I hope you received my email that I sent yesterday evening concerning additional information that I wished to be added to my original objection.

In this second email, I would be grateful if you could answer the questions below, which relate to the process by which the Gypsy Traveller Sites (specifically GT03 and GT04) were chosen to be included in the WDC document.
If you feel unable to answer any of the questions, then please consider this email to be a formal request under the Freedom of Information Act.

In the WDC document, you include a number of points from the Planning Policy for Travellers Sites', March 2012 document. The questions below relate to those guidance points.

1. "to ensure that local planning authorities, working collaboratively, develop fair and effective strategies"
Please would you supply dates and details of meetings and or discussions that were held with officers of Stratford District Council where land being considered as Gypsy/Traveller sites was discussed.
2. "for local planning authorities to have due regard to the protection of local amenity and local environment"
Please can you provide evidence of where the protection of local amenities and local environment was considered in relation to sites GT03 and GT04.
3. "to enable provision of suitable accommodation from which travellers can access education, health, welfare and employment infrastructure"
Bearing in mind the fact that there nearest education and health facilities to GT03 and GT04 are in excess of 1.6 miles and to welfare and work facilities over 6 miles, what criteria did the council use to determine that GT03 and GT04 satisfied not only the national guidelines above but also their own which stated "** Convenient access to a GP surgery, school, and public transport; ?
4.
The following questions relate to the WDC document guidelines.
1. ** Avoiding areas with a high risk of flooding;
Bearing in mind GT03 and GT04 are at or near flood plains, what criteria were used to determine that the sites were not at risk of flooding? Was reference ever made to Dept. of the Environment flood risk mapping? Please would you provide documentary evidence of any consideration given to this prior to the inclusion of GT03 and GT04?
2. ** Safe access to the road network
GT03 and GT04 are both located on a high accident risk commuter route. What criteria were used to determine if both sites provided Safe Access to the road network?
3. ** Sites which can be integrated into the landscape without harming the character of the area.
Chesterton Windmill is, according to WCC, "a famous feature of the Warwickshire countryside". The site is visited by many people as it provides panoramic views over the Warwickshire countryside? What criteria were used by WDC to determine that GT03 and GT04 did not contravene the above objective?
4. ** avoids placing undue pressure on local infrastructure and services
In relation to GT03 and GT04, what discussions were held between WDC and WCC Education Dept. concerning the ability of Harbury school to cope with the increased pupil numbers that would result from the sites' adoption? Also, what discussions were held between WDC and either the Primary Care Trust or its replacement (Clinical Commissioning Group) regarding the ability of Harbury Surgery to accommodate increased patient numbers?
WDC Document Section 8
5. The WDC document paragraph 8.1 states that consideration was given to its own (WDC) land holdings. But none were found to be suitable. Please could you provide the criteria and weightings given to any individual criterion that led to the council decision that none of its own land was suitable? I am particularly interested in the point about being surrounded by "residential development" as I believe that one objective of permanent gypsy traveller sites was integration. Was consideration given to "brown field" sites within WDC. If so, what were they and what criteria were used that determined their unsuitability?
6. Paragraph 8.3 also says that the council ATTEMPTED to work with other councils. Would you provide evidence of such attempts, especially in relation to sites GT03 and GT04?