Object

Representation ID: 64490

Received: 05/05/2014

Respondent: mrs pauline seaton

Concerned about the evidence (SA and GTAA are both flawed), Landscape Sensitivity and Ecological & Geological Study have been ignored and there is a lack of fairness in the entire process, especially the Green/Amber/Red ratings which are unbalanced.

Landscape Sensitivity and Ecological & Geological Study scores GT02 highly against development as site is not suitable for housing and development would harm the character of the area. Area would be sensitive to commercial development and travellers site would include some commercial activities. But the council's subsequent 'site-by-site' assessment doesn't comment on how open the site is or if it can be screened. Similarly it downplays the number of nearby neighbours and states there is only a single dwelling.

Certain reasons for excluding other sites also apply to GT02:
- traffic tailbacks: Could cause problems on the Fosse Way
- footpaths: lack of safe pedestrian access to facilities
- local business: will impact on Warwickshire Exhibition Centre operations and possibly lead to its closure. Using CPO powers here will impact on social cohesion. Using CPO also questions site availability and deliverability
- breeding: breeding of the alpacas and rare pigs will be affected
- noise: traffic noise from Fosse Way is a problem but its impact is being ignored
- facilities: site is remote from facilities and separated from them by Fosse Way
- remote: site is in open countryside

Where is the evidence to show Fosse Way is a popular route for travellers and GT02 an ideal location as a result? The site allocation is not popular/ideal for existing local residents and Fosse Way is popular with cars, bikes etc who would be susceptible to risk from accidents if further traffic were to use the adjoining roads.

Over 700 objections to this site but they have been ignored or downgraded because many people used a standard letter of objection. The number of objections should count.

All the above reasons, plus the impact on landscape, wildlife, local environment/eco-system, existing community and businesses should be sufficient to class this site as Red and not Green.