BASE HEADER

Dear Sir/Madam

Warwick District Council - Sites for Gypsies & Travellers - Local Plan consultation of preferred options - 14th June to 29th July 2013

I wish to object in the strongest possible terms to the proposal for a Gypsey site off Warwick Rd Norton Lindsey. I have looked at the criteria for selection contained within the documentation and would comment as follows:



Sustainability

* No. of Pitches / Site layout
GT14 has been proposed to accommodate 2 pitches, and is clearly the smallest site amongst all sites proposed. A fewer number of sites accommodating a greater number of pitches would benefit WDC in reducing opposition to the sites proposed and the cost of providing on-going services. The layout of the site is long and thin and does not provide suitable scope for turning articulated vehicles, particularly if the site had existing pitches and vehicles parked. In summary the sites layout and size is significantly restrictive for the proposed use, compared with all of other options proposed. The site currently houses two dilapidated battery hen farming buildings. A recent planning application to reuse the buildings for battery hen farming was refused. The refusal related to many reasons, however, access and the turning for articulated vehicles was included as a valid reason. The Warwick Road does not include a footpath or street lighting and would be dangerous for pedestrians to walk along.

* Access to Public Transport
Norton Lindsey is not included on a regular daily public transport route to provide access to neighbouring towns and villages for regular commutes for employment and or shop. Therefore this site would not be serviced by a public transport system which could promote a sustainable lifestyle and prevent unnecessary car journeys to work or shop. In contracts most of the other options are situated in areas which will provide a regular public transport system to facilitate a sustainable lifestyle.



* Shops & Services
Norton Lindsey does not contain a shop of any description. The public house is now closed (August 2013) and the potential reopening of this facility is uncertain, potentially it may not reopen. Most of the other options have shops within the community the sites are being proposed or are close enough to walk to the facility or public transport is available to enable sustainable travel to the shops and services.

* Employment Infrastructure
As detailed above the village of Norton Lindsey does not contain shops or services. Therefore the employment infrastructure is not available to sustain local employment. The public transport system does not provide a regular daily service and therefore cannot sustain travel to other areas for regular employment. Again most of the other sites proposed have some or significant employment infrastructure or are situated close to and have regular public transport links to employment infrastructure to provide a sustainable lifestyle.

Essential Services

* Health Service (Doctors Dentist Surgery etc.)
The Norton Lindsey site does not have any health service facilities within close walking proximity. As detailed above public transport routes do not service the village regularly and therefore could not provide a sufficient service to access these facilities regularly especially for families with young children whom need access to doctors surgeries on a daily/weekly basis. The closest facilities are situated within the larger towns of Leamington Spa, Warwick, Stratford upon Avon or larger villages of Hampton Magna and Claverdon. In excess of 65% of the other proposed sites are situated in areas providing direct access to these services or are close enough to the larger areas to gain access to these services by walking or via public transport. I.

* Education/Schools
The village of Norton Lindsey does include a small school, with an approximate intake of 15 pupils per year. The ages range from 4-11. The school is currently at full capacity. Most of the other proposed sites have access to larger schooling facilities for a wider age range and with greater numbers of placements available. Access to the school would also be along safer roads (for walking) which is certainly not afforded by the Warwick Road into Norton Lindsey, which would require journeys to be made by private vehicles.

* Services/Utilities
With reference to the previous use, GT14 will include an electricity and water supply and potentially be linked to the sewage system, however, in view of the condition of the buildings on site, the equipment and courses will be dilapidated and require upgrading. It is unlikely that the site will have a gas supply as the Hawkes Hill development situated close by was required to have gas storage tanks installed. GT20 is unlikely to have any facilities due to the sites nature and location. If separate gas tanks are required to be installed or small gas bottles delivered and refuse collected access to the site will be compromised by the two pitches and the delivery vehicles unable to turn on the site. The site would be unserviceable from these perspectives. If Warwick Road deliveries and refuse collection were proposed, dangerous implications would be experienced on Warwick Road. The road is busy and has experienced accidents recently, due to the blind corner upon which the entrance to the site is situated. Most of the other options proposed are located in areas where there are existing services on site, close to site or in areas with significant populations close by where services will be capable of being diverted and supplied.

Impact on the Environment/Landscape

* Visual/Noise Impact
The proposed site in Norton Lindsey is on the main road in Norton Lindsey. There will therefore be a detrimental visual impact on the access to the small country village. The site is also low lying with a number of dwellings sitting above the site and having a direct line of sight onto the proposed pitches. A significant noise impact will also be experienced by local residents due to the elevated position of the surrounding houses. Approximately 80% of the other options proposed are situated on larger sites which can be screened or hidden from view or are located adjacent to major roads and therefore would not impact upon the locality of the areas proposed and therefore not cause a visual intrusion.

* Conservation Areas/Greenbelt/Character of local area
The proposed site is situated in a Greenbelt very close to a conservation area, the use would spoil the character of the immediate local area and that of the village. 70% of the alternative proposed options would be more suited to this type of use and the character of those areas not affected to the degree that Norton Lindsey could potentially experience.

* Access to the Road Network
The entrance to the site is situated on a blind corner on Warwick Road. The junction to the west end of the site is dangerous with poor visibility splays and has experienced a number of accidents as recent as last year. The entrance to the site could not be relocated due to the thin nature of the site. As described above deliveries to the site and access would be impractical, for articulated vehicles and other larger vehicles. Turning into and out of the site will be hazardous due to poor visibility splays. Loading on the Warwick Road will be necessary therefore causing congestion on a blind corner and the potential for further accidents.

Inclusion within established Communities
The proposed siting of pitches at GT14 and GT20 would place undue pressure on the local infrastructure and the scarce services in existence. For the reasons expressed above and the impact this would cause on the locality, the sites GT14 and GT20 would not promote a peaceful and integrated co-existence between the site and local community. The proposed sites GT14 and GT20 do not promote a sustainable lifestyle for the proposed use or the local community.

* Flood Impact
The site does not sit within a flood zone, however, the Warwick Road along this stretch of road does suffer severe pooling of water during and following prolonged and heavy rainfall. The pooling impacts upon traffic flow and movements along Warwick Road. Additional hard standing on the site to facilitate pitches would exacerbate this problem.

Cost & Inclusion as a proposed option
We understand that this site was the only option put forward by a land owner for inclusion within the list of proposed sites. The reason is clear, the land owners application to reuse the site for battery poultry farming was refused due to local opposition. It would therefore provide an unethical base to consider this site as a viable option. The site is also being marketed at a price of £550,000, which is unlikely to be deliverable either privately or by the Council.


Conclusion

I cannot comprehend based on the evidence above just why this site has been selected for consideration? In my opinion the facts above are irrefutable and the debate is a result of mischief making by the land owner with no real benefit identified to either the gypsy community or the local community.

I look forward to confirmation that the site is to be removed from the list of potential options.