Dear Sir/Madam,

I writing to you on behalf of my client, Shell, who wish to lodge a formal objection following information that a permanent gypsy & traveller site has been proposed on the land off Birmingham Road, Budbrooke Warwick (next to the Shell service station). I believe this site is known as GT19 for the purpose of this process.

The basis of the objection is that there have been previous incidents with travellers at the Shell Birmingham Road site which have caused genuine concern among staff and customers. There have been reported incidences of theft and damage at the site and on one occasion staff on site had to lock themselves inside the property. The police have been called out on multiple occasions following these incidents. As there is an obvious track record of problems with travellers at this site I would feel it would be inappropriate to authorise a gypsy/traveller site in such close proximity to the Shell station.

Please confirm receipt of my email as I understand this is the final day for objections.

Details of objection:

1. ROAD SAFETY AND CONGESTION
* Dangerous stretch of highway (several fatal accidents over the last 5 years)
* 40mph speed limit not adhered to, hence creating high risk for children crossing the road to and from school etc
* Previous planning applications by the owner of Oaklands Farm have been refused because of the heightened risk to road users
2. CANAL
* High risk to children, particularly those not supervised
* Narrow boats (holidaymakers, will cease to park up close by, creating an impact on local businesses)
* Bird spotters, anglers, picnickers, walkers, runners, cyclists will avoid the area close to the gypsy site

3. HUGE IMPACT ON THE NATURAL AND HISTORIC ENVIRONMENT
* 'Stairway to Heaven', well known and popular visitor attraction and has historic canal heritage - detrimental to it's heritage!
* Gypsy site will seriously affect local tourism
* Fear of crime
* Threat to peaceful 'way of life'. It is not racist to state that gypsy camps frequently cause an increase in crime and mess. It is a statement of fact. (Mail Online, January 2009).
* Poor street lighting

4. BAD IMAGE TO VISITORS
* Eyesore on approach to Warwick, sending out bad vibes to visitors as it is in full view on the approach to the historic town of Warwick
* Loose/dangerous dogs from the travellers may wander onto the road/canal, frightening people and causing accidents

5. HEALTH RISKS
* High risk of harmful emissions to those residing in caravans with pollutants from petrol station and the road - National News - avoid developments within 100m of a petrol station/dangers of combining road pollution - fatal cancer in children and the elderly
* Potential risk of Weils disease if living conditions allow the spread of vermin, which is possible from the storage of food etc
* Noise level from 24 hour garage (lack of sleep etc)
* Warwick already suffers from pollution levels above European Guidelines on safety

6. LOSS OF GREENBELT
* Endangering wildlife, (Kingfishers, water voles, protected slow-worms and grass snakes etc) arable productivity and visual amenity
* Greenbelt cannot be replaced
* Inappropriate development
7. RISK OF FLOODING
* Flood plain on road adjacent to Oaklands Farm and with proposal of additional housing at Hatton Park this is likely to worsen
* Ditches overflow by Ugly Bridge - not suitable for a settlement
* Mouchel Report compiled for Warwick District Council April 2013 states "avoid development near canals as they can be at risk from flooding".
8. INFRASTRUCTURE
* Local stores limited in range of produce and higher in cost
* Local school is at capacity. (Also consider walking distance to local school, doctors etc)
* Doctor's surgery is currently a full patient load (Again walking distance)
* Roads not able to sustain heavy/additional vehicles without thousands of pounds being spent

9. DEMOGRAPHIC
* Strong possibility that travellers will exceed the total number of residents in the immediate vicinity of Birmingham Road and will spread rapidly, hence taking over the area
10. EGRESS
* Entry to and from site poses risks to pedestrians and motorists as not suitable due to the high volume of traffic in the area and the movement of gypsy and travellers vans, caravans etc will increase these risks
* Ugly bridge will require maintenance and support
11. RAILWAY EMBANKMENT
* Unsupervised children climbing the railway embankment and the nearby railway bridge will be an accident waiting to happen (just like the canal)
I trust that the above objections will be taken into serious consideration and I look forward to receiving updates at the earliest possible convenience. However, please also consider the cost to the general public of setting up this site, is this what we are paying our council tax for? Will the gypsy and travellers be paying council tax? and if not, why not! Regards.

Dear Sirs,

In response to the proposal to create a new site for the travelling community at Oaklands Farm on the Birmingham Road, we object for the following reasons:

Lack of infrastructure
Although the area around Hatton Park does have a bus service, this only runs once per hour and not at all on Sundays. Such a poor service will hardly encourage travellers to use public transport in order to get into Warwick or Leamington, with the result that they will either drive or travel on foot along a busy road (A4177), having to cross the A46 roundabout in the process, adding to local congestion.

Hatton Park has one small, local shop to service the residents. It is not adequate and will struggle to cope with any influx of new residents.

The local school at Ferncumbe is already oversubscribed, with the result that local children are unable to be accepted. It is obviously highly desirable for all local children to receive an education, but many of the local schools are unable to cope with present numbers, let alone with an increase in numbers. Apparently expansion has been explored and found to be impossible so where will any new children be schooled?

Likewise the local hospital is already at full capacity with no further room for expansion. It would find it very difficult to cope with an additional group of people with their own needs, including maternity care, health visits, etc. There is no dentist or GP surgery at Hatton Park at present so any new residents will be forced to turn towards Warwick, where services are already strained.

There are no other amenities on Hatton Park for new residents to use, which scarcely seems to fulfil the criteria set out for the travelling community.

Road safety
The proposed site at Oaklands Farm is right beside a main road (A4177), plus it is sited fairly close to a bend in the road and close to existing access points to the Shell garage and the turn into the lane leading to Ugly Bridge. The road becomes extremely busy, particularly at rush hour, and these points are already under heavy pressure. The road will struggle to support the additional traffic here. Access for large, slow-moving trailers will be particularly poor and lead to an increased risk of accidents.

In addition, any children located on this proposed site will be right beside a busy road, which they will have to cross to reach Hatton Park or walk along in order to reach Warwick. The danger of accidents will rise accordingly.

Canal safety
The proposed site at Oaklands Farm is right beside the canal. In fact, the site is penned in between the main road and the canal. Again, if children are present on the site then they will inevitably be attracted to the area beside the canal when playing and this will involve a greater risk of accidents and potential drownings.

Impact on local community
Apparently the council has already objected to the existing site and its current use as a farm. Whilst most of its activities seem to be entirely in keeping with a rural/agricultural way of life, it appears that some objections have been raised to some aspects. If the farm is converted into a site for travellers, surely this will only worsen matters. The travellers will need to work and to use this land for their employment, which will in all likelihood be more industrial than the existing fairly rural activities and which will inevitably have some impact on the surrounding area and the appearance of the site.

We will have little control over any environmental impact on a beautiful amenity in the form of the canal. It is very heavily used both by locals and visitors, especially in summer and fine weather. Any deterioration in the visual appearance of Oaklands Farm will have a huge impact on the attractiveness of the canalside and towpaths, resulting in a reduction in the numbers of visitors to the stretch and making use of the facilities such as the cafe and the pub.

The countryside should generally be protected from changes which will have such a huge impact on the natural and historic features of the community. The canal in particular will be seriously affected by such a change in its intended use, and this will have serious repercussions further up the canal towards the Hatton Arms & visitor centre if it is allowed.

The development will have a particularly serious impact on the local houses and roads leading towards the junction for Warwick Parkway. The small cluster of houses on the roadside near Oaklands Farm will be in serious danger of being taken over by the travellers' site. The new site will be separated from the existing houses by only one small field and there must be a huge risk of danger of encroachment with such a small buffer between the two plots, in addition to noise pollution from any activities carried out by the travelling community which will be to the detriment of the current residents. The size of the proposed site will unfortunately overpower the small number of houses in their community.

Finally, although relevant information is available on your website, it is difficult to find. At first, we were unable to find any guidance on how best to register our views, or an indication of any criteria which will be used to evaluate each individual site. Generally, there appears to be a lack of disclosure or transparency in the procedure which we find immensely frustrating since we are very proud of our community and want to be actively involved in its future development.

I wish to register my objection to the traveller sites across South Warwickshire as I believe that the local community will be seriously impacted due to the excess cars, caravans etc

Dear Mr Elliott,

We write with reference to the consultation for gypsy and traveller sites currently taking place.

We have considered the potential sites that have been put forward by the Council. We are extremely concerned by the inclusion of Kite's Nest Lane as a possible site (GT13). AS you are undoubtedly aware, this site has been the subject of two planning applications for use as a Gypsy and Traveller site. WDC have now decided twice that development of this site is inappropriate. The Secretary of State has also deemed it unsuitable for any form of development of this kind; even one Gypsy pitch would be inappropriate.

This site is in Green Belt: it is therefore inappropriate development. The site has been found not to be in keeping with its surroundings, which is open countryside. It is down a narrow country lane, with no footpaths or easy access to a main road network. These, and many other reasons, which have been discussed in detail at two Planning Inquiries, make it completely unsuitable. Of equal concern, however, is the fact that this site has been included at all. Significant resource has been expended by WDC already and the site has now, on two separate occasions, been found to be unsuitable. It is clear to us, therefore, that the Kites Nest Lane site should not be under consideration at all and we suggest it is withdrawn immediately and object in the strongest terms to any form of development there.

We believe that WDC should be looking outside of the Green Belt for all of its sites. However, we understand that a large part of the District is Green Belt. If it is not possible to identify enough sites outside of the Green Belt, we would suggest using Green Belt sites which have already had buildings on them. An example of this given in the consultation would be the Oaklands Farm site (GT19).

We have commented on the sites with which we are familiar and given reasons as to why we feel these would be suitable below.

GT15: This site is close to amenities and could easily be landscaped to integrate into its surroundings. It would be possible to provide appropriate access to the site.

GT17 and GT18: Taken together these two sites would provide a substantial number of pitches. This land has previously had buildings on it for many years and could easily be converted to providing Gypsy pitches without burdening Warwickshire Green Belt with additional development. They have good access to the main road network, which we believe is a requirement of the Gypsies and Travellers. Utilities will already be set up and these sites are close to Warwick town for access to services. Several houses lie along the A46 so clearly there would be no noise issues and the current design of the land means there is plenty of room for pulling on to and off the sites (there may even be slip roads already in place).

GT20: This site would provide excellent access to main roads and would be large enough to provide substantial integration of a Gypsy site into the landscape. A significant number of pitches could be created here, allowing Gypsies the chance to live in their extremely large family groups, as they often wish to.

Despite the positive features of these four sites, we still feel that land outside of the Green Belt should be the focus of this search. WDC has stated previously that any Gypsy Site allocations it makes do not necessarily have to be in Green Belt and we would urge WDC to carefully consider its position with regards to protecting the Warwickshire Green Belt. Indeed, the Secretary of State has recently announced his intentions to further protect Green Belt from Gypsy and Traveller developments and WDC should also be looking to safeguard its Green Belt from any kind of development.

We can confirm that this as our formal response to the consultation, and trust that WDC will consider this as appropriate.

I am writing to register an objection against the below consultations to develop the land surrounding Hatton Park for building houses and a gypsy site. Specifically:

R115 relating to the land behind Tidmington, Combroke, Ebrington.
R125 & R25 relating to Oakland's Farm, next to the Shell garage, where not only are they looking to this land for building houses but this location has also been designated as a proposed gypsies site.

My husband will be attending the planned meeting at Hampton Magna village Hall.

Should you require any further information please let me know.

We are opposed to the above (A) on the following grounds:

1. Property prices in the immediate vicinity will decrease - we would not have moved here if there had already been a gypsy site;
2. There will be an increase in crime;
3. The site will look unsightly;
4. There will be noise and extra traffic.

We are opposed to the above (B) on the following grounds:

1. When we moved here, we were assured that the land in question would not be built on and this was reiterated at a Parish meeting in 2011;
2. Building here would spoil the countryside and particularly for those whose homes overlook the site;
3. Increase in traffic.

I trust you will give these comments full consideration when making your decision.

I am writing to register an objection against the below consultations to develop the land surrounding Hatton Park for the building of houses and a gypsy site. Specifically:

R115 relating to the land behind Tidmington, Combroke, Ebrington.
R125 & R25 relating to Oakland's Farm, next to the Shell garage, where not only are they looking to this land for building houses but this location has also been designated as a proposed gypsies site.

My objection is based on a number of issues: Safety: the road infrastructure cannot cope with the current traffic levels with fatalities having already taken place over the past few years on the stretch of road involved. Amenities: local amenities such as schools are already full to bursting. Environmental: The area already floods during winter, the local wildlife will be impacted upon as a number of animals including bats inhabit the woods close to the sites. And lastly, I believe that the Government paper which calls for local councils to provide traveller pitches also states that settled communities should not be impacted upon, which clearly they would be.


Should you require any further information please let me know.

Dear Sir/Madam,

Please find below my various representations with regard to the proposed site options.

In line with the report I wish to make representations on a number of points as detailed below.

1. Introduction

No comment

2. Background

No comment

3. Who are Gypsies and Travellers?

No comment

4. What are the Issues?

No comment

5. Policy Background

SUPPORT

National policy is correct in advocating that (1) local planning authorities work together to identify sites and (2) that decision-taking protects Green Belt from inappropriate development and makes enforcement more effective.

On Point (1) it is therefore extremely worrying that Warwick District Council (WDC) is no longer working with other authorities to consider plans on a cross-authority basis, which it has a duty to do under the 2011 Localism Act. On point (2) WDC makes no distinction between Green Belt and non-Green Belt sites in its policy criteria so again contradicts national policy.

6. Evidence Base

No comment

7. Local Plan Requirements

OBJECT

The policy criteria listed by WDC are sensible.

However they omit crucial aspects of national guidance including (1) that plan-making and decision-taking should protect Green Belt from inappropriate development and (2) sites must be in appropriate locations. Why?

There is also the fact that WDC is no longer working on a cross-authority basis to provide sites. Again, why when much of WDC is covered by Green Belt (80%)? Surely by definition travellers are nomadic and the requirement for pitches should not be restricted to Warwick District?

8. Identification of Potential Sites

OBJECT

Section 8.1 is inadequate. WDC should list all sites within it's ownership and explain why it considers each site to be unacceptable.

Section 8.3, in which WDC is seeking to identify sites itself is a total dereliction of its duty under the 2011 Localism Act. WDC contains a high proportion of Green Belt and the Council should be looking to share supply of sites in appropriate locations with other authorities.

Site listing criteria should distinguish first whether locations are appropriate according to national and local planning policy. This is a planning document and land ownership (and willingness to sell) should not be a concern due to CPO powers.

9. Sites for consideration and comment
10. Table of Sites

GT01 Land adjacent to the Colbalt Centre, Siskin Drive

No Comment

GT02 Land abutting the Fosse Way at its junction with the B425

No comment

GT03 Land at Barnwell Farm

No comment

GT04 Land at Harbury Lane, Fosse Way

No comment

GT05 Land at Tachbrook Hill Farm

No comment

GT06 Land at Park Farm, Spinney Farm

No comment

GT07 Land at Stoneleigh Road

No comment

GT08 Depot to the west side of Cubbington Hill Farm

No comment

GT09 Land to the north east of M40

No comment

GT10 Land at Tollgate House and Guide Dogs National Breeding Centre

No comment

GT11 Land at Budbrooke Lodge, Racecourse and Hampton Road

No comment

GT12 Land north and west of Westham Lane (area of search)

No comment

GT13 Kites Nest Lane, Beausale

OBJECT

Kites Nest Lane, Beausale is totally inappropriate as a site for this purpose because:

1. It is a greenfield site in the open countryside within the Green Belt and any use for this purpose (or residential etc) is inappropriate development. The National Planning Policy Framework protects the Green Belt from inappropriate development.

2. Adopting it as a possible site would legitimise the long-running unauthorised applications to impose this illegal use at this site. WDC has rightly objected to such applications (although achieved nothing in removing the illegal settlement) and allowing development through this process would set an extremely damaging precedent in this and other areas that will attract significant public disapproval. National policy supports effective enforcement against unauthorised developments.

3. Access to local services is limited.

4. Its rural location means that this use cannot be integrated in the landscape without harming the character and amenity of the area in terms of aesthetic appearance and noise.

GT14 Warwick Road, Norton Lindsey

No comment

GT15 Land east of Europa Way

No comment

GT16 Land to north of Westham Lane and west of Wellesbourne Road, Barford (small site)

No comment

GT17 Service area west of A46 Old Budbrooke Way

No comment

GT18 Service area east of A46 Old Budbrooke Way

No comment

GT19 Land off Birmingham Road, Budbrooke, Oaklands Farm

OBJECT

Land at Oaklands Farm, Birmingham Road is totally inappropriate as a site for this purpose because:

1. It is in the Green Belt and any use for this purpose (or residential etc) is inappropriate development. The National Planning Policy Framework protects the Green Belt from inappropriate development.

2. Access to the road network is not safe - Birmingham Road is 2-way and heavily congested, particularly during peak times. There was a fatal traffic accident immediately outside the proposed site in 2010.

3. It is adjacent to the Grand Union Canal running locally between Warwick and Hatton offering views of Warwick Castle and St Nicholas Church.

As stated on numerous websites including Hatton Parish Council, the Canal & River Trust and Enjoy Warwick, (to name but a few), Hatton is home to one of the most picturesque spots on the Grand Union Canal.

The famous Hatton Flights, otherwise known as "The Stairway to Heaven" contains 21 locks in less than two miles, raising or dropping the Grand Union Canal by 146.5 feet. They are an excellent example of original and recent canal engineering providing two hundred years of waterways history at a key location on the Grand Union canal.

As part of a Heritage Lottery Funded Working Boats Project, a pair of restored working boats that once worked this route are moored on the Hatton Flights. A recent Heritage Lottery funded project has also made some of the local history available to visitors through information panels, leaflets, a family wildlife trail along the Hatton Flights, education packs and picnic benches.

This is a very popular towpath for boaters, walkers, runners and cyclists alike whose amenity will be greatly impacted by the occupation/development of this site.

Its location will further impact on the visual amenity of the Grand Union Canal.

4. The site may be prone to flooding due to its location next to a water network.

GT20 Land at Junction 15 of M40

No comment

Do you have any other suggestions for land within this district that you think would be suitable for use as a Gypsy and Traveller site?

No comment

I look forward to receiving your comments and trust that the Council will make a well informed and well researched decision when it comes to sites to be considered in greater detail.

see attached

Gypsy & Travelers sites

I have considered this consultation and agree that Warwick District Council needs to address the matter and identify suitable sites. Rather than consider all the available sites, because each will have a local context I have considered the 6 sites that WDC has identified that are nearest to and that would impact on my parish and its residents.

These are our views:

* Budbrooke Lodge [Site gt11] although this area sometimes floods, it has particularly good access to local shops and Warwick town centre, by public transport [bus stop adjacent to Budbrooke Lodge] and reasonable access to the main arterial roads. Servicing the site will be potentially low cost. Not sure if this is green belt site.
* Norton Lindsey [site gt14] is green belt, outside main development, dangerous location on a busy road, no public transport, not easy access to infrastructure /facilities.
* A46 [sites gt17 & gt18]- green belt, outside main development, particularly dangerous location on bypass, considerable air and noise quality issues, no public transport, not easy access to infrastructure /facilities
* Oaklands farm [site gt19] access is an issue identified by Warwickshire Highways Authority on numerous planning applications, proximate to canal so would impact on tourist, walkers and canal users, dangerous access on Birmingham Road and Ugly Bridge Road, both busy roads, loss of greenbelt, previous refusal because of business needs & hazardous sites.
* Watery Lane [site gt20] is green belt, outside main development, particularly dangerous location on bypass A46, M40, and Junction 15, considerable air and noise quality issues, no public transport, not easy access to infrastructure /facilities it floods.

The Local Plan
I have carefully considered the paper by Ray Bullen, which was supported by Rural Parish Councils, and the response from WDC on 18th July 2013. I regard the overall estimated residential development growth in the Local Plan to be significantly out of proportion to the local need; unrealistically high and untenable.

The District Council as failed to acknowledge, address or take account any of the issues identified in Budbrooke Parish Council's response to the first consultation in this second document. [1]

In respect to development in Budbrooke:
* All proposed development is in the green belt and there are no special reasons for using the green belt [reference: NPPF 2012 development in green belt is inappropriate.]
* Taking land out of green belt for development, I.e. re-drawing green belt boundaries, is tantamount to a gross misapplication of NPPF 2012. To do so is not a special reason.
* Loss of green belt will mean a loss of prudent use of land potential loss of value to special/ high landscape value
* Identifying potential sites in green belt, when there is other unused land outside the green belt and outside the local plan, constitutes a breach of NPPF 2012, referenced above.
* Budbrooke Parish Plan has not identified any significant demand for development locally.
* Hampton Magna is surrounded by high grade agricultural land
* Negative effects on strategic siting such as increased levels of traffic
* Air, Light & noise pollution will increase especially in the construction phase
* Presence of Railway will be a nuisance to potential development

People live here because they like the area, any development, and in particular an up to 25% increase, will have a significant impact on the nature and locality. This issue must be considered as it has previously been accepted by WDC in its dealings with other councils.

Capacity of the Infrastructure
Hampton Magna was built on the site of an army barracks in 1960s to the standards that prevailed at that time. Little or no improvement has been made since the site was first built on, and none since I came here in 1979.
* Minor cosmetic road improvements were made to accommodate a substantial increase to traffic due to the building of Warwick Parkway Station. Car parking since originally built has increased 3 fold with no change to roads or traffic management.
* Consequently, traffic is already extremely heavy. Approaches - Birmingham Road, Old Budbrooke Road, Woodway, Church Hill and roads to Hatton via Ugly Bridge, and through Hampton on the Hill. Any additional development will have a considerable negative impact on roads and traffic
* Traffic issues have not been addressed or even assessed
* Sewage arrangements is a major concern of the PC - Although adopted, prior to privatisation the system falls below the standard normally required.
* The main local electricity supply arrangements area the same as those for the barracks which left nearly 50 years ago. Supplies into the village are subject to frequent fluctuations and outages.

Budbrooke School, with only around 50% children resident in Hampton Magna, already draws traffic from surrounding areas -Hatton, Hatton Park, and Chase Meadow - and the county lanes are increasingly congested and hazardous. Increasing the size of the school to accommodate the 25% increase increases the congestion and hazard, and fails to address the Green Agenda unless additional resource is allocated in the current catchment areas, which idea has been discounted.

Sustainability
The argument that additional development will help address the sustainability of local facilities and services is flawed. There is no evidence is provided to show that this would be the case.

Without the publication of specific sites. I can make little assessment of the local internal impact of any development other than to state that in my judgment all development will have a significantly high negative affect on the community and community facilities. I challenge the council to draw up any development plan that doesn't have a negative effect on residents.

Budbrooke Parish Council has considered this consultation and agrees that Warwick District Council needs to address the matter and identify suitable sites. Rather than consider all the available sites, because each will have a local context the council has considered the 6 sites that WDC has identified that are nearest to and that would impact on the parish and its residents.

These are our views:

* Budbrooke Lodge [Site gt11] although this area sometimes floods, it has particularly good access to local shops and Warwick town centre, by public transport [bus stop adjacent to Budbrooke Lodge] and reasonable access to the main arterial roads. Servicing the site will be potentially low cost. Not sure if this is green belt site.
* Norton Lindsey [site gt14] is green belt, outside main development, dangerous location on a busy road, no public transport, not easy access to infrastructure /facilities.
* A46 [sites gt17 & gt18]- green belt, outside main development, particularly dangerous location on bypass, considerable air and noise quality issues, no public transport, not easy access to infrastructure /facilities
* Oaklands farm [site gt19] access is an issue identified by Warwickshire Highways Authority on numerous planning applications, proximate to canal so would impact on tourist, walkers and canal users, dangerous access on Birmingham Road and Ugly Bridge Road, both busy roads, loss of greenbelt, previous refusal because of business needs & hazardous sites.
* Watery Lane [site gt20] is green belt, outside main development, particularly dangerous location on bypass A46, M40, and Junction 15, considerable air and noise quality issues, no public transport, not easy access to infrastructure /facilities it floods.

Summary, if any of these sites are chosen Budbrooke Parish Council would support GT11.

Dear Sir or Madam,

1. I write to object to the proposals to allocate sites for Gypsies and Travellers set out in the Gypsy and Traveller Site Options document (June 2013). In particular options GT19 (land adjacent to Shell Petrol Filling Station, Birmingham Road, Budbrooke, Warwick) and GT14 (Kite's Nest Lane Beausale).

2. The Preferred Option (PO7) to help meet the needs of Gypsies and Travellers set out in Warwick District Council's Local Plan Preferred Options document (May 2012) sets out the criteria to be used to bring forward sites for Gypsies and Travellers:

* Convenient access to a GP surgery, school, and public transport;
* Avoiding areas with a high risk of flooding;
* Safe access to the road network and provision for parking, turning and servicing on site;
* Avoiding areas where there is the potential for noise and other disturbance;
* Provision of utilities (running water, toilet facilities, waste disposal, etc);
* Avoiding areas where there could be adverse impact on important features of the natural and historic environment; and,
* Sites which can be integrated into the landscape without harming the character of the Area.

3. Para 8.5 of the Sites for Gypsies and Travellers document (June 2013) states ..."The Council has considered where the most sustainable sites for this purpose would be given the criteria listed". However, no evidence that the sites satisfactorily meet these criteria is given. I do not consider, therefore, that this is a fair, transparent and accessible consultation.

4. I do not consider that the options offer convenient access to a GP's surgery, school nor public transport and I have concerns over the safe access to the road network particularly in relation to option GT19 given the additional trips and type of trips/movements that would be generated by this option.

5. Policy B: Planning for Traveller Sites, para 11(f) of Planning Policy for Traveller sites (March 2012) states that Local Planning Authorities should ensure that traveller sites are sustainable economically, socially and environmentally and that Local Planning Authorities should, ensure that their policies avoid placing undue pressure on local infrastructure and services.

6. Warwickshire is experiencing a significant growth in pupil numbers and demand for places is currently outweighing availability. Notably, in 2012, there was a consultation on proposals to increase the Published Admission Number (PAN) of The Ferncumbe CE Primary School from and to re-allocate the Hatton Park development across the priority areas for Budbrooke Primary School and The Ferncumbe CE primary School to help the Local Authority to meet its statutory duty to ensure a sufficiency of places. Without these changes, children from the Hatton Park development could have to travel some considerable distance to secure a school place and a large number of 'in-area' children will be unable to secure admission to their priority school.

7. I consider that the options will, therefore, place undue pressure on local infrastructure and services - particularly local schools and the road network and particularly when there is an additional 70-90 additional dwellings on Hatton Park proposed in Warwick District Council's Revised Development Strategy (June 2013).

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 Development Policy Manager or to whomever it may concern,

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 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.
- 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 would appreciate it if could confirm receipt of this email and my objection. Many thanks.

Dear Warwick DC Planning

I strongly object to the proposed development of the Kites Nest Lane site for permanent use by gypsies and travellers. I emailed my objection in January 2013 and my opinions are the same as then:

'I am completely opposed to this application for retrospective planning permission at Kites Nest Lane, Beausale, Warwick. This site is a green field site and should therefore not be developed. Since the arrival of the applicants this site has become an unsavoury eyesore and a blight on our community and environment.'

I also wish to express my strong objection to the proposed development of the site on the land adjacent to the Shell Petrol filling station on the Birmingham Road for the same reasons. I am aware that this is not a green field site at present however its use is commensurate with its rural location. The address for the Birmingham Road site is Budbrooke however this land is located opposite Hatton Park, before the first turning into the development.

Hatton Park and the properties on the Birmingham Road are owner occupied,they are well maintained and this is considered a very good area to live. If gypsies and travellers were permitted to live so close to our properties this would have a detrimental affect on property prices and the appeal of the area. It would not be possible to drive up the Birmingham Road towards Hatton Park without passing a travellers' site.

There is already pressure on the Birmingham Road and any new residents, travellers or otherwise, would only increase this pressure. There is no local GP practice or school.

Gypsies and travellers have no connection with this area and should not be permitted to live on these sites either now or in the future.

I am extremely dismayed that there has been another appeal allowed on the Kites Nest Lane site and trust the council will listen to Warwickshire residents who pay their taxes and take part in elections. Please listen and preserve the beautiful area that is Hatton Park and the environs.

see attached

see attached

see attached

see attached

see attached

see attached

see attached

see attached

see attached

see attached

see attached

see attached

see-attached

see-attached