GT12 Land north of Westham Lane, Barford (green)

Showing comments and forms 61 to 90 of 116

Object

Preferred Options for Sites

Representation ID: 64373

Received: 05/05/2014

Respondent: Giles Harrison-Hall

Representation Summary:

You say sites are akin to conventional housing. Planning application for housing on these sites would not be granted.
Views from A429 important and understood that modern planning considerations prevented developments sprawling beyond recognised boundaries.
Local plan uses A429 as boundary to justify "in filling" between village and bypass. Proposals for two siteswould be an extension to that.
Would use agricultural land providing development where it would be detrimental.
If you cannot plan to integrate Gypsy and Travellers sites into new development sites cannot expect to be able to integrate by imposition

Full text:

I write to register my opposition to your proposals for gypsy and travellers sites GT12 and GTalt12 at Barford.
You say in your consultation document at para 2.7 that these sites are to be regarded as akin to conventional housing. Any rational examination of the sites would lead one to say that a planning application for housing on these sites would not be granted.
The A429 is an important route. The views from the road are important and I understood that modern planning considerations prevented developments sprawling beyond recognised boundaries.
Your new local plan uses the A429 as a boundary for Barford to justify "in filling" between the village and the bypass. Your proposals for the two sites at Barford would be an extension to that, providing for development on both sides of the road. The development would use important agricultural land, and would provide development in an area where any development would be a detriment.
In your new Local Plan, you have suggested a large area to the south of Warwick/Leamington Spa for development. If you cannot plan to integrate Gypsy and Travellers sites with a completely clear sheet of paper within that area, you cannot expect to be able to integrate by imposition. I think it would be much better to provide sites within the large areas you have already earmarked for development.

Object

Preferred Options for Sites

Representation ID: 64382

Received: 01/05/2014

Respondent: Toby Jones

Representation Summary:

Remains staggered that this site is still on a shortlist of all possible sites in the district and it undermines my faith in WDCs ability to evaluate options against their own stated criteria.

1 - Proximity to GP surgery etc: There is no GP in Barford. The school and scarce public transport is accessible only by crossing an extremely dangerous road. This is a sweeping bend on a fast bit of road as recent accident statistics will prove. I am not at all happy crossing it with my kids.
2 - Safe access to road network. As above, this is not a safe stretch of road. We nearly get rear ended pretty much every time we turn into the village from the north. It is a fast and sweeping bend.
3 - Noise and other disturbance. This is a busy trunk road. It will be noisy for the travellers
4- Sites which can be integrated into the landscape.: This is the real big issue here. Land to the west of the A429 is obviously and distinctly open coutryside. It represents an iconic bit of of the River Avon valley on a distinct meander contained to the west by a steep scarp. The traveller site here would be completely out of character and would intrude in open views to the west. Moreover, the proposed site being elongated and spread along the roadside appears to be designed to maximise visual intrusion. Its influence will be accentuated by its proposed form so that it will appear from the road as prominent as the village itself.

The site is prominent due to its open countryside setting, it is prominent because of its insensitive design and it is prominent in that it is next to a busy road seen by thousands of people every day. The utilitarian traveller site would become the face of Barford. WDC would have little or no control over the viability or performance of any landscape mitigation once it has been implemented since you are simply walking away once consent is granted.

Will not be swayed by arguments that mitigation planting will alleviate this harm. Traveller sites are what they are. They tend to be utilitarian in character with few aesthetic merits (and why should they?). This is simply a case of the wrong site.

Full text:

Please accept the following as comment on the current Gypsy and Traveller Consultation.

Site GT 12 North of Westham Lane, Barford.

As a general point I remain staggered that this site is still on a shortlist of all possible sites in the district and it undermines my faith in WDCs ability to evaluate options against their own stated criteria.

1 - Proximity to GP surgery etc: There is no GP in Barford. The school and scarce public transport is accessible only by crossing an extremely dangerous road. This is a sweeping bend on a fast bit of road as recent accident statistics will prove. I am not at all happy crossing it with my kids.
2 - Safe access to road network. As above, this is not a safe stretch of road. We nearly get rear ended pretty much every time we turn into the village from the north. It is a fast and sweeping bend.
3 - Noise and other disturbance. This is a busy trunk road. It will be noisy for the travellers
4- Sites which can be integrated into the landscape.: This is the real big issue here. Land to the west of the A429 is obviously and distinctly open coutryside. It represents an iconic bit of of the River Avon valley on a distinct meander contained to the west by a steep scarp. The traveller site here would be completely out of character and would intrude in open views to the west. Moreover, the proposed site being elongated and spread along the roadside appears to be designed to maximise visual intrusion. Its influence will be accentuated by its proposed form so that it will appear from the road as prominent as the village itself.

The site is prominent due to its open countryside setting, it is prominent because of its insensitive design and it is prominent in that it is next to a busy road seen by thousands of people every day. The utilitarian traveller site would become the face of Barford. WDC would have little or no control over the viability or performance of any landscape mitigation once it has been implemented since you are simply walking away once consent is granted.
I will not be swayed by arguments that mitigation planting will alleviate this harm. Traveller sites are what they are. They tend to be utilitarian in character with few aesthetic merits (and why should they?). This is simply a case of the wrong site.

Site GT12a Barford Community Meadow

The same points apply as for GT 12 with the added insult that a huge amount of community thought care and work has gone in to this site to make it available to the community. The fact that this is still being put forward as a possible site speaks volumes about the WDC's attitudes to existing communities. Truly, this makes me despair.

General Points...for what they are worth.

I believe that WDC is failing in its duties by not considering incorporating these new gypsy and traveller sites into the new planned communities that are coming forward. It depresses me to think that this proactive approach is not being pursued because of the unhealthy influence the major house builders and developers have over our council leaders. Instead you are seeking to somehow lose this unpopular requirement in the rural community.

I believe WDC is failing in its duties by not challenging the function and performance of the greenbelt north of Warwick and Leamington (a 1950s designation with the main aim of preventing Birmingham and Coventry from merging. Its function and performance can and should be reviewed in this District). Instead you are blindly piling development pressure including the gypsy and traveller sites on our rural communities in the south of the District. In the south we feel embattled and that our interests are not represented by our Council leaders. It makes me sad and angry in equal measure.

Object

Preferred Options for Sites

Representation ID: 64409

Received: 02/05/2014

Respondent: D S and A J Warren and Beasley

Representation Summary:

The nearest GP Surgery is nearly 5 miles away by road in Bishops Tachbrook with no easy access from Barford.

This site sits within and immediately adjacent to areas identified by the Environment Agency as having significant flood risk.

Vehicular access to this site is from the A429 trunk road where there have been a significant number of traffic accidents including a fatality. There is also inadequate pedestrian crossing facilities for safe access into the village. Access would be difficult and expensive whilst being very dangerous for both vehicle users and pedestrians.

Noise levels from the By Pass and M40 roundabout can be heard through double glazing in the surrounding houses so could not be reduced effectively or economically by constructing barriers.

There are no services available in the area and the cost for supplying them would render the site uneconomical.

The impact on the landscape and tourism of a Gypsy and Traveller site would be immense. The proposed site is green field and a satellite from Barford village, so will have a material adverse effect on the landscape and could not be integrated without harming the visual amenity and character of the site.

The A429 Barford Bypass isolates the site from the village and therefore presents a physical barrier to integration with the village.

Site does not promote peaceful integrated co-existence with the local community.

It will place undue pressure on the local infrastructure and services.

Will adversely impact on the capacity of Barford St. Peter's School, given the village is a "Secondary Service Village" and likely to accommodate children from the 70-90 new dwellings during the Plan period.

The Gypsy and Traveller community should be catered for and integrated into new, larger mixed development sites being proposed through the New Local Plan. Larger pitches would be more economical too.

Full text:

I am writing to register our objections and give our views on the suitability of the following Gypsy and Traveller Preferred Options Consultation.

GT12/GTalt12 - Land at north and west of Westham Lane
* Warwick District Council (WDC) Criteria states that the site should have "convenient access to a GP surgery, school, and public transport" - The nearest GP Surgery is nearly 5 miles away by road in Bishops Tachbrook and there is not an easy access from Barford.
* WDC Criteria states that the site should "avoid areas with a high risk of flooding" - This site sits within (part) and otherwise immediately adjacent to areas identified by the Environment Agency as having significant flood risk.
* WDC Criteria states that the site should have "Safe access to the road network and provision for parking, turning and servicing on site" - Vehicular access to this site is from the A429 trunk road (The Barford Bypass) which was constructed as a bypass to Barford. It is a 60 mph speed limit road and there have been a significant number of traffic accidents including a fatality. There is also inadequate pedestrian crossing facilities for safe access into the village. Access would be difficult and expensive whilst being very dangerous for both vehicle users and pedestrians
* WDC Criteria states that the site should "avoid areas where there is the potential for noise and other disturbance" - Noise levels from the By Pass and M40 roundabout can be heard through double glazing in the surrounding houses. The continuous noise from the Barford Bypass could not be reduced effectively or economically by constructing barriers.
* WDC Criteria states that the site should have "Provision of utilities (running water, toilet facilities, waste disposal, etc)" - There are no such services available in the area and the cost for supplying these for a small number of pitches would be considerable and therefore render the site uneconomical.
* WDC Criteria states that the site should be "Avoiding areas where there could be adverse impact on important features of the natural and historic environment" - The
proposed site is on the busy route between the historic town of Warwick and the Cotwolds, and the impact on the landscape and tourism of a Gypsy and Traveller site would be immense.

* WDC Criteria states that the "sites which can be integrated into the landscape without harming the character of the area. Site development will accord with national guidance on site design and facility provision" - The proposed site is green field and a satellite from Barford village, the development of this site could not take place without a material adverse effect on the landscape and could not be integrated without harming the visual amenity and character of the site.
* WDC Criteria states "Promotes peaceful and integrated co-existence between the site and the local community" - The A429 Barford Bypass isolates the site from the village and therefore presents a physical barrier to integration with the village.
* WDC Criteria states "Avoids placing undue pressure on local infrastructure and services" - This site does not fully meet with the provisions of Planning Policy for Gipsy & Traveller sites as it does not promote peaceful integrated co-existence between the proposed sites and the local community. It will also place undue pressure on the local infrastructure and services. It would have a material negative impact on the capacity of Barford St. Peter's School, especially given the village's status as a "Secondary Service Village" and its likely requirement to provide 70-90 new dwellings during the Plan period.
The Gypsy and Traveller community should be catered for and integrated into new, larger mixed development sites being proposed through the New Local Plan. Larger pitches would be more economical as opposed to smaller pitches which would drive down the pitch costs, gets economies of scale and has less impact on fewer communities and residents.

The following sites would seem eminently more suitable to a greater or lesser degree than the two proposed sites adjacent to Barford Bypass:

* Sites GT02- Land Abutting Fosse Way at Junction with A425 (part) already has an immediate access to popular route for Gypsies and Travellers.

* SiteGTalt03 Henley Road /Hampton Road - where the landowner is very keen to promote the site for the required purpose. The site is available and deliverable.

Warwick District Council should be requiring Gypsy and Traveller sites are delivered within the proposed major new housing developments. This would ensure that the sites could be properly designed in a sustainable fashion and be fully integrated into a local community which will provide facilities such as a school, doctors surgery and shops which are accessible on foot, on bike, by bus and by car.

Object

Preferred Options for Sites

Representation ID: 64423

Received: 04/05/2014

Respondent: Mr & Mrs Clifford & Carol Veasey

Representation Summary:

Barford has few facilities. The A429 is an extremely busy road, there have been several accidents between Wellesbourne and the M40 junction. It would be dangerous for road users and children and adults from the site on foot trying to reach Barford. Concern over cost and upkeep of the sites.

Full text:

Barford has very few facilities; it has a community shop, a small primary school and has not had a Doctors surgery
since the early seventies.

The A429 is an extremely busy and fast road and it is very difficult at times to exit Wasperton on to this road.
There have been several accidents between Wellesbourne and the M40 junction.

The gypsy and travellers on the proposed site, just off the Barford bypass, would find it very difficult to get out on to the road,
in a car, van, caravan etc. It would also be dangerous crossing the road for adults and children on foot trying to reach Barford.

Our community pay rates, abides by the law, and we look after our property.
If travellers did the same , then the community would accept them, but their history in the Warwick district and elsewhere
has not been good.

They are disruptive where ever they go and cost the Council,ie the ratepayers, a lot of money to evict them.
After they have gone it costs a lot more money to clean up, as the sites are left in such a disgraceful state.

We know that parts of some of these proposed sites are for permanent residents, but who will pay to clear their rubbish etc
when the tempory travellers have gone.

Object

Preferred Options for Sites

Representation ID: 64448

Received: 05/05/2014

Respondent: Mr David Edwards

Representation Summary:

Objects to Gypsy & Traveller site GT12 (land to the north of Westham Lane Barford) as a preferred option site.

* The site is right next to the Barford by-pass (A429 between Wellesbourne and Longbridge), a road which is busy and getting busier.
* New homes being built in Wellesbourne cannot be ignored - the volume of traffic will only increase.
* Additionally traffic on the road is derestricted. Already a notorious accident area, access to the site would potentially be lethal to both pedestrians and drivers.

The council should also consider the distance of this site from established medical services. For example there is no doctor's surgery for almost 5 miles, and no easy means of getting there. This would be disadvantageous to any potential site occupant.

Full text:

I wish to register my objection to Gypsy & Traveller site GT12 (land to the north of Westham Lane Barford) as a preferred option site.

The site is right next to the Barford by-pass (A429 between Wellesbourne and Longbridge), a road which is busy and getting busier. New homes being built in Wellesbourne cannot be ignored - the volume of traffic will only increase. Additionally traffic on the road is derestricted. Already a notorious accident area, access to the site would potentially be lethal to both pedestrians and drivers.

The council should also consider the distance of this site from established medical services. For example there is no doctor's surgery for almost 5 miles, and no easy means of getting there. This would be disadvantageous to any potential site occupant.

Please register my objection to site GT12 in accordance with your consultation process.

Object

Preferred Options for Sites

Representation ID: 64452

Received: 30/04/2014

Respondent: Mr George Gordon Williamson

Representation Summary:

Access is not safe, situated alongside the very busy A429 (Barford bypass).

Pedestrians and potential schoolchildren would have to cross this road to get access to the village.

Provision of utilities would be expensive.

Extremely detrimental being situated on the main trunk road and very popular tourist route.

Integration into the landscape would be very difficult and the natural environment around the pretty River Avon would be destroyed.

Full text:

Gypsies and Travellers Preferred Options for Sites
Whilst I understand the need for these pitches, I object to Site GT12 Westham Lane as it does not comply with your own criteria on page 13 of the Preferred Options document where it states "the council has applied consistent criteria".

1. Access is not safe in any way. It is situated alongside the very busy A429 (Barford bypass) with a speed limit of 60 mph. Pedestrians and potential schoolchildren would have to cross this road to get access to the village. This road unfortunately has a history of too many serous accidents, some fatal.

2. Provision of utilities would be expensive, not cost effective
3. The physical aspect of this site would be extremely detrimental as it is situated on the main trunk road from historic Warwick to the Cotswolds, a very popular tourist route.
4. Integration into the landscape would be very difficult and the natural environment around the pretty River Avon would be destroyed.

A much more obvious choice would be GTalt01 Brookside Willows.
It is still located at the edge of Warwick with all its advantages but
1. Is screened form the Banbury Road
2. Has a good and safe access already built
3. Safe pedestrian access to town
4. Choice of good schools, surgeries and transport readily available
5. A pleasant environment and no issues with noise (either way).
6. It is a larger area and potentially could hold more pitches, making it more sense economically.

A longer term solution, surely, would be to provide larger G & T sites within the planning of new, larger mixed developments which will surely happen with the introduction of the Local Plan.
This makes sense both economically and from a planning point of view.

Object

Preferred Options for Sites

Representation ID: 64479

Received: 02/05/2014

Respondent: Mr D S Warren

Representation Summary:

The nearest GP Surgery is nearly 5 miles away by road in Bishops Tachbrook with no easy access from Barford.

This site sits within and immediately adjacent to areas identified by the Environment Agency as having significant flood risk.

Vehicular access to this site is from the A429 trunk road where there have been a significant number of traffic accidents including a fatality. There is also inadequate pedestrian crossing facilities for safe access into the village. Access would be difficult and expensive whilst being very dangerous for both vehicle users and pedestrians.

Noise levels from the By Pass and M40 roundabout can be heard through double glazing in the surrounding houses so could not be reduced effectively or economically by constructing barriers.

There are no services available in the area and the cost for supplying them would render the site uneconomical.

The impact on the landscape and tourism of a Gypsy and Traveller site would be immense. The proposed site is green field and a satellite from Barford village, so will have a material adverse effect on the landscape and could not be integrated without harming the visual amenity and character of the site.

The A429 Barford Bypass isolates the site from the village and therefore presents a physical barrier to integration with the village.

Site does not promote peaceful integrated co-existence with the local community.

It will place undue pressure on the local infrastructure and services.

Will adversely impact on the capacity of Barford St. Peter's School, given the village is a "Secondary Service Village" and likely to accommodate children from the 70-90 new dwellings during the Plan period.

The Gypsy and Traveller community should be catered for and integrated into new, larger mixed development sites being proposed through the New Local Plan. Larger pitches would be more economical too.

Full text:

WDC Local Plan Gypsies & Travellers Preferred Options Consultation
I am writing to register my objections and give my views on the suitability of the following Gypsy and Traveller Preferred Options Consultation.

GT12/GTalt12 - Land at north and west of Westham Lane
* Warwick District Council (WDC) Criteria states that the site should have "convenient access to a GP surgery, school, and public transport" - The nearest GP Surgery is nearly 5 miles away by road in Bishops Tachbrook and there is not an easy access from Barford.
* WDC Criteria states that the site should "avoid areas with a high risk of flooding" - This site sits within (part) and otherwise immediately adjacent to areas identified by the Environment Agency as having significant flood risk.
* WDC Criteria states that the site should have "Safe access to the road network and provision for parking, turning and servicing on site" - Vehicular access to this site is from the A429 trunk road (The Barford Bypass) which was constructed as a bypass to Barford. It is a 60 mph speed limit road and there have been a significant number of traffic accidents including a fatality. There is also inadequate pedestrian crossing facilities for safe access into the village. Access would be difficult and expensive whilst being very dangerous for both vehicle users and pedestrians
* WDC Criteria states that the site should "avoid areas where there is the potential for noise and other disturbance" - Noise levels from the By Pass and M40 roundabout can be heard through double glazing in the surrounding houses. The continuous noise from the Barford Bypass could not be reduced effectively or economically by constructing barriers.
* WDC Criteria states that the site should have "Provision of utilities (running water, toilet facilities, waste disposal, etc)" - There are no such services available in the area and the cost for supplying these for a small number of pitches would be considerable and therefore render the site uneconomical.
* WDC Criteria states that the site should be "Avoiding areas where there could be adverse impact on important features of the natural and historic environment" - The
proposed site is on the busy route between the historic town of Warwick and the Cotswolds, and the impact on the landscape and tourism of a Gypsy and Traveller site would be immense.



WDC Local Plan Gypsies & Travellers Preferred Options Consultation - Cont/d
* WDC Criteria states that the "sites which can be integrated into the landscape without harming the character of the area. Site development will accord with national guidance on site design and facility provision" - The proposed site is green field and a satellite from Barford village, the development of this site could not take place without a material adverse effect on the landscape and could not be integrated without harming the visual amenity and character of the site.
* WDC Criteria states "Promotes peaceful and integrated co-existence between the site and the local community" - The A429 Barford Bypass isolates the site from the village and therefore presents a physical barrier to integration with the village.
* WDC Criteria states "Avoids placing undue pressure on local infrastructure and services" - This site does not fully meet with the provisions of Planning Policy for Gipsy & Traveller sites as it does not promote peaceful integrated co-existence between the proposed sites and the local community. It will also place undue pressure on the local infrastructure and services. It would have a material negative impact on the capacity of Barford St. Peter's School, especially given the village's status as a "Secondary Service Village" and its likely requirement to provide 70-90 new dwellings during the Plan period.
The Gypsy and Traveller community should be catered for and integrated into new, larger mixed development sites being proposed through the New Local Plan. Larger pitches would be more economical as opposed to smaller pitches which would drive down the pitch costs, gets economies of scale and has less impact on fewer communities and residents.

The following sites would seem eminently more suitable to a greater or lesser degree than the two proposed sites adjacent to Barford Bypass:

Sites GT02- Land Abutting Fosse Way at Junction with A425 (part) already has an immediate access to popular route for Gypsies and Travellers.

SiteGTalt03 Henley Road /Hampton Road - where the landowner is very keen to promote the site for the required purpose. The site is available and deliverable.

Warwick District Council should be requiring Gypsy and Traveller sites are delivered within the proposed major new housing developments. This would ensure that the sites could be properly designed in a sustainable fashion and be fully integrated into a local community which will provide facilities such as a school, doctor's surgery and shops which are accessible on foot, on bike, by bus and by car.

Object

Preferred Options for Sites

Representation ID: 64511

Received: 04/05/2014

Respondent: Mr & Mrs John & Janet Newbery

Representation Summary:

The main road is on a long sweeping bend where most traffic travels above the legal speed limit of 60mph. This stretch of road is highly tempting to impetuous drivers who often overtake slower vehicles travelling at 50pmh. The only safe solution will be to build it as a dual carriageway.

Travellers with trailers, caravans etc present a further problem/danger.

Travellers visitng Barford will have to cross this major road with all the dangers of attempting to slow the traffic.

Vehicles and trailers exiting the site will face the danger of being rammed unless lights are installed. Sight lines will be similarly restricted opposite the suggested site.

This site will require efficient drainage and a soak-away which will also require regular servicing.

The local plan suggests that there is a Doctors surgery in Barford. This is not correct, the nearest is in Wellesbourne.

The local facilities are confined to a local shop in Barford and shops in Wellesbourne.

The school in Barford is already at a maximum capacity and is located on a restricted site.

Site is in the middle of highly productive farming land and will have a detrimental effect on the local economy.

Full text:

New Local Plan - Permanent Gypsy site selection
GT12 / GTalt 12

As a local resident in Wasperton we wish to object to the possible choice of this site on the basis of safety, lack of local facilities and loss of valuable farming land.

1. The main road past the site is the major route to the Cotswolds. The site is on a long sweeping bend where most traffic travels above the legal speed limit of 60mph, even past the second Barford turning. This stretch of road is highly tempting to impetuous drivers who often overtake slower vehicles travelling at 50pmh. The only safe solution will be to build it as a dual carriageway.
2. The possible solution could be to put up traffic lights or a large pull-off stretch but then the Traveller will be faced with towing a long vehicle across the heavy stream of traffic with all the inherent dangers.
3. Travellers wishing to visit Barford, say to take children to school, will have to cross this major road with all the dangers of attempting to slow the traffic.
4. Vehicles and trailers exiting GT12 turning either right or left will face the danger of being rammed unless lights are installed.
5. Personally speaking we have been involved with three similar incidents when turning into Wasperton with drivers overtaking double lines to gain additional road space. Sight lines will be similarly restricted opposite the suggested GT12 site.
6. This site will require efficient drainage and a soak-away which will also require regular servicing. Can we trust the travelling community to commission this work or will seepage occur into the River Avon which is very close by?

7. The local plan suggests that there is a Doctors surgery in Barford. This is not correct, the nearest we believe is in Wellesbourne.
8. The local facilities are confined to a local shop in Barford and shops in Wellesbourne. The latter Town is currently been expanded with 1600 houses on the airfield and would be highly suitable for a traveller site as the Town sits in open countryside where traffic has to travel at slower speeds (4 Roundabouts currently on the main road).
9. The Local school in Barford is already at a maximum capacity and is located on a restricted site. Any further expansion will require the local authorities to relocate at considerable expence.
10. This GT12 site sits in the middle of highly productive farming land which has already been badly affected by the essential building of the Barford Bypass. This choice will have a detrimental effect on the local economy.

In conclusion, and certainly not on a NIBI basis, The choice of a site should surely be measured against just how well the Travelling community will fit into the local environment without endangering life and limb or that very environment itself. GT12 is in a dangerous position which will require considerable cost to make safe. It has not got local facilities to hand and will damage local industry. There must be a simpler and better solution to this issue and we look to you, our local government, to provide a sensible answer.

Object

Preferred Options for Sites

Representation ID: 64571

Received: 16/04/2014

Respondent: Mrs A P Mander

Representation Summary:

Site is too close to the nursery it will be impossible for the business to make itself secure from trespassers out of working hours as a great deal of stock will be out and in the open.

Full text:

see attached

Attachments:

Object

Preferred Options for Sites

Representation ID: 64573

Received: 14/04/2014

Respondent: Mr Colin Smith

Representation Summary:

Inside village conservation area
Unneighbourly plan
Large waiting list for Barford School already exists
Noise and pollution from Barford bypass
No evident need identified in the Preferred Options

Full text:

see attached

Attachments:

Object

Preferred Options for Sites

Representation ID: 64589

Received: 02/05/2014

Respondent: Mrs Wendy Barlow

Representation Summary:

Contrary to government's policies of inclusion. Barford by pass will effectively exclude the travelling community by making them difficult to access.
By pass is an extremely difficult road with growing levels of pollution which is not good from a health and safety perspective
Concerns over already popular and over subscribed school - where will money be found for extra children and the extra support needed due to the nature of their peripatetic lifestyle.

Full text:

see attached

Attachments:

Object

Preferred Options for Sites

Representation ID: 64600

Received: 02/05/2014

Respondent: Ms Lorraine Thorne

Representation Summary:

The site will have an adverse impact on the character of the village as well as surrounding landscaepe. The site cannot be adequately screened.
The bypass next to it is a very busy and fast road and is not safe to cross a lot of the time.
Whilst not in the Green Belt, the area should be left as a rural setting for the village, otherwise it will destroy some of our precious landscape once and for all time.
It is also unfair that all the preferred sites are located in the South of the District, especially when most of the new housing will also be in this area.

Full text:

see attached

Attachments:

Object

Preferred Options for Sites

Representation ID: 64601

Received: 30/04/2014

Respondent: Mrs Anne Lloyd

Representation Summary:

1. Barford bypass is a very dangerous road and there have been at least 2 deaths within 1 mile radius and several deaths between longbridge and Wellesbourne.
2. Plans are in for considerable development on the nursery and 2 other sites (H21, H20, H22), which will overload the school places, so children on the Gypsy site may have to go to Wellesbourne, Warwick etc. to school, as they will live further away.
3. At consultation, we were shown a newly built Gypsy site. Why were we not shown a site of 5+ years old? Questions whether this is unfair and misleading.

4. Gypsies will not be ablte to integrate with the village due to dangerous bypass as crossing it is so dangerous.

5. This is agricultural land of high quality and higher than land on GT19.

6. In the press it has said that you cannot CPO land for Gypsy sites, of the preferred sites, Barford is the only site that requires a CPO.

Full text:

see attached

Attachments:

Object

Preferred Options for Sites

Representation ID: 64602

Received: 06/05/2014

Respondent: Mrs Miranda Baker

Representation Summary:

Excellent agricultural land.
Site has an amazing view over the River Avon area and Sherbourne.
The bypass is an extremely busy road and is very difficult to to cross as a pedestrian also, joining the road in a car is not easy. Several accidents have occurred as a result. Children on site would be a danger to themselves and others.
Developing the site would be extremely expensive - who pays for amenities to be provided?
There are no doctor or dentist surgeries nearby, and only one small community shop.
It would spoil the overall vista of the village and surrounding area. Screening would be an eyesore as it possibly would not be maintained.

Full text:

see attached

Attachments:

Object

Preferred Options for Sites

Representation ID: 64603

Received: 22/04/2014

Respondent: Mrs Peggy Peacock

Representation Summary:

Road network - safety of local community: There is already and excess of cars and coaches making the cross roads dangerous for children and the elderely. Accessing properties difficult due to inappropriate parking.
Impact on visual aspect of village and landscape will have anegative effect on character of the village.
Schools already full and local GP surgeries also seem to be busy to take extra patients as doctor appointments difficult to get.
Green belt allocation should be reinvestigated.

Full text:

see attached

Attachments:

Object

Preferred Options for Sites

Representation ID: 64617

Received: 05/05/2014

Respondent: Dr James Gordon

Representation Summary:

This would impact on a small farm
The owner is not willing to sell
Families on this site would be isolated from facilities (siuch as school and shops) by a high-speed road.
The is a risk of pollution the river

Full text:

see attached

Attachments:

Object

Preferred Options for Sites

Representation ID: 64622

Received: 24/04/2014

Respondent: Mr Andy Pullen

Representation Summary:

The site should be discounted because it
- is at risk of airborne pollutants from the nearby road network as well as from agricultural practices
-it would be subjected to excessive road noise

Full text:

see attached

Attachments:

Object

Preferred Options for Sites

Representation ID: 64623

Received: 06/05/2014

Respondent: Mr Robert Mulgrue

Representation Summary:

The site does not meet several of the Council's site criteria and should therefore be discounted, namely:-
-Barford has no GP surgery, or secondary school the nearest GP surgery is 4 miles away and there is no direct bus link to it.
-The access to the site is from a 60 mph road and would be dangerous to slow moving caravans etc turning into/ out of the site
- There are no electricity or water services to the site - their provision will be expensive

Full text:

see attached

Attachments:

Object

Preferred Options for Sites

Representation ID: 64649

Received: 08/05/2014

Respondent: Mr Steven Peters

Representation Summary:

-The site is very visible from the surrounding area and will have a negative impact on the landscape.
- The site will have a detrimental impact on the visual amenity and character of the immediate surrounding area.
- There are no GP surgeries, hospitals or community facilities in Barford
-The village school is already over-subscribed a situation that will be worsened by the development of the Sherbourne Nursery site
- The site is on greenfield land
The site is adjacent the by-pass which will be unsafe for the residents
access to the site wil require a crossing point across the by-pass (a very dangerous proposition)
-the owner does not wish to sell the land
-the site will be in close proximity to existing and proposed houses in Barford
-The imposition of a G and T site will cause an upsurge in crime . In doing this it is believed that the Council will be unlawfully breaching the human rights of those in the vicinity of this proposal.
-Blight has not been given proper consideration and compensation for those in the immediate environs has not been given due/ proper consideration

Full text:

see attached

Attachments:

Object

Preferred Options for Sites

Representation ID: 64653

Received: 17/04/2014

Respondent: Mrs Ann Starkey

Representation Summary:

The site should be discounted because :-
-It will have a detrimental impact on the visual amenity
-Access to / from the site will be dangerous because of the by- pass
-Proximity to the by-pass will be unbelievably noisy for the gypsy families
-The by-pass will be dangerous for young gypsy children in this locality

Full text:

see attached

Attachments:

Object

Preferred Options for Sites

Representation ID: 64661

Received: 01/05/2014

Respondent: Mr Alan Woodhouse

Representation Summary:

This site should be discounted because-
- Barford has no doctors or dental surgery
-The by - pass is adjacent to the site associated traffic and noise will be a problem to the site.
-The impact on landscape would be negative

Full text:

see attached

Attachments:

Object

Preferred Options for Sites

Representation ID: 64663

Received: 01/05/2014

Respondent: Mr & Mrs Michael & Lynda Wardle

Representation Summary:

Prime grade 2 agricultural land.
Hazardous access to busy main road.
Compulsory purchase would have to be used.
Impact on heritage assets.
No local amenities within walking distance.
Noise impact due to Barford by-pass.

Full text:

see attached

Attachments:

Object

Preferred Options for Sites

Representation ID: 64675

Received: 02/05/2014

Respondent: Mr Robert Hunt

Representation Summary:

This is good quality agricultural land which should not be used as a travellers' site.

No mains services.

The access is dangerous.

Full text:

see attached

Attachments:

Object

Preferred Options for Sites

Representation ID: 64676

Received: 07/05/2014

Respondent: Mr Allan Fawcett

Representation Summary:

Adversely affects character of Avon Valley and views.

Destroys part of Barford Bypass flood relief system.

Risk of contamination to surrounding environment/watercourses (Avon) from on site activities.

Loss of good quality agricultural land.

Landowner does not wish to sell.

Adjacent to busy, fast moving road. The access will interrupt the fast flow of traffic and be potentially dangerous. Splayed entrance/exit lanes will be required so as not to hamper the flow of traffic. This will be expensive.

Noise from the road will impact residents living in caravans etc. Any noise attenuation on the site will need to be effective and will probably need to use a lot of the available space eg for bunding and in turn will have a negative visual impact.

The expenditure required on this site for the small number of pitches makes this site an expensive option.

Full text:

see attached

Attachments:

Object

Preferred Options for Sites

Representation ID: 64693

Received: 02/05/2014

Respondent: Mr Ian Ogg

Representation Summary:

No utilities.
High water table.
Sewage problem.
Bypass is busy road with curve which would render access/exit dangerous.
Community population concerns.
Impact on landscape.
Grade 2 agricultural land.
Owners do not wish to sell.

Full text:

see attached

Attachments:

Object

Preferred Options for Sites

Representation ID: 64702

Received: 08/04/2014

Respondent: Miss Sarah Falkland

Representation Summary:

Impact on landscape character: It cuts through a beautiful swathe of countryside.
Impact on agricultural land quality: The land here is amongst the most fertile in the County.
Amenities: The school is nearly full, and there is no dentist.
Noise: The A429 has increasing traffic with a noise and pollution risk to travellers.
Accident risk: The road would be a 'divider' between communities and prevent integration.
The site would not be suitably screened because of the slope of the land, encouraging rubberneckers and accident risk.

Full text:

see attached

Attachments:

Object

Preferred Options for Sites

Representation ID: 64714

Received: 22/04/2014

Respondent: Mrs Kate Findlay

Representation Summary:

1: The only facilities Barford has are a shop and a school. There is no GP surgey or dentist etc.
2: The proposed site is on the opposite side of a fast, busy road, and to use facilities in Barford, people will have to cross this road. Access onto the road for vehicles will be difficult.
3: It would be a very noisy site for caravans.
4: Integration with the village community would be difficult because of the segregation by the busy road. Also the social impact on a small village community would be greater than on a larger community.

Full text:

see attached

Attachments:

Object

Preferred Options for Sites

Representation ID: 64719

Received: 22/04/2014

Respondent: Mrs Jane Price

Representation Summary:

Not a suitable site being next to the by-pass, a derestricted road, which would have to be crossed to get to the village; this is not sensible for children and a potential for serious accidents.

Full text:

see attached

Attachments:

Object

Preferred Options for Sites

Representation ID: 64720

Received: 12/06/2014

Respondent: Mr Stephen Price

Representation Summary:

Compulsary Purchase would be necessary.
The site is immediately adjacent to the new Barford by-pass and suffers from noise.
The site is surounded by open fields and so would detract from the visual amenity of the area.
Access to the village from the site would require crossing the by-pass resulting in increased risk of accidents and danger to children.
Increased vehivular traffic at the junction will be dangerous.

Full text:

see attached

Attachments:

Object

Preferred Options for Sites

Representation ID: 64729

Received: 28/04/2014

Respondent: Mrs Jayne Longfield

Representation Summary:

It is difficult to see why this has been included with the bypass adjacent.
It would be a very expensive site to convert and not effectively positioned.
The landscape impact would damage the economy affecting tourists to the area and screening would cause loss of views.
This will impact on the agricultural viability of the farm who is also unwilling to sell.

Full text:

see attached

Attachments: