We live on Chase Meadow and attended the meeting at Aylesford School on 15th July in order to learn more about the proposed sites, 4 of which are within a short distance from our estate.

We understand the requirement to meet Government guidelines regarding these sites but cannot accept that the selection of sites has to be so close to residential developments.

1)The response from residents of our estate has been overwhelmingly against any site in this vicinity. If one of the aims is to integrate the different communities, this is already doomed to failure because of the antagonism and hostility that is evident and was expressed at the meeting.

2)The town of Warwick is a tourist attraction and any site within close proximity to the town would have a detrimental effect because of the visual impact of such a development on entering a town of special interest.

3)The areas around Hampton Lane are prone to flooding and the already existing problem would only be exacerbated by further hard-standings and buildings.

4)We understand that the race-course have concerns about the risk to thoroughbreads stabled near the race-track, due to cross-infection from the travellers/gypsies livestock.

5)We are concerned about the management of the sites and what control the authority would have if they become over-subscribed or if the waste- management is not adequately dealt with. Would the rate payers have to foot the bill if the managers cannot make the sites sufficient economically viable to be properly maintained?

6)Of all the proposed sites, Hampton Lane/Budbrook Lodge is the most adjacent to a large housing development, which is continuing to expand rapidly with consequent pressures on schools, doctors and other facilities.

7) Have the travelling community been asked if they want to live near residential developments? The overall impression is that the travellers prefer a rural environment with their own closed communities and sense of privacy. They are mobile with cars and touring vans and can access the social facilities they need without being adjacent to them. For this reason, countryside plots would be more acceptible to both them and us.

8)Reading the objections to Kites Nest Lane, it appears that it is the enfringemnt of the Green Belt that is of most concern. If the practical issues of access, sewage, etc. can be resolved in the same way as they would have to be addressed in a new site, why cannot there be some compromise on the reclassification of the Green Belt for exceptional circumstances? This would apply not just to Kites Nest Lane but also to another area in the north of the district, as we are not talking about mass development but semi-rural use.