Re: Local Plan - Sites for Gypsies and Travellers - March 2014

I am writing to OBJECT strongly to the inclusion of site GTalt03 in the above consultation document as a possible site for Gypsies and Travellers. The main reasons for my objections are as follows:

1. The inclusion and classification of GTalt03 in the document is wrong:
* The description regarding GTalt03 in the consultation document appears biased. It omits vital information such as recent planning application refusals for part of the site and focuses entirely on the landowner's willingness to offer the land. We therefore see inconsistency, for instance, when comparing the descriptions for GT13 and GTalt03, where the former clearly states past planning objections and is classified as RED.

* The statement for GTalt03 in the consultation document that the landowner is eager to promote the site stands out and appears a promotional statement rather than statement of fact that one would expect from a consultation. It could therefore be misleading to readers that the site is an easy solution therefore attracting supporting votes from those who object to other sites. Since the landowner does not live locally, the offer of GTalt03 could only be for speculative motives and financial gains. Once again we see the officers compiling the document have taken side with a single view without giving due consideration to other stakeholders' views.

2. Criteria 3 - Safe Access to the road network and provision for parking, turning and servicing on site: Hampton Road is a narrow country lane and there is a sharp turn and blind spots at the Hampton Road/Henley Road junction. The access to the site from Hampton Road is inadequate and the provision for parking, turning and servicing the site is very poor and unsafe.

3. Criteria 6 - Avoid areas where there could be adverse impact on important features of the natural and historic environment: It is essential to preserve the rural character and green belt area of Hampton-on-the-Hill. This area has already been significantly affected by the development of surrounding road and motorway networks, the railway link at Warwick Parkway. The residents have long suffered increased traffic from these developments and noise and air pollution. The local authority has a duty to consider carefully the implementation of a Gypsy and Travellers' site and not to impact this area further.

4. Criteria 7 - Sites which can be integrated into the landscape without harming the character of the area: GTalt03 occupies a prominent and high level position therefore it cannot be adequately screened to mitigate all view points. It will have a great impact on the landscape character of this green belt village and the visual amenity of the surrounding area and cause land contamination, noise and other disturbances.

5. Criteria 8 - Promotes peaceful and integrated co-existence between the site and the local community: Hampton on the Hill is a small rural hamlet with a population of about two hundred. According to West Midlands Regional Assembly's Interim Statement on Gypsy & Traveller Policy, 'Family size among Gypsies & Travellers is larger on average than among the settled community. There are indications that Gypsies & Travellers marry young, and generations are relatively short. Household formation rates are likely to be higher than in the population as a whole.' The prospect of fifteen pitches on the site could amount to an additional 60 people - a 30% increase which would cause much imbalance between the existing settled community and the travellers' community.

6. Criteria 9 - Avoid placing undue pressure on local infrastructure and services: Hampton on the Hill is served by one narrow through road across the whole village and majority of the houses in the village are located alongside this main road. Any further increase in traffic volume caused by additional population from the proposed travellers' site will place further pressure on an infrastructure that is already unsuitable for the amount of traffic passing through the village nowadays.

7. A section of GTalt03 measuring 0.1 hectare has been the subject of two planning application REFUSALS by the Warwick District Council and a DISMISSAL by the Planning Inspectorate in recent years for reasons of inappropriate development in the Green Belt and Highways Safety. GTalt03 is 1.66 hectares and sixteen times larger. The reasons given for these REFUSALS and the DISMISSAL are relevant and valid today to GTalt03 and even more so with the increased site size and greater numbers of people.

Based on the above reasons, I believe that site GTalt03 should be reclassified as a Red site and removed from any further consideration in this consultation.