This site is often subject to surface water flooding and run-off issues in the north west corner, which also floods the road junction between Mallory Road and the B4100.
This road junction also has a high incidence of traffic accidents with 9 occurring in the period 2005-2012. A further 12 incidents have occurred within a 500m stretch in the same period, one of which was fatal. A traveler site at this location with slow moving vans and trailers will increase the risk of traffic accidents on this stretch of road, especially with the increased traffic flow heading to and from the Jaguar Landrover site at Gaydon.
The local primary school is full and could not accommodate the additional children without breaking class size limits. The local school is also a Church of England school and the nearest Catholic school is many miles away.

As a resident of Bishops Tachbrook I must oppose the site at Tachbrook Hill Farm that may be used as a
traveller site.The site
is situated right at the entrance to the village making a very unattractive vista
approaching the village.The site is too close to the village, traveller sites are often also used as a work
base which could be very
noisy.this could also mean lorries entering and exiting what is already a busy and
sometimes dangerous junction.The doctors surgery here is only a small branch surgery that is only open part
time and local schools are already over subscribed,although it was stated that three new schools are being

built to my knowledge none of the sites have yet got planning permission.Houses that are on the Local Plans
favoured sites runs next to the farm field and would doubtless prevent people buying these houses.a rep.from
Blor said
they would object to a traveller site.On top of everything else the owner of said land would not
sell so this would have to be done by compulsory purchase!

I wish to object strongly to the proposed Gypsy and traveller sites in Bishop Tachbrook.
I understood that land cannot be compulsery purchased forgypsy/traveller sites if the landonwer does not wish to sell.I think it is disgustingthat families that do not pay taxes should be given priority over law abiding people for places in local schools.Bishop Tachbrook cannot provide enough places for families already living in the area.
There is not enough doctor facilities for people already living here and we only have one shop!!
The insertion of a gypsy/traveller site will threaten the character of this village which is very special.
The road structure will become chaotic and will collapse

This development would impact upon the rural nature and entrance to Bishops Tachbrook village detrimentally impacting upon the current landscape.
There is no pathway from this site to the village and due to the narrow nature of Mallory road and hazardous Banbury Road this would be impossible to provide. Users of the site would be forced to use cars and access to the bus stop would be dangerous on foot.
Proposed access from the Banbury Road would be on the brow of a hill and dangerously close to a very busy motorway junction. Vehicles towing trailers or caravans into the site would present a risk to themselves and other road users.
The farmer is unwilling to sell the land and compulsory purchase would be the only option.
Mallory Road and parts of this field flood on a regular basis.

Further to visiting the public drop in session & exhibition at the Bishops Tachbrook Sports & Social Club concerning the proposed sites for gypsy & travellers, we would like to object to the following suggested site - GT05.

Our main reasons for objection are -

1. Village's infrastructure unsuitable to cater for further increased population.
2. Road network at proposed site already dangerous & increased traffic onto the Banbury Road
would cause further increased hazards.
3. Appearance of the village & it's local area would be severely altered.
4. Potential increase to crime rates in the village, which is currently very low.
5. Effect of such a site to local house prices (Internet research shows that there is a negative
impact to home valuations when traveller sites are situated nearby).
6. Effect of such a site to local home insurance premiums (Internet research shows that there is
an increase to insurance costs when traveller sites are situated nearby).

From the Preferred Options list, we would like to suggest the following site preferable - GTalt01.

As detailed, this site already has planning permission for a potential caravan site.
This site is situated between Bishops Tachbrook, Barford and Warwick (thus having a less severe impact on any of the individual communities).
It is also near local amenities without causing too much disruption to any the local population.

We hope you can appreciate our points and concerns. We look forward to hearing from you.

Whilst we appreciate that this site is only proposed as an alternative, should the preferred sites not be deliverable, we still consider that the site is entirely unsuitable for such a use and should be removed from the alternative sites list.

The council should instead focus on whether the preferred sites are deliverable.

The rationale for producing the Gypsy and Traveller Site Allocation document is that the Council is required by the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and the Housing Act 2004 to meet the accommodation needs of the population within their area. This includes the needs of the Gypsy and Traveller community and that of Travelling Show People.

The allocation of sites is intended to enable the Council to identify a supply of specific deliverable and developable sites, in accordance with paragraph 9 of the Government's Planning Policy for Traveller Sites. Site GT05 is neither deliverable nor developable.

Undeliverable

According to the Government's Planning policy for traveller sites, to be considered deliverable, sites should be available now, offer a suitable location for development now, and be achievable with a realistic prospect that development will be delivered on the site within five years and in particular that development of the site is viable.

Firstly, the site is not available. The consultation document and Gypsy and Traveller Site Assessment document both state that the site is not available without compulsory purchase. The landowner is objecting to the proposed allocation and will not make the site available for such purpose.

The site is therefore not deliverable without compulsory purchase. There is no indication in the consultation document or supporting evidence base that the council intends to use compulsory purchase powers or have the funds available. There is therefore no evidence sufficient to demonstrate that the site could be delivered within the first five years.

This site was on the list of original sites considered, however, during the Options Consultation, a number of other potential sites were drawn to the Council's attention, on the basis that they were genuinely available. We urge the council to look to those sites which have been put forward for this purpose, ahead of those which are unavailable meaning the council would have to resort to compulsory purchase powers.

Secondly, the site is not in a suitable location which will be discussed in detail below.

Given that the site is unavailable, in an unsuitable location and there is no prospect that the site will come forward within five years, it cannot be considered deliverable.

Undevelopable:

According to the Government's Planning policy for traveller sites, to be considered developable, sites should be in a suitable location for traveller site development and there should be a reasonable prospect that the site is available and could be viably developed at the point envisaged. Given that the site is not available without the use of compulsory purchase powers, and no indication is given in the consultation document or supporting evidence to suggest that the Council have the funds available, the site cannot be considered developable.

As above, the site is not available without compulsory purchase powers, and with no evidence to suggest that the Council have the funds or intentions to do so, there is no realistic prospect of the site being available and viably developed.

Unsuitable

The site is entirely unsuitable for the proposed allocation and land use and be discounted from further consideration. The detailed justification for this is outlined below:

Landscape impact:

The Gypsy and Traveller Site Assessment document identifies that the site is open in part from Banbury Road, but that it could be screened.

However, development of this site would have a significant impact on landscape character due to the height and prominence of the site. It is extremely visible from Mallory Road when entering the village and as a consequence would entirely change the visual aspect of the village from this approach.

The findings of the Gypsy and Traveller Site Assessment are directly contradictory to the Landscape Character Assessment and Green Belt and Greenfield Review undertaken in support of the New Local Plan.

This concluded that development of this site would have a significant impact on the physical form of the village and landscape character.

The Green Belt and Greenfield Review concludes that the parcel of land of which the site forms part (parcel BT4) plays an important role in preserving the open setting of the village from the south.

It identifies the parcel as being part of a generally a very open landscape which is slightly elevated towards the village centre. It is highly visible along the B4087, past breaks in the tree line which would impact negatively on the visual amenity of the. Development would result in a very significant loss of agricultural land. Development would have a potentially significant impact on the
character and identity of Bishop's Tachbrook and reduce the open setting and gateway to the village from the south and therefore have a negative impact on the open setting of a village.

Landscape Character Assessment undertaken in support of the New Local Plan similarly concluded that:

"The existing settlement edge is very prominent in this zone and any further development would exacerbate this and erode the rural character of the zone and the setting of the listed building. Development on the higher ground would be particularly visible and should be avoided."

As a result of these significant negative landscape impacts, the site should be discounted from further consideration.

Sustainability/Connectivity:

There is little potential to connect this proposed new development to the existing village; it would be physically detached from the existing settlement with little opportunity to integrate.

The majority of the existing village services (doctor's surgery, shops, church, sports club, pub) are located within the historic core to the east of the village which is remote from the proposed site. Whilst the primary school is closer to the site, this can only be accessed via the main road. Whilst the number 77 bus passes the site, there is no bus stop and there is no evidence to suggest that occupiers of the site would make use of public transport.

Access to services would be via the A452 or Mallory Road. As a result of the remoteness of the site and poor connectivity, new residents would use local services in the village and would rely on the private car for the majority of journeys.

Highway Safety:

The Gypsy and Traveller Site Assessment document identifies significant access constraints. It does not recommend access either via the existing Tachbrook Hill Farm access not recommended as sited opposite an existing junction or from Mallory Road.

Access would therefore have to be taken from the A452 and it is not recommended any closer to motorway junction meaning it must be to the northwest of Tachbrook Hill Farm access. Potential forward visibility issues are identified in this location due to existing vertical alignment of road, plus the need for traffic calming features.

There are therefore potentially significant and unsurmountable highways issues which ought to be fully understood prior to any allocation of the site.

Environmental Constraints:

The Gypsy and Traveller Site Assessment document identifies a number of environmental constraints which should have resulted in this site being discounted from further assessment at the options stage. Instead the site area has been reduced, however, this has not overcome all of the considerable constraints identified.

It is within a sand and gravel safeguarded area; allocation for a Gypsy and Traveller site would undermine this safeguarding and seriously constrain the ability to access this important resource.

It also identifies that a high pressure gas main crosses land to the south of the farmstead, meaning only the land to the north of the buildings could be developable. Whilst this may be the case it is still not desirable to locate a new residential use in such close proximity as it would prevent future expansion of the site, should this be necessary.

It also identifies potential noise issues form the M40 and A452.

The Sustainability Appraisal which supports the consultation document also identifies that the effects on air, water & soil quality are considered to be major negative in the long term. It identifies loss of the best and most versatile agricultural land, proximity to a main A road with potential for high levels of noise, poor air quality and possibly light pollution. It recommends that a noise assessment is carried out to identify possible noise impacts and suggest appropriate mitigation; no allocation or reserve allocation should be made unless and until this has been carried out and demonstrated that development of the site is suitable.

Allocation of this site would therefore be directly contradictory to the Government's Planning policy for traveller sites. This states at paragraph 11 that
Local planning authorities should ensure that their policies:

"provide for proper consideration of the effect of local environmental quality (such as noise and air quality) on the health and well-being of any travellers that may locate there or on others as a result of new development "

Therefore the site should be should be discounted from further consideration.


Infrastructure:

The Gypsy and Traveller Site Assessment document identifies capacity issues with Bishops Tachbrook Primary School which is usually over-subscribed. The Government's Planning policy for traveller sites states at paragraph 11 that Local Authorities should avoid placing undue pressure on local infrastructure and services.

The Gypsy and Traveller Site Assessment document concludes that the site would be unlikely to be able to connect to public foul mains sewer and would need a non-mains solution. Nearest waterbody for discharge of treated sewage is Tach Brook which is failing in its objectives under Water Framework Directive due to high levels of phosphates and therefore the site is not suitable in terms of potential impact on water environment.

Having reached this conclusion there is no justification for including the site as an alternative site and it should have been discounted from the assessment at the Options stage.

Flooding:

Despite being in flood zone 1, the site ground conditions are very wet meaning infiltration drainage techniques will not be suitable. Development of this site would exacerbate existing surface water flooding issues of residential properties in the vicinity.

Heritage:

Development of this site would have a negative impact on the setting of the Grade 2 listed barn and Historic Farmstead at Tachbrook Hill Farm, as highlighted in the Gypsy and Traveller Site Assessment document and the Sustainability Appraisal.

Site assessment:

The Gypsy and Traveller Site Assessments document, on the detailed site assessment page, does not conclude that the site is suitable. There is no entry in the box 17. Suitable size. The site area reduced from the previous Options Consultation to avoid noise from major roads, high pressure gas main on southern part of site and farm complex, however, no specifics are given suggesting that the outcome of the assessment was that it was unsuitable..

The Gypsy and Traveller Site Assessments document identifies a considerable number of constraints which result in the site being unsuitable. It should therefore have been discounted from further assessment.

This is contrary to the Table of Sites in Summary at the end of the Gypsy and Traveller Site Assessments document which identifies it as "Green".

Detailed assessment of the site suggest that this site is only "Green" on the basis that it is not in the green belt. Whilst sites that have negative constraints which either cannot be overcome, or would require significant changes to overcome have been categorised as red or amber, a green categorisation suggests that the site should be suitable. These are sites where the majority of the criteria can be met and where the site is not in the green belt or is previously developed land or has the support of the landowner. In this instance, the site is neither previously developed nor available; it is a greenfield site which the landowner does not wish to see developed for this purpose and is no more suitable than a comparable green belt site, simply because it lacks the green belt policy designation.

Conclusion:

For the reasons outlined above allocation of this site would have a significant detrimental effect on the landscape, highway safety, and the setting of a listed building. It would place considerable pressure on local infrastructure including the primary school and potentially exacerbate surface water flooding. Significant potential environmental constraints have been identified and it would not represent sustainable development due to poor connectivity to the existing village.

Consequently the site is unsuitable for the proposed allocation. In addition to being unsuitable the site is also unavailable meaning it cannot be considered to be deliverable or developable and should therefore be removed from further consideration.

This site is unsuitable. It is agricultural land and will require compulsory purchase. Access to the site will increase the hazards at the already accident prone junction of Mallory Road and the extremely busy Banbury Road. There is no pedestrian access. The local village school and doctor's surgery are already oversubscribed. There will be an adverse effect on the visual impact for visitors travelling to Warwick from the south. Due to the site's proximity, the spreading of diseases and noise disturbance could adversely affect the dogs at the Guide Dog Centre and the wildlife in Oakley Wood.

This site doe not have safe access to the road network due to its proximity to the Mallory Road/ A452 junction and Junction 13 of M40.
I do not believe that a site here could be integrated into the landscape without harming the approach to Bishop's Tachbrook and the existing character of the village.

Too near the village for harmonious co-existence.
Pressure on small school & surgery as we are already getting 150 more houses.
Owner dos'nt want to sell.
Close to A452 with noise, pollution & safe access issues.

I object to this site due to the situation close to M40 and A452 with the accompanying noise and pollution issues, it would add to the existing traffic problems at a junctions with very bad visibility and previous fatalities. A mobile speed camera is offen stationed opposite this junction thus proving the speed of traffic is excessive. This site would have a disastrous effect on the rural landscape and is a totally unsuitable use of good agricultural land. A compulsory purchase agreement is completely unexceptable for a development to this sort.

This land is currently agricultural land and I believe it has flooded in the recent bad weather. It is a rural area on the outskirts of a village that doesn't have the amenities to support an increased population. The A452 Banbury Rd is already a busy road (with nearby Land Rover at Gaydon) and the junction with Mallory Rd outside this site has already seen a number of accidents. There is no provision for pedestrians.

Site not suitable for Caravans as too close to M40. Precedent set in 1992 when villagers were compensated for noise pollution from the M40. It follows that if there is excessive noise pollution for villagers in houses that the site is unsuitable for caravans as they are less insulated to noise and the site is closer to the M40 than the village. This was over 22 years ago when there was much less traffic so noise levels now are much higher than in 1992.
Aside from the M40 the A452 is now a major commuting route from Warwick and Leamington to the M40 and the Gaydon site for Motor Manufacturers. There have been numerous fatalities on this road including the Mallory Road Junction right next to the site. The proximity of the site to the M40/A452 could introduce the potential of a stray dog, child or horse, the consequences of which would not only be devastating to the travelling community but is a safety hazard for motorists on the M40/A452.
The site is unsuitable for business purposes that are pursued by the travelling community with large vans and lorries.
Village has few resources. Most villagers commute to work.
Doctors surgery is part time and run at capacity. Main full time surgery Croft Medical is in Sydenham and not local.
School is oversubscribed with single form entry and the introduction of the travelling community will have a negative impact on school life as they will take preference over local children within the current catchment area.
Site is remote from employment and facilities.
Limited public transport.
Pedestrian access is dangerous. There is no footpath to reach facilities.
Listed buildings on site in need of protection.
Visual impact would harm the character of the area.
Planning policy states that compulsory purchase orders are to be used as a last resort and this will be required for this site. This site is permanently used for rearing livestock. Removal of the site from the farm will be detrimental to the farmer's livelihood and local employment.
There are other more suitable sites than GT05 (GTalt01, GT02, GT04, GT12, GTalt12 and GT15).
Site is also prone to flooding near the Mallory Road junction and therefore it is not suitable for caravans.

Not suitable. Not owned by the Council, so compulsory purchase would be needed, which could have adverse impact on the farm's viability as a business. Access to the site would make an already dangerous junction (Mallory Road and Banbury road was the site of a fatal road accident) even worse. There could be adverse effects on the Guide Dogs Centre and Oakley Wood. There is no pedestrian access and local facilities (school and Surgery in Bishop's Tachbrook) are already oversubscribed. Adverse visual impact and high noise level from M40 add to site's unsuitability.

We object strongly to this proposed site for the following reasons amongst many:
* It is only 50 metres from a Grade 2 listed barn
* The site important huge historical value
* The land is grade 3 agricultural land and should be kept as farmland
* Land is farmed so plays an important role in local food production and is important for its micro economy.
* With frontage to two major roads, the site would have a massive detrimental effect on the landscape character.
* It would destroy a large natural habitat
* The site is too close in proximity to too many residential properties
* The road and junction are already very busy and dangerous, something else would need to be done to address this
* The proposed land is already prone to flooding so is unsuitable for development. The development would only exacerbate the problem
* The village as it is does not have adequate services and amenities to support development.
* The GP surgery is not big enough
* Children will take priority over others for places at the school, ours will have to travel further afield for their schooling
* The proposal is not deliverable as the landowner is unwilling to sell

Access is an issue being located near a junction noted for high risks of accidents. Infrastructure problems, no mains sewer.
Noise level from M40.
77 bus passes the site but locating a stop near site would be dangerous. Destroying Grade 3 Agricultural land.

1. This site is bound on two sides by busy roads, which are noisy and significantly diminish local air quality. Banbury Road is already a busy access route with heavy goods vehicles and high volumes of commuter traffic. Its junction with Mallory Road has seen a number of major vehicle accidents. Mallory Road is an alternate access route into Leamington Spa. In the proposed new Local Plan both roads are forecast to have yet further increases in traffic flows.
2. This area is prone to flooding, due to water run off from the surrounding fields, especially in the area adjacent to the junction of Mallory Road and Banbury Road.
3. Tachbrook Hill Farm is a listed property and the fields immediately around it are an important part of its curtilage. This Farm is vital to the rural character of the area and the approaches to historic Warwick.
4. Bishop's Tachbrook has poor local amenities, with a part-time doctors surgery, a single form entry primary school and a general store. It is not well served by bus services or other local transport, with limited services during the peak commuter periods.

I object to this site on the following grounds; Proximity to Village Incompatible with wanting to live apart from settled community.
Can school facilitate the children and any special needs alongside the new housing development
A452 is a main arterial route to Gaydon JLR site from making this an extremely busy road especially during morning and evening rush hour.
Good agricultural land. Exit onto the main road will be dangerous.
Compulsory purchase is unfair in order for the G&T community to operate the site as a business.
Not suitable for business use.
School, Local GP already oversubscribed
Cost to taxpayer due to NO infrastructure in place

This would be sited near to a very busy commuter road which would need junction upgrade to support this development.
There are good public services for the current population - they would need to be upgraded to support new families - the plan of increasing school and GP surgery (currently part time)capacity would need to work in conjunction with this development, I haven't seen evidence of this in the plan.
Site is subject to flooding - poor public transport links

The Tachbrook Hill Farm (GTO5) site is part of Bishops Tachbrook, a village that has very limited local amenities. The doctor's surgery is only part time, has a single shop and a poor bus service.
The high volume of commuter traffic onto the B4100 means access can be very difficult especially with the amount of vehicles travelling to and from JLR. There have already been a number of serious accidents and there are likely to be more due to an increase in traffic flow as forecast by the council.
The visual impact would be detrimental having a gypsy/traveller's site on the entrance to the village. Tachbrook Hill Farm is a listed property and the owner does not want to sell the field next to it for the proposed site. This will mean a compulsory purchase order having to be issued.
The field of the proposed site and the Mallory Road/B4100 junction is also well known for flooding in heavy rain.

I feel this site is totally inappropriate for this use as the 2 adjacent roads are not safe for access to the site. The A452 Warwick/Banbury road has poor visibility from both directions, fast approaching traffic from both directions and has been the cause of many accidents at Mallory Road junction over the years, some fatal. Mallory road again has poor visibility along that stretch, being on a slight bend, would be to narrow for long vehicle access and again is subject to fast traffic both entering and leaving the village. There is also no safe pedestrian access to the village as Mallory road is unsafe to walk on on foot at certain times of the day. I have to children both of whom had to walk on the roadside to school and both have been hit by car wing mirrors and both have had to dive for the hedge to save being hit by vehicles not repecting pedestrians.
The site has no infrastructure for any of the three mains services, we are on the edge of the village and are still using a cesspool system.
The village school is not large enough to support the needs of the extra children without even more expansion to the site it stands on.
I am also completely against the use of compulsory purchase which has no benefit to the whole community ie. education, health or other necessary infrastructure, as this is the only use compulsory purchase should be used and I would question the legallity of its use in this case.

Concerns relating to
* Impact on Tach Brook and water quality
* Cost of construction of electricity supply
* Impact on local wildlife habitats - , proximity to habitat for great crested newts
* Safety implications of additional traffic
* Noise from M40 and A452 - potential air quality issues and therefore health issues
* Limited capacity of local schools - oversubscription already at Bishops Tachbrook - sustainable travel access to schools and other services is low
* GP surgery, school and public transport capacity and access
* Safety issues relating to access and increase in vehicular traffic
* Integration into landscape without harming character of area.
* Difficulties integrating into two distinct sections of local community
* Sustainable travel gains from living and working in one place negated by visiting traffic to site.
* Impact on local businesses
* Infrastructure

This area of land is bordered by busy roads, with further increases in traffic forecase due to Local Plan. High volume of commuter and HGV traffic.

The area is frequently flooded as has been seen recently.

Local infrastructure insufficient.

Tachbrook Hill farm is listed and the adjacent fields are very important to its curtilage and provide context to heritage/history of the area, which is constantly being eroded with new housing and roads plans.

This location is wholly unsuitable for development let alone a Gypsy and Traveller site. There are a number of reasons for this. First and foremost it would be harmful to the character and integrity of the village. Bishops Tachbrook is traditionally a small parish and any further development of any kind is detrimental to its charming character. This site is also not suitable for the Gypsy and traveller site owing to the speed in which motorists travel from and to the Banbury road. Whilst it is (I believe) a 50mph limit lowering to a 30mph in the village actual speeds are much higher. There is no suitable footpath for pedestrians therfore this would be hazardous for future intended occupants of the site especially children who would be at risk of serious/fatal accidents when not supervised. The village itself has limited services with only a single convenience store and access via public transport to neighbouring towns is ridiculously in frequent, non existent to Warwick in fact. This land remains one of the few outlying areas for not only draining but also wildlife with many birds residing and nesting in these fields, development would naturally destroy this.

This area is a rural band between Leamington and Bishops Tachbrook. It is currently peaceful, which would change significantly if any gypsy/traveller site settled there. Equally the road infrastructure is already, at times, dangerous and busy. The school in the village is already oversubscribed and the Dr's surgery is only part time. I feel strongly that what is currently a gentle rural idyll would be under threat by any such settlement. Detracting from the historical building and the natural beauty of the area.

Very busy and dangerous road. A site this close to a village with limited village facilities will put more pressure on these services. Also an obvious rural landscape that would be severley affected visually from all angles. Far better options in the plans.

This is NOT a suitable site.
It is green belt agriculture land which is used for farming. Compulsory purchase order should not be used for this purpose.
Bishops Tachbrook school is oversubscribed and at capacity. This would place massive strain on a small single form entry school to accept a large number of children.
There is no footpath to allow the gypsy/traveller children to safely walk to the school.
There is no infrastructure and no scope to add electric/gas/water facilities.
The gp surgery is only available a limited number of hours - it is Not a full time gp service. It is currently difficult to obtain appointment with nurse/gp so it again would put large pressure on surgery.
Again there is no footpath to access the surgery.
There are limited facilities in the village - no post office and only 1 small shop.
Limited bus service and nothing on Sunday's.
The road junction is dangerous - numerous fatal collisions have occurred here. It is a busy junction and will become much worse with the expansion of Gaydon/lighthorne Heath announced by Stratford district council.
It is not suitable for large caravans/trucks turning.
This site is also prone to flooding.
This site is visible to visitors to the area coming from the m40. There is no screening.
This site will not be integrated into the local community.
There are no suitable disposal for industrial waste for business use.
The national breeding centre for guide dogs is very close to this site which would be adversely affected by pollutant run off or the presence of unvaccinated animals.
Oakly wood is an ancient,historic woodland which could be affected by pollution run off from industrial pollutants.
The site also suffers from significant noise pollution from the M40 making it a very noisy site.

Access to the site would be in a 50mph zone therefore I question the safety for vehicles entering & leaving the site. There is also no footpaths to the village so potential dangers for families going to the school / doctors.

Though Bishops Tachbrook has a GP surgery it is only a part-time one. The school is a single form entry. This area is known to flood regularly.
The Banbury Road is extremely busy, with an increasingly high volume of commuter traffic. There have been several serious accidents at the junction with Mallory Road, and it is incredibly dangerous at times, to turn right from the Mallory Rd towards Warwick.
There would be a high noise from this busy road, and from the very busy M40 which is only a short distance away.
A Traveller site here could not be incorporated into the landscape without harming the character of the area. Tachbrook Hill Farm is a listed property and the fields immediately around it are crucial to the atmosphere and charm of the Farm.

This would be awful for our village, there is a better solution.

Gtalt01
I make the following comments on this site.
* It has previously been granted planning permission as a touring caravan site which is a similar use in many respects to the proposed use as a gypsy and traveller site for permanent residence, and therefore with careful adaption it can conceivably be suitable for the proposed purpose.
* Re-engineering of the highway has been completed already allowing the site to be established quickly to help deal with the need identified.
* With appropriate screening this site can be established without causing a high visual impact. This is particularly important when considering the historic setting of Warwick Castle and also that this route into historic Warwick is not compromised.
* There is access on foot into Warwick which offers a range of services and amenities, adding to the site's sustainability, however the footpath would need to be improved to provide pushchair and wheel chair access.

GT15
I object to this site being considered as a gypsy and traveller site, for the following reasons:
* Whilst sight lines appear adequate, constructing as safe access for large articulated vehicles onto the very busy Europa Way will be expensive.
* It is proposed that Europa Way will be widened into a dual carriageway. This is likely to reduce the usable area of the proposed site.
* The establishment of vehicular access and hard-standings for park homes and the storage of touring caravans with require the removal of significant amounts of the existing vegetation. This will open up views into the site from both the historic footpath from Bishop's Tachbrook to Warwick and also from the proposed Country Park, south of Harbury Lane. This will create negative visual impacts across the rural landscape of the Tachbrook Valley.
* There will be an unknown impact on the ecology of the Tachbrook which is an important wildlife corridor linking with the Avon.

Alternative Options

GT05
I believe this site should be removed from any further consideration as a site for development as a permanent gypsy and traveller site, for the following reasons.
* A safe access cannot be constructed from the Banbury Road onto the site. This is a fast road with adequate site lines and is has a poor record for accidents.
* There is not adequate access on foot to village amenities.
* The owner is known to be unwilling to sell and I do not support compulsory purchase in these circumstances, for the reasons given below.
* This site has high landscape value according the resent WCC Landscape Ecology and Geology report completed on behalf of the District Council in support of the New Local Plan process and therefore it would be wrong for this to be developed
* The site is highly visible from a long section of Banbury Road and also Mallory Road
* There are potential negative impacts on the listed Tachbrook Hill Farm House and also Greys Mallory house.


GT06
I also believe this site should be removed from any further consideration as a gypsy and traveller site.
* It is rated as amber and therefore has a number of unresolved issues associated with it.
* Both the owner of the proposed site, and the owner of the adjacent site that could provide access are known to be unwilling to sell. Therefore compulsory purchase would be required which I object to in principle for the reasons given below but also because CPO would be a long and lengthy route to acquisition of the site, delaying significantly the delivery of the pitches required.
* The proposed site has a very open aspect and therefore would create a visual impact on the route into historic Warwick
* There is no suitable access onto the site. The creation of the access will exacerbate visual impact and require the removal of a significant length of hedgerows damaging the natural habitat for animals and plants.
* There is no access on foot to key services and amenities. The nearest bus stop is 1/2 mile away but there is not footpath meaning residents would have to walk to the bus stop along a busy road. Therefore this site is not sustainable.
Compulsory Purchase
I object to the use of a CPO to acquire any site against the owner's wishes, for the following reasons:
* The CPO process is long and protracted. This will lead to a long delay in making the necessary pitches available.
* It seems to me that it is immoral, oppressive and draconian that a private owner of a piece of land can be forced to sell that land to the district council so that it can then be sold onto a landlord for commercial gain. CPO should be reserved only for infrastructure projects that are critical for a region or sub region.
Proposed Operating Model
* Any site that is delivered for permanent use by gypsy and travellers should either be operated by the district council or a specialist housing association. The district's intension sell sites onto private landlords for their operation is a high risk strategy and is not acceptable, because the resolution of any poor practices or planning breaches would be long and protracted and would lead to tension arising will the local settled community and this would undermine the district's objectives.