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

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!

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.

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.

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 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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

* 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.
The Middle Road/ Fosse Way junction is often flooded
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. GT04 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 been 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.
In addition this is adjacent the Birmingham to London Chiltern railway line, causing both noise and a potential danger.
* 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.
GT04 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.
GT04 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 the New Windmill Football Ground and if the Enfusion (consultants) recommendation to include working space is adopted this would possibly increase to twice the area of the football ground. 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 GT04 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 04 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 04 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 04 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 GT04 site is part of an area of good quality, extensively farmed land. Unauthorised intrusion from GT 04 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 04 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

see attached

Re: Proposed sites GT03 and GT04

I wish to object to the proposed Gypsy/Traveller sites at the above locations for the following reasons:

The local schools and amenities are already over subscribed and stretched to capacity, - how can this area provide schools/Doctor's facilities to a travelling community?

Our local road network cannot cope already with the volume of traffic currently using the road network, a convoy of travellers vehicles moving around on a regular basis would create traffic chaos.

It would be far more suitable to create a site for this type of community in an area that could provide the amenities and services that they would require.

Dear Sirs,

I write to voice our objection to the proposed 'gypsy' and travellers sites near Harbury.

1. There is a strong case for providing so called gypsies or itinerants with a place to stay only because they have nowhere to go and it is a big problem moving them on constantly and clearing up afterwards. The point is that in 2013 it is no longer viable or reasonable to expect to exist in this way living in caravans with no proper employment. Do you really believe these people survive on seasonal work such as was found in times gone by? We can only guess how they make their money but it is a fact that they pay no taxes and as such do not subscribe to the way of living sponsored by society in the main. Therefore the way of life should be discouraged and we would prefer to pay for housing benefit similar to any other under privileged peoples. If people decide to ride horses down the M40 we would hardly construct a lane specifically for them, it would be unreasonable in 2013 to allow this practice and there is little difference to wanting to set up communes in caravans.
2. The proposed sites are clearly prime residential locations, sited in open countryside but being within easy reach of local amenities and Leamington Spa. There is a live and let live theory but this is clearly far too biased towards one side. You have to be conscious of the developed society and how the majority have sought to establish the communities we live in. That is that more often than not the benefits of any particular location are linked to the cost of living there, mainly by the cost of the housing. This is typical of any human society founded on trade, be it money or any other currency. Why should the sites be in such highly valued locations, when ordinary people strive to achieve similar with such struggle? This is not snobbery or a 'nimby' attitude just plain laws of living which are seemed to be circumnavigated through some misplaced conscience or 'do good' feelings. Why should we not only sponsor the facilitation of sites, but also face the reduction in value of our most significant asset? It is a plain fact that the sites will cost some people hundreds of thousands of pounds and as a percentage of wealth even the 'gypsies' would object to such a plan. How can you expect people to continue to pay such high amounts of council tax dependent on their chosen style of living (ie. greater value apportioned to housing versus other asset forms - cars, jewellery etc.) when there is a section of the community paying nothing? There are plenty of suitable locations along the M40 corridor where the impact would be less or even negligible. What it seems is that the benefits for the 'gypsies' have been put way above the sacrifices of the society as a whole. Any site should not be within 1 mile of a residential property and should not impact on another community in any way.

In conclusion we object to the practice of providing any site, but can see the need in the circumstances. Given the need we object to the extremely biased and unnecessarily privileged locations being proposed.

see attached

see attached

This site fails to meet the councils Local Plan Requirements & its preferred options because-
The GP Surgeries in Bishops Tachbrook & Whitnash & Harbury are at capacity and would be unable to cope with an influx of new patients.
The primary school in Bishops Tachbrook & Harbury is already oversubscribed & the Catholic Primary in Whitnash, St Josephs' has even had to turn away Catholics with siblings already at the school as it has such a high application rate.
Also the educational needs of many of these children will mean that should a place be found at a local school they will need additional help to catch up, and this should be provided. 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 no employers within in the village of Bishops Tachbrook or Harbury therefore there is no immediate local economy for them to join with. Most villagers have to commute to work.
There is no Dental care in Bishops Tachbrook.
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 put in.
This would force more traffic through the village of Bishops Tachbrook & Whitnash & Additional traffic at major road junctions would put 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? For instance a horse on the Banbury Road especially a loose one could end in fatalities.
.
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. Bishops Tachbrook & Whitnash & Harbury would not be able to offer any traditional forms of income for travellers or gypsies. Next to this statement is an image of a draught horse. We are not a horse based community so farrier's would not be able to make a living here. Also my understanding is that traditional forms of employment also include door to door sales and this would be in stark contrast to advice given by police not to buy from door to door sales people. I fail to see how our community can support the traditional lifestyle of travellers.

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.

We would lose the much used New Windmill football ground. This is not acceptable.
Therefore a site in this location will put undue pressure on local infrastructure & services.


I picked up the council's document "Sites for Gypsies & Travellers" Local Plan helping shape the district.
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 & 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. Odd that. 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? 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.
Also 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?

I attended the public meeting at Whitnash Primary School recently regarding the Local Plan. I have never attended a public meeting before & went with the idea that WDC & our local councillors would be working for the benefit of our community. Unfortunately when I left the meeting & on reading the documents I felt very disillusioned. The lead spokesperson for the council gave a long and drawn out introduction implying that we were all prejudist against the traveller community. I found it offensive, ill advised and very condescending. Where I appreciate all the hard work & effort that council employees put in and I appreciate that the directives regarding The Gypsy & Traveller sites are coming from 10 Downing Street and not Local council I found the attitude of the councils representatives quite staggering. The gentleman representing The Highways Agency had clearly not received any training in how to speak to people. He was interrupted at one point by a lady at the back of the hall who asked a question relevant to the comment he had just made. The gentleman from the Highways agency then lost his temper and threatened not to give us any information if he was interrupted again. I found this to be highly unprofessional and suggest that that gentleman needs to learn the difference between a heckle and a pertinent question. And for the record that lady asked 3 questions, non of them were answered. I was left wondering if this was because she didn't appear to be a councillor.
I also thought I was attending a public meeting but it appeared to be that the vast majority of people who were handed the microphone were councillors. I am very glad they were there but surely this was a place for the general public to have the chance to speak and to ask some questions supported by councillors?
Many people left that meeting about halfway through as they felt their voice was not being heard by the council. I found the whole experience depressing and frustrating. The gentlemen from the council set out their stall as a "you & us" situation and they seem to of forgotten that actually we are all supposed to be on the same side! We are able to understand directives from Downing Street and we should be questioning decisions that are projected onto our lives. Surely this is democracy? That meeting felt like the council had attended just to tick the box and that what they were suggesting should just be signed off. I am truly appalled.
I look forward to receiving the answers to my questions and trust my objections have now been logged.

I am objecting to the gypsy sites surrounding the Bishops Tachbrook area.

Site 3. Very remote from major amenities
Site 4 Very remote from major amenities
Site 5. Access onto a very busy road, no pedestrian access. Potential visual impact on the approach to historic Warwick, putting off tourists.
Site 6. Very remote from main centres and no pedestrian access.
Site 9. Access onto a very busy main road, no pedestrian access. Potential visual impact to approach to historic Warwick, putting off tourists.
Site 10. Close to guide dogs for the blind national breeding centre.
Site 15. Site located on the banks of the tachbrook, so possible contamination if site used for business.

General considerations.

Remoteness. The sites identified in Bishops Tachbrook parish are too remote from the major centres to be suitable for this type of development.
Access. All sites are on very major roads with no pedestrian access.
Undue pressure on infrastructure and services. The school in Bishops Tachbrook is a single form entry. Even small gypsy sites could have many children that the school wouldn't be able to cope with.

Proposed Site for Gypsies and Travellers

I wish to object to the above proposed site - GT04 at Harbury Lane, Fosse Way.

My concerns and comments are as follows:-

a. Access to Local Amenities - the nearest doctor's surgery has NO capacity for the influx of new patients and the nearest primary, junior and secondary schools are already at capacity.
b. Travel - The site is on a high risk travel route with more than 12 serious accidents in the last 3 years! There is currently no bus stop on the Fosse Way and providing one would be unsafe for road users. The Fosse Way is already a busy and dangerous road, with increased Jaguar Landrover traffic.
There is no pavement to walk anywhere and cycling is extremely dangerous on busy commuter routes. Children cannot be allowed to stand on a busy road waiting for transport to school.
c. Rural Environment/Other - The proposed site will have a visual impact from Harbury and Fosse Way.
The proposed site has no mains gas, mains sewerage or drainage.
I am also concerned about the damage to the wildlife and its habitat.
In addition to this, it is a flood risk area often flooding at the end of Middle Road, Harbury Lane and surrounding fields.

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

see attached

SEE ATTACHED

see attached