Object
Preferred Options Consultation - Land at Stratford Road, Warwick
Representation ID: 67293
Received: 18/08/2014
Respondent: Mr Steven Baker
Already aware of necessity for permanent sites for travelling community and 20 sites on shortlist, reduced to 5. Bought house on basis that none were close by. Now find that new house overlooks potential site previously not under consideration. Severe implications for people in similar position.
I have recently purchased a property on the Chase Meadow development and moved in in May this year.
As I was already a Warwick resident I was well aware of the necessity to have permanent sites for the travelling community and the 20 strong shortlist, which was then reduced to five. I did my due diligence prior to purchasing my house as this would have influenced my decision to purchase should any of the shortlisted sites have impacted where I chose to live and potentially my property value. On finding none of these sites would directly affect my situation I proceeded with the purchase.
I have today become aware that the 5 shortlisted sites is now 3, and a completely new site, virtually overlooking my house is within those 3 sites. I find this incredible given that the initial consultations and such were done over a year ago and this process has been ongoing in public for well over a year. Then at the last minute this site has been added without ever being included in that process, with what seems a degree of stealth. I normally have little sympathy for NIMBYism, but cannot help but feel this is grossly unfair on myself and other recent Beaumont/Chase Meadow purchases and had the process been done with clarity and openly we would have had chance to withdraw from our purchases should we have wished. As it is, we were not given that opportunity and have almost been misled by the council process of identifying traveller sites.
I wish to advise that I will be seeking legal advice immediately as I believe this process to have been incredibly unfair and really cannot believe it is legal to be brutally honest. This could have severe financial implications for many people and fair opportunity has not been afforded by the council consultation process in regard to this particular site, and it almost seems to me that it has been done with a degree of secrecy.
Had such a similar thing happened in the private sector, I am sure you, as local councillors and MP's would be championing the cause of local residents/voters as it is grossly unfair?