Warwick District Council

Gwrthwynebu

Gypsy and Traveller Site Options

ID sylw: 54809

Derbyniwyd: 24/06/2013

Ymatebydd: Mr Andrew Cruise

Crynodeb o'r Gynrychiolaeth:

Hampton Road site is unsuitable as it would involve a CPO and has no services available driving up costs. The site is too big and there's a risk that an unauthorised number of travellers willlocate there. There is land at Kites Nest that is owned by travellers and they have expressed a desire to stay there.
Newburgh and other schools in the vicinity are over subscribed and could not accommodate children from the travellers' It could not accommodate travellers additionally.
Chase Meadow is still being developed and there are more homes to be built which will exacerbate strain on local facilities.
Council has other sites that are suitable identified in the consultation.
Locating a traveller site on the Hampton Road could devalue homes on Chase Meadow for which there would be no compensation. This could force many into negative equity and be socially irresponsible. potential sites make this outcome unnecessary.
Other sites would provide services required for the travellers but would not have such a negative impact on the local community. A smaller number would be likely to object and this would provide a fairer and more reasonable outcome.
Disproportionate number of proposed sites in the south around Warwick. Why have alternative sites in the north not been considered?
Local plan includes large scale building of houses, new schools and other key facilities to the South of Warwick. Locating the travellers' site there would make far more sense as the local facilities could be planned with the required additional capacity in mind.

Testun llawn:

Please accept and acknowledge this email as a formal objection to council proposals to site travelle...

Please accept and acknowledge this email as a formal objection to council proposals to site traveller sites near to Chase Meadows estate in Warwick. The sites I am objecting to are listed as numbers GT11 GT17 and GT20.
Please respond in writing addressing all of the points of objection that I have raised individually. Please can you also confirm the process, criteria and scoring/weighting you will apply in selecting the location for traveller sites?
Summary of initial grounds for objection:
1. The Hampton Road site is unsuitable as it would involve a compulsory purchase order and has no services available at present which will drive up costs. The site is also far too big and there's a real risk that an unautorised number of travellers will seek to locate there. There is land at Kites Nest that is owned by travellers and they have expressed a desire to stay there.
2. Newburgh school and other schools in the immediate vicinity are already over subscribed and could not accommodate children from the travellers' site. This makes the Hampton Road site unsuitable against the required criteria.
3. The GP surgery on Chase Meadow is over subscribed and it is very difficult to get an appointment. The GP surgery could not accommodate travellers in addition to the existing number of people who are registered there. This makes the Hampton Road site unsuitable.
4. Chase Meadow is still being developed and there are hundreds more homes to be built which will only exacerbate the strain on local facilities such as schools and the GP surgery. This reconfirms that the Hampton Road site is unsuitable.
5. Many people who are resident on Chase Meadow would strongly object to the locating of a traveller site on the Hampton Road for the reasons stated. The council has many other sites that are suitable that are identified in the local plan consultation. The council should act democratically and in the best interests of the people it represents and locate the site elsewhere. It would be wholly inappropriate and undemocratic to locate the site on the Hampton Road against the wishes of local residents.
6. Locating a traveller site on the Hampton Road could have a material negative impact on the valuation of hundreds of peoples' homes on Chase Meadow for which we would likely receive no compensation. This could force many into negative equity and would therefore be socially irresponsible. This would be wholly inappropriate - especially as other potential sites make this outcome unnecessary.
7. There are multiple other sites that would provide the services that are required for the travellers but would not have such a negative impact on the local community. A much smaller number of people would be likely to object and this would provide a fairer and more reasonable outcome for all.
8. There is a disproportionate number of proposed sites in South Warwickshire and around Warwick. Why have more alternative sites in the north of Warwickshire not been considered?
9. The local plan includes large scale building of houses, new schools and other key facilities to the South of Warwick. Locating the travellers' site there would make far more sense as the local facilities could be planned with the required additional capacity in mind.

[dangos mwy]