or GT04 be considered for a Travellers' site then we believe that extensive remodeling of the junction to provide a roundabout would be necessary

YOUR CATEGORY:-
Avoiding areas where there could be an adverse impact on important, features of the natural and historic environment;

Development of either Site GT03 and/or Site GT04 would have an adverse impact on the views from Chesterton Windmill - an historic feature in the Warwickshire Landscape as lauded and acknowledged by the Europa Nostra Award given for its restoration.

Chesterton Windmill is a building of local, national and international importance and its setting should not be challenged or damaged by development.

It is an important tourist attraction much loved and photographed (see Google Images!).

But the windmill is only part of the historic landscape that could be compromised by development. Research by David Adams on the Roman occupation of the Chesterton Valley has shown that settlement extended beyond the present village of Chesterton, over Windmill Hill and beyond the Camp on the Fosse.

There are thought to be Roman and possibly earlier remains on the western side of the Fosse and these would need to be investigated and excavated properly before any further development were sanctioned.

OUR CATEGORY
Intimidating and restricting nature of online response format. We found your online response format intimidating, unnecessarily restrictive and liable to cause the exclusion of many potential respondents. We would urge you to make any future consultations more user-friendly and accessible.

After reading with trepidation about the huge housing developments proposed for the South Leamington area, the Residents / Rate Payers and Electorate and are now being told to expect 10 permanent Traveller sites in what can only be see as an over the top planning action by the elected councillors of WDC!
Most of the sites appear to be unsuitable for Travellers and far to large for 15 families; a 1/4 of an Acre per family, I only wish my children could have grown up with a full sized football pitch to play on!

The sites proposed at locations 3,4,5,6,9,10,15 are remote from any main amenities, such as shops bus routes and very little in the way of pedestrian access. Also accessing onto very busy A & B roads that carry high volumes of rush hour traffic, including school traffic into Warwick each week day. Some of the sites would result in employment loss i.e. Fosse Exhibition centre & Guide Dogs Breeding Centre. Others sites would impinge on the local historic views e.g. approach to Warwick & Chesterton Windmill, others are prone to winter flooding e.g. Tachbrook, all would put a strain on local middle schools and Doctors Surgeries.
Yes we do worry about increased crime and falling house prices, so the way to limit this is to spread the load more evenly across the district. There must be more suitable locations North, East & West of the Town? But apart from the one site proposal in Cubbington North Leamington is unscathed yet again, because the proposed housing developments have also passed it by? The residents in South Leamington area can only be left to wonder how many serving councillors live it the seemingly protected North Leamington area???
But take heed, councillors are employed because you were elected by the local voters, but if these proposals go through then at the next local election you wont be getting too many votes from South of the River! You were elected to benefit all of the local areas not damage some and favour others.............................. If the Government is bullying you into this Traveller site fiasco then SPREAD THE LOAD FAIRLY AND EVENLY thought the district!

From a very concerned local resident and rate payer over the past 39 years.

Dear Sir/Madam

My apologies for sending this as two emails, I had not realised that responses on the draft gypsy and traveller site consultation were to be sent to the same email address as general comments on the new local plan.

As explained in my earlier email, I hope you will still consider this feedback even though it has been submitted after the deadline. I am currently visiting family in Finland and have had to cope with two unexpected collapses of my father this afternoon which necessarily distracted me from responding before the deadline. I did, however, want to share my thoughts on the new local plan hence sending this email. Please would you confirm whether you will take my email into consideration as part of the new local plan consultation.

I understand that the proposed gypsy and traveller sites include a number in the environs of Bishops Tachbrook (sites 5, 6, 9, 15, 3 and 10). I fail to see how these sites meet with the criteria required for candidate sites, for example being able to integrate a permanent site into the landscape without harming the character of the area, convenient access to public transport, providing safe access to the road network, placing undue pressure on the local infrastructure and services and avoiding areas where there is the potential for noise and other disturbance. All these sites are too remote from major settlement areas.

The Bishops Tachbrook area has a strong rural character that must be preserved. The village is already being compromised by traffic that runs through it as a rat run to the M40. As outlined in my earlier email there are already road safety issues in the village so any new settlement (of any type) that increases the traffic through the village (to the motorway or to Leamington Spa) should be avoided. The public transport service is very limited so alternative options are not practical and many of the proposed sites do not offer pedestrian access so inhabitants will inevitably resort to using cars.

My recommendation is that sites which are closer to existing services (e.g. GP services and village schools) that could accommodate the additional demand should be sought and that the impact on the local rural road network be seriously considered. Any sites which will compromise the rural character of immediate area, specifically those listed above, should be excluded from the list of proposed sites. I appreciate this means that more rurally based councils will find it harder to find appropriate sites for gypsies and travellers, however this does not mean that the natural environment and character of the areas within its care should be compromised.

See attached.

See attached.

I feel as long term resident to Warwickshire..We all should be concerned about siting any developments of this nature.

These sites will create concrete jungles/ possible dumping areas / especially concerned about FOSSE WAY sites despoiling ancient roads, and our heritage..

Also so many now use these vital road links.Therefore greater risks of traffic accidents, on this already dangererous road to all motorists and many cyclists who seem to
abound this area.

So my objection is to any site along / near to Fosse Way.

see attached

I support the area of search at GT11 (Hampton Road). This is a sustainable site with good access to GPs and both primary and secondary schools. There is adequate separation from the settled community to avoid issues of noise from the site affecting the settled community, whilst the site is close enough to minimise isolation and potentially promote a better understanding between the two communities. However, the western end of the site is too close to the A46 and noise levels are high. Trailers cannot be soundproofed to the same level as houses so this part of the area will not provide reasonable accommodation for the travelling community.

Other sites offering reasonable access to existing facilities, particularly primary schools, include GT12 and GT05, particularly the northern end of GT05. In the case of GT12 the difficulty of crossing the
A429 Barford bypass should be considered, however.

I object to the site at GT20 (Junction 15, M40) because the high level of noise from the M40 will adversely impact on the amenity of residents of any site here.

Similar comments can be made for large parts of GT09

The Fosse Way sites (GT03 and GT04) appear to have nothing to recommend them in terms of access to facilities. The level of isolation of the sites is also unlikely to promote inclusion. GT06 suffers from similar problems.

GT15 (Europa Way) relates well to the proposed areas of growth and might be a suitable site in the long term, although its size and shape makes the provision of internal open space with good casual surveillance difficult. Noise from Europa Way could also be a problem.

see attached

To whom it may concern,

I object to the proposed travellers site for a number of reasons.

1/ There has been a significant build-up of traffic on the Fosse Way which connects all the sites in recent times due mostly to the great expansion of workers travelling to the Gaydon factory sites. This would serve to make this considerably worse.

It is also a fast road and with travellers crossing the road on foot, it would be a likely accident spot.

2/ The Combined School in Harbury has always maintained a high standard of education for local children. An influx of traveller children would put a considerable strain on resources,unjustifiably adversely affecting the village children.

3/ The local Doctors surgery in Harbury already serves a number of local villages and is always under strain. This would significantly increase the pressure to maintain services.

Please do not take this consideration any further.

The three proposed sites that are either abutting or adjacent to the parish are: GT02, GT03 and GT04.
GTO2 - Land either side of the Fosse Way (B4455) north of the junction with the A425.
GT03 - Land SE of the junction of Harbury Lane and the Fosse Way (aka Bendigo Mitchell Crossroads)
GT04 - Land NW of the junction of Harbury Lane and the Fosse Way.
Harbury Parish Council fully accepts that WDC and SDC should provide suitable sites for travellers. However it does not believe that these specific sites are suitable on planning grounds.
The consultation document suggests a number of criteria that might make a site suitable for traveller use.
Medical facilities - the nearest medical facility to these three sites is the surgery in Harbury. Discussions with the Senior Partner at Harbury surgery indicate that the surgery is already struggling to cope with demand. It has more than 6,000 registered patients since it serves Harbury, Bishops Itchington, and a number of the smaller surrounding communities including Ufton and Chesterton. Without significant extra resources to physically expand the medical facilities, there is no way the surgery could accept additional patients. Conclusion: There are no suitable medical facilities close to the proposed sites.
Schooling - the nearest primary school is Harbury Primary, but as with the surgery, it is already oversubscribed by children in the catchment area. School age children would likely have to travel into Leamington. Conclusion: There are no suitable educational facilities close to the proposed sites.
Public transport - these sites are not ideal. At GT03 & GT04 there are no footpaths for pedestrians, and might require a stop on the Fosse Way itself, adding to the accident risk. Conclusion: The proposed sites are not on existing public transport networks.
Safe access to the road network - All of these proposed sites are on a busy main road. The speed limit is 60mph and there have 57 accidents in the past five years on the Fosse between the B4100 and the A425. Three people have lost their lives in road accidents on this part of the Fosse in the past three years alone. Adding more traffic to this road, particularly junctions would inevitably increase the accident risk, particularly if some of those vehicles are slow moving (eg caravans/trailers). The potential risk both to travellers and the local population makes each of these three sites unsuitable. Conclusion: These sites do not offer safe access to the road network.
Flooding - Parts of GT03 and GT04 are noted on the flood maps on the Environment Agency website as being at risk of flooding. Conclusion: WDC should research these sites comprehensively to assess the flood risk.
Impact on the historic landscape - both GT03 and GT04 are adjacent to the Roman Fort at Chesterton and the iconic windmill at Chesterton. Conclusion: The sites would have a detrimental impact on the historic landscape.
It is also noted that these three proposed sites, along with several others (GT1, GT10, GT12, & GT16) are on the boundary between Warwick and Stratford Districts. The impact of any traveller sites would thus largely be felt in the neighbouring district and not by council-tax payers in Warwick district.
Summary
As all three proposed sites would place considerable strain on the local resources and facilities, while also adding to the accident risk, it would appear that GT02, GT03 or GT04 are not suitable sites for travellers.

To whom it may concern,

It is with horror we have learnt of the proposal of siting traveller sites close to the village of Harbury.
We have been residents of Harbury for thirty seven years and feel strongly opposed to this ill-thought out proposal for a number of reasons.

1/ There has been a significant build-up of traffic on the Fosse Way which connects all the sites in recent times due mostly to the great expansion of workers travelling to the Gaydon factory sites. This would serve to make this considerably worse.
2/ The Combined School in Harbury has always maintained a high standard of education for local children. An influx of traveller children would put a considerable strain on resources,unjustifiably adversely affecting the village children.
3/ The local Doctors surgery in Harbury already serves a number of local villages and is always under strain. This would significantly increase the pressure to maintain services.
4/ Whether it offends the supporters of political correctness or not, the simple truth is that people like ourselves, the vast majority of people who have worked hard, paid income tax, council and road tax and national insurance in the thousands of pounds for many years bitterly and justifiably resent these people who turn up and expect special attention and definitely DO NOT PAY THEIR DUES. There is no doubt whatsoever that this would cause considerable bitterness.

Please do not take this consideration any further.

Dear Sir/Madam

With reference to the proposed traveller sites GT02, GT03, and GT04 please find below our objection to the plans.

The three sites are all close to an exceptionally busy highway, the Fosse way. There are no bus routes, safe footpaths or access points to the sites and there would be a disregard for the cycle path. The traffic on the fosse way has increased dramatically with the expansion of the jaguar land rover sites at Gaydon. Thus making the sites a poor choice on the basis of safety reasons for all users of this already saturated travel network.

We fear it would create a huge strain on resources especially with the school, pre-school and doctors surgery which can at times already take two weeks to obtain an appointment.

It is also of concern that the proposed sites are around flood risk areas and would contribute to over development of the open countryside.

see attached

see attached

See Attached

see attached

* Convenient access to a GP surgery, school and public transport;
This site is in excess of 1.5miles from any GP surgery. The proposed site is outside of the catchment area of Harbury Surgery and the nearest surgery is the Warwick Gates Family Health Centre which approximately3 miles away which I understand is full so there is no convenient access to a surgery.
The position with regard to schooling is similar with GT03 being outside of the Harbury catchment area and Harbury Primary School has had recent issues with too many children already. There are several schools in Whitnash (over 2 miles away) with limited capacity.
The public transport whilst satisfactory is largely irrelevant as the residents are unlikely to use anything other than their own transport. There is a bus stop on the Harbury Lane however there is no pedestrian links from that to the potential site.
* Avoiding areas with a high risk of flooding
The area is prone to flooding. Fields are often under water and livestock and ponies moved accordingly. The area is effectively a flood plain.
Harbury Lane is often flooded and impassable.
* Safe access to the road network and provision for parking, turning and servicing on site;
The proposed 15 pitch site will contain up to 50 vehicles and generate hundreds of traffic movements daily. It is on the junction of two major roads and access into the traffic flow will possibly need highway improvements. It is possibly unwise to introduce even more traffic turns at this major junction and it will certainly add significantly to existing peak time delays. GT03 is sited on the junction of two main roads with high traffic flows and the Fosse Way in particular sees fast traffic despite the nearby speed camera and is a designated High Risk Route by the County Council. There have more than 12 Serious Accidents at this junction over the last 3 years.
* Avoiding areas where there is the potential for noise and disturbance
This site is adjacent the Fosse Way a very busy and noisy main road.
* Provision of utilities (running water, toilet facilities waste disposal etc);
The proposed site has no mains sewerage, drainage or gas so fails to meet the criteria. Also the
electricity supply is a limited rural line and will possibly need to be upgraded to meet the very considerable increase in demand.
GT03 is considered by British Telecom to be too far from the Whitnash Telephone Exchange to provide an adequate telephone or internet service (They term it as a long line). They will not upgrade the system resulting in poor telephone connections and intermittent (<1mbs) internet service.
GT03 does not have a reliable mobile phone service. There are no mobile phone networks that provide more than a mediocre service.
* Avoiding areas where there could be an adverse impact on important, features of the natural and historic environment;
This choice of site overlooks the fact that at this point the Fosse Way, as the original Roman road built nearly 2000 years ago is known, is on its original alignment and there is likely to be considerable archaeological remains in the area which will be destroyed by the development. There was also a tollhouse nearby in the 17th and 18th centuries and remains have been found.
* Sites which can be integrated into the landscape without harming the character of the area.
The proposed site will cover 0.8 hectare (8000 m²) which is larger than Barnwell Farm and if the Enfusion (consultants) recommendation to include working space is adopted this would possibly increase to 1.5 times the area of the farm. There will be a large variety of caravans and vehicles on the site so, being in the bottom of the valley, it cannot integrated into the landscape without harming the visual appearance and character of the area.
* Promotes peaceful and integrated co-existence between the site and the local community;
In this respect the local community forms two distinct sections. There is a very small community of some 20 houses within half a mile of the site along the Fosse Way and the far greater community in the villages of Harbury and Whitnash over 1.5 miles away.
It will be difficult to integrate the residents into the local Fosse Way community as with up to 120 residents on site rather than integrate they will actually absorb the local community. This does not meet the criteria of a peaceful and integrated co-existence.
* Avoids placing undue pressure on local infrastructure and services;
The proposed site has no mains sewerage, drainage or gas so fails to meet the criteria. Also the electricity supply is a limited rural line and will possibly need to be upgraded to meet the very considerable increase in demand.
* Reflects the extent to which traditional lifestyles (whereby some travellers live and work from the same location thereby omitting many travel to work journeys) can contribute to sustainability.
No comment
Local Business/Employment
There are many businesses that operate from GT03 site and the surrounding area and will potentially suffer if the proposed sites go ahead. For example:
1. Will Russell - Farm land being fully utilised for sheep
2. Bob Wright - land being used for arable farming
3. Fosse Garage
4. Rollason Fencing
5. Barnwell Chicken Farm
6. MH Polo Ltd - teaching people to ride ponies
7. Fosse Paddocks Ltd - farming and ponies
8. Warwick Reclamation
9. Mallory Court Hotel
10. Harbury Lane Breakers Yard
11. There are many others.
Archaeology and Heritage
GT 03 is located right next to the historic Fosse Way. The road now known as the Fosse Way was built following the Roman invasion in AD 43, nearly 2000 years ago, and has been a major highway throughout the centuries. There was a tollhouse on the junction of the Fosse Way and Southam Road in the 17th and 18th centuries. If GT 03 is approved it is important that a major archaeological dig should take place prior to site work so that the archaeology and heritage of the area can be recovered and safeguarded.
Urbanisation
GT 03 will involve considerable infrastructure in addition to the actual site. Its proximity to the roundabout may require traffic control and road widening to provide a right turning lane for access. Further features could include bus shelters and a pedestrian crossing and more street lighting would be needed.
Agriculture
At present the proposed GT03 site is part of an area of good quality, extensively farmed land. Unauthorised intrusion from GT 03 into the agricultural land could result in contractors not wishing to risk tractors and equipment and this together with crop damage and possible rubbish deposits could result in the land ceasing to be farmed and becoming unsightly.
Rural Landscape
The area surrounding GT 03 is rural and agricultural in aspect and the proposed site will be a major invasion into the openness of the countryside and will be an irreversible urbanisation of the entire area. If the site is built, the council will be ill placed to prevent further 'ribbon' development.

see attached

see attached

Dear Sir/Madam,
I am writing to make my objections to the Gypsy and Traveller Site (G&TS) options clear.
It is clear that when considering G&TS's the following must be considered:
Convenient access to a GP surgery, school and public transport
Is Bishops Tachbrook being penalised for having a part time GP surgery? It is extremely difficult to get an appointment within a week at the local surgery. More often than not I have to travel to Sydenham to the main full time surgery to get an urgent appointment. What will be the impact if 6 G&TS sites are created around Bishops Tachbrook. Will the GP surgery expand, including longer opening hours and more than 1 GP and 1 nurse as is the current standard?
Gypsies and Travellers experience the worst health status of any disadvantaged group in England. Life expectancy is 12 years less for a woman and 10 years less for men than amongst the settled community. Baring in mind these statistics this would suggest an increased usage of medical facilities
In 2007, 2.7% of children of Gypsy/Romany origin and 8.4 % of traveller children of Irish heritage achieved 5 or more A* to C grades or equivalent exams including English and Mathematics in England compared to a national average of 45.4%. 8% of Gypsy and Traveller mothers have experienced the death of a child compared to less than 1% of the settled community. This could put a major strain on the already overworked education and medical facilities already available in the area.
The GP Surgeries in Bishops Tachbrook & Whitnash are at capacity and would be unable to cope with an influx of new patients. There is no dental care provision in Bishops Tachbrook.
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. Is the council going to supply additional funds to help support these children's needs? Given that the parents of many of these children are unable to read & write themselves they are not in a position to help children with their own learning and this identifies yet another pressure point. As an adult not being able to read & write seriously narrows down the type of work you would be able to apply for, there are limited employers within in the village of Bishops Tachbrook therefore there is no immediate local economy for them to join with.
Avoiding areas with a high risk of flooding
Field on the corner of Mallory Road, Banbury Road floods on each side whenever there is a significant rainfall. Sites GT05, GT06, GT09 and GT10 are all prone to flooding.
Provision of utilities
Who would be expected to provide this? Sites GT05, GT06, GT09 and GT10 do not have adequate provision of utilities such as sewerage, drainage, gas and water.
Safe access to the road network and provision for parking, turning and servicing on site
Sites GT05,GT06, GT09 and GT10 are all on very major roads with no means of pedestrian access. There are no bus routes and they are all fast moving roads.
Avoiding areas where there is the potential for noise and other disturbance
Banbury Road is the main road off the M40 for people travelling from both the North and the South. GT05, GT06, GT09 and GT10 are all bordering the M40 meaning that these sites will be very noisy for occupants. GT05 is in extremely close proximityto residents of Bishops Tachbrook and so any noise from this site would have a major effect on current residents.
Avoiding areas where there could be adverse impact on important features of the natural and historic environment
St Chads church in Bishops Tachbrook has many historical features. It is mentioned in the Domesday Book. GT05 and GT09 are both situated on the approach to Bishops Tachbrook and would be the first visual sight that visitors would see of the village.
Sites which can be integrated into the landscape without harming the character of the area.
It is difficult to think of any area at all that would meet this criteria. The character of the area around GT05, GT09 and GT10 is agricultural farm land. I fail to see how a G&TS would integrate into this landscape without harming the character of the area.
Promotes peaceful and integrated co-existence between the site and local community
I would suggest this is highly unlikely due to the level of local disagreement with the proposed sites, in particular GT05, GT09 and GT10. I have concerns over the level of noise that any sites may incur, both from the inhabitants and also the local community expressing their objections. Local residents have discussed various methods of protest if these plans are to go ahead. Various residents have offered financial assistance regarding legal advice. The press and local MP's have been engaged and shown their support.
Avoids placing undue pressure on local infrastructure and services
Will additional funding be provided to the village school to support with the proposed number of children likely to attend? If not will a new school be built to support in this area? Will this cause a change in the catchment areas for the school? It would be unfair for tax paying residents to be moved out of the catchment area to accommodate these new developments.
The school in Bishops Tachbrook is single form entry and is already oversubscribed. G&TS of 5,10 or 15 are likely to provide homes for 10,20 or 30 children. A small school which is always at capacity is unlikely to be able to provide the infrastructure required to support the needs of the proposed sites. The school does not have the resource to support children that have received very little if any formal education. They will struggle to integrate into the local school environment.
The school also relies on the parent teacher working relationship meaning that parents support the school by giving up their time to help teach and read with pupils. It is known that 81% of Gypsy and Traveller children's parents are illiterate. This will mean no support for the school. It will also mean that these children will require even more support from existing parents. The extra support that these children will need will put the current children at a disadvantage. The school is simply not equipped to deal with the needs of these children.
There are already concerns that the secondary schools in the area are oversubscribed and that there is not adequate provision for the current population of the parish. Any additional strain on these numbers will only make the situation worse.
There is a grade 1 listed church and a sports and social club built through local fund raising. There is a small local shop, a hairdresser and one public house. That is it.
The villagers choose to live with limited resources as they prefer the quiet friendly community feel of the village.
There are limited public transport options in the area with limited bus services and no train routes. Reaching a place of employment with public transport would be extremely difficult.

Reflects the extent to which traditional lifestyles (whereby some travellers live and work from the same location thereby omitting many travel to work journeys) can contribute to sustainability
I would suggest that it is a small minority of Gypsy and Travellers that live and work from the same location. I would be interested to see the evidence to show how a Gypsy and Traveller site can support local sustainability in this area.
Specific sites
GT05, GT09- Vehicle access is onto a very busy main road, with vehicles travelling at speed. To introduce caravans and mobile homes turning into the site would be dangerous. Additional traffic at the junction of Mallory Road & Banbury Road would put too much strain on an already busy junction onto a road where cars are travelling at speed, because of the north and southbound approaches to junction 13 of the M40. This is not an easy junction to get out of especially if you have to move slowly due to pulling a trailer or caravan.
Given the proximity of 50mph roads next to this site what are the provisions for the safety and security of both people & animals? For instance a horse on the Banbury Road especially a loose one could end in fatalities. As could loose dogs.
No pedestrian access and to create any would be dangerous. There are also no pavements between this site and the village, nor the main Banbury Road. For any children living on this site the walk to school will be extremely dangerous. There are no bus stops in the immediate vicinity and nowhere safe to put one. Cycling would be hazardous
The potential visual impact would be devastating on the approach to the Historical Warwick town and could discourage visitors and tourists. There are listed buildings on this site in need of protection. 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. It would be the first thing that people see when travelling into the village from the M40
This site does not provide utilities. There are no gas, sewerage or drainage facilities.
GT06 - Very remote from main centres and no means of pedestrian access
GT10 - Close to the Guide Dogs for the Blind National Breeding Centre. The risk of disease from any unvaccinated animals belonging to Gypsies and Travellers could be devastating. Given the proximity of 50mph roads next to this site what are the provisions for the safety and security of both people & animals? For instance a horse on the Banbury Road especially a loose one could end in fatalities. As could loose dogs.
Vehicle access is onto a very busy main road, with vehicles travelling at speed. To introduce caravans and mobile homes turning into the site would be dangerous.
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.
GT15 - site located on the banks of the Tachbrook. There could be a chance of contamination, given that the proposed site may be used as a place of work. Europa Way is an already congested road and adding further traffic to this mix could be devastating.
Sites GT05, GT06, GT09 and GT10 are currently homes to many forms of farm and wildlife animals. They are also working farm land.
Other considerations
6 out of the 20 sites have been proposed around the small unique village of Bishops Tachbrook.
Are the sites identified in and around Bishops Tachbrook too remote from the main infrastructure of Leamington Spa or Warwick to be suitable for this type of development?
On behalf of Warwick District Council, Salford University has determined that there is a requirement for 25 pitches initially expanding to 31. Why the need for so many propsed sites then?
Who will monitor the sites. It is my understanding that the sites will be operated by Gypsy and Travellers and not Warwick District Council. If this is the case how can concerns such as noise pollution land pollution and overcrowding be controlled?
Recommendations state that the size of each site must be between 5 and 15 pitches but does not specify how many people can populate this sites. What plans have been put in place to ensure that what happened at Dale Farm does not happen again. This was where a legitimate site expanded?
What about the effect on house prices in the general area around these sites?
What will be the visual impact on Bishops Tachbrook village and surrounding area. Will it have an impact on tourism in the area?
Where will the Gypsy and Traveller community find work locally? All the sites suggested are too remote from employment and facilities and so are unsuitable for this type of development.
All proposed sites are on busy roads where it would be a danger for any children to wait for transport to school.
Why are 15 of the proposed sites in the south of Warwick & Leamington? The small village of Bishops Tachbrook has 6 of these proposals within a mile of it, 3 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. The effect on Bishops Tachbrook 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 have produced 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? Are you planning to use these larger identified areas to put up multiple sites? Please be clear & honest!
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 & this is inexcusable.
Sites GT05, GT06, GT09, GT10 are all next to each other meaning that of all these sites are successful there would be a huge Gypsy encampment in a small area.
The images you are using on your front cover, page 3 & page 4 are clearly stock images of holiday camping sites. They are not permanent sites and they are certainly not Gypsy & Traveller sites. Why is the council not using real images from existing successful sites to give an honest & truthful photographic representation of how these sites will look?
Proposals
Has the area next to the police site on the west side of Europa Way in between GT06 and GT15 been considered. This could have access onto one of 4 roads and would have a high Police presence.
A further alternative site and one that is a much more suitable at addressing the issues that are set out in Section 4 of the consultation document is on the opposite side of Stratford Road, Warwick to Aylesford School. This site is located within walking distance of medical, educational and recreational facilities.
It is located on a straight section of road with good sight lines and a 40 mph speed limit. It is served by bus routes and has wide pedestrian footpaths. This site is also set back from the road so would provide some protection from any negative visual impact.
Other comments
The instructions for this plan are very unclear. I have been advised that a separate letter needs to be submitted for each proposed site but I can not see anywhere that this is mentioned for email responses, this is unclear. If that is the case I have grave concerns that this consultation has not achieved its legal goal of "improving the efficiency, transparency and public involvement in large-scale projects or laws and policies" as people do not know how to respond in the correct manner.

I request to know the name of the authorised Gypsy site shown in your brochure.
Whilst I appreciate that WDC are under instruction to provide sites I would suggest that the proposed sites around the Bishops Tachbrook area are in the wrong places. This community is already stretched to capacity. I fail to see how the G &T could contribute to our small community.

see attached

see attached

see attached

see attached

see attached