GT02 Land abutting the Fosse Way close to A425 junction

I would like to object to the plans for 2 gypsy/ traveller sites on the edge of Harbury.

1. Why are we expected to give land to certain people on which to put their caravans ? Can they not finance and provide for themselves as I do?

2. I strenuously object to land at Leamington Football Club being given away as this is going to end up causing massive extra expense for WDC in ultimately WDC having to provide new quarters for the Football Club.

3. I strenuously object to you targeting land at the Exhibition Centre on the Fosse Way. Do you not realise that this is going to interfere with a business that has been carefully developed over many years and which provides jobs and entertainment in the area ?

4. Both sites are traffic accident hotspots and not suitable for families possibly with young children, or teenagers on bicycles.

5. There are so many more suitable and worthy causes we would all like to see our council tax money spent on in these difficult financially lean times.

6. Which of the over-subscribed schools in the area do you intend to send their children to ?

7. Is there some reason you have chosen sites right on the extreme edge of Warwick District Council ? Is it so that Stratford District Council will have to pick up the costs of education and health-care ?

8. Providing such sites creates the possibility of attracting more travellers to the area and creating more and more expense. We should not have to finance people just because they choose an unconventional life-style.

I object to the proposed Gypsy and Traveller Site at GT02 on the following grounds:-

1. LOCAL ECONOMY
As part of the process to originally identify sites, Warwick District Council, in conjunction with Enfusion undertook a review of potential Gypsy and Traveller sites in Warwickshire. During this exercise, Enfusion conducted an appraisal of 16 key Sustainability metrics (SAs) which formed the basis of their guidance. Despite having conducted a formal assessment of 20 possible sites, the review of GT02 was barely 65% complete. Of the 16 required SA metrics, GT02 had four SA metrics that were left blank. Despite the fact that GT02 is occupied by a number of trading businesses that, along with the Warwickshire Exhibition Centre, contribute, both directly and indirectly, to the local economy, the SA metric for 'Economy' was left incomplete. This demonstrated a lack of due diligence by both Warwickshire District Council and Enfusion. As a consequence, the exhibition centre produced a study to quantify the Economic Impact that the Gypsy and Traveller proposal would have on the GT02 site.
The Economic SA metric alone provides enough reason for it to make the whole site inappropriate for a Gypsy & Traveller site. During the past number of years the UK economy has suffered recession and this has had a knock on effect in the local economy. High streets across the nation have seen organisations such as Blockbuster, Woolworths, HMV and Republic enter in to administration. Leamington Spa has seen a noticeable impact on its retail sector and many national and local companies have had to cease trading. Now almost 40 businesses have signed a petition suggesting the inevitable closure of the exhibition centre will cause a major impact on the local economy.
Warwickshire Exhibition Centre provides a significant direct and indirect contribution to the local economy. Having conducted an impact assessment of this contribution, the Warwickshire Exhibition Centre believes that it contributed more than £2million to the local economy in 2013, and more than £20million to the local economy in the four year period, 2013-2017. If Warwick District Council were to compulsorily purchase the land required at the Exhibition Centre, it would put the organisation go out of business. This would have a significant impact on the Exhibition Centre's employees, the directly supporting businesses and the wider Warwickshire Economy.
As a local businessman, I would strongly urge councillors to pay significant attention to these economic factors.


2. CONVENIENT ACCESS TO GP SURGERY, SCHOOL AND PUBLIC TRANSPORT.
The Practice Manager of the Croft Medical Centre has said there is no capacity to take on additional patients. Therefore, this confirms that the nearest practice - the Croft - which is 3 miles away, is already running at capacity and would not be in a position to cater for, what would up to 100 new patients, from the proposed 15 pitch gypsy and traveller site . There is no direct bus route to any of the other local practices which are over 5 miles away
Concerning public transport, there are two bus stops in the vicinity of the GT02 site. The first is on the Southam Road and the second is on the roundabout on the Fosse Way. These are positioned on the narrow grass verge. I requested a site visit from Peter Garrison from WCC Highways Department to assess the viability of the GT02 site for use by the gypsy and traveller community. He looked at both areas and his immediate thoughts were that the site was not viable and would not have the highway department's support at a prima facie level.
Mr Garrison went on to say that the site was not sustainable when assessing it on bus links, cycle paths, footway links and general amenities. It was suggested that a pavement would need to be built all the way to Radford and that this would have to be lit and maintained and would also introduce urbanisation into the countryside.
There is a speed camera positioned on the Fosse Way opposite the proposed site, there are also signs advising us of it being a 'High Risk Crash Route', '12 Casualties over 2 miles in 3 years', 'Think Bike'. These enforce the fact that both the Fosse Way (60 mph Speed Limit) and Southam Road (50 mph Speed Limit) are both busy, dangerous road.
Therefore, based on Peter Garrison's observations, information from Roger Harding and personal experience, I would comment that the two bus stops are not suitable for regular use and, it would require a lit path or pavement structure from the roundabout, on both sides of the road, all the way to the village, to make this area safe for pedestrians. Peter Garrison advised that the verge area was too narrow for this in several areas.
3. FLOODING
We own the land immediately above the proposed Site GT02. Last year, (2012) we experienced flooding as a large amount of surface water collected on the fields above. This 'overflow' happened on several occasions.
This volume of water caused extensive pooling of surface water in our four paddocks (situated above the GT02 site). This resulted in an outbreak of Liver Fluke in the
horses that use those paddocks. If concrete, hard standing areas were placed on the land below this, it could cause the back-up of excess water to increase, as the natural draining process would be interrupted and could result in more ill-health in our animals.


4. PROVISION OF UTILITIES (RUNNING WATER, TOILET FACILITIES WASTE DISPOSAL ETC.)
There would be no mains gas to the proposed site. Our property only uses oil or LPG gas. All the surrounding properties are serviced by individual septic tanks. There is no mains sewage system.
A large septic tank - notoriously problematic - while an obvious solution would cause ponding of effluent, given the principals of septic tank operation is such that fluids theoretically drain into surrounding land while solid waste collects to be either anaerobically broken down or removed from the site by a waste disposal contractor. The ponding of effluent from either one large septic tank or a series of smaller ones would present health concerns to both residents on that immediate site, livestock and nearby population.
Additionally, the mains power supply would need to be upgraded because it apparently has no further capacity and could not cope with a further addition of 12 'properties'.
5. AVOIDING AREAS WHERE THERE COULD BE AN ADVERSE IMPACT ON IMPORTANT FEATURES OF THE NATURAL AND HISTORIC ENVIRONMENT.

The proposed GT02 site is adjacent to an historic wood, owned and managed by ourselves. This covers 12 acres of land and in January this year a survey was carried out by Richard Finch, a Contractor for the Forest Commission (Site Survey 42856 - Parlour Spinney) to collect data for the National Forestry Inventory.

He informed us of a badger set in the wood, along with the presents of bats and a honey buzzard nest, with a breeding family located there. There are also owls, sparrow hawks, woodpeckers and a variety of deer naturalised in the wood. Mr Finch advised me that the badgers were protected and that it was against the law to develop 30m from their set. He also informed us that by placing any additional lighting on the land below the wood would affect the commuting route of the bats as they fly from the Warwickshire Exhibition site to the wood.

There are also two natural pond areas, one on the lower edge of the wood and one on the road edge, adjacent to proposed site. These contain various reptiles including adders, grass snakes, frogs, toads, aquatic insects and newts.

There are also sporting shoots that take place around the wood area on a regular basis, which obviously poses a danger to anyone inhabiting the surrounding land.

The Fosse Way, at this junction is the site of a Toll Station and is also a significant Roman Road. Roman potter has been found on the site and the record of this is below.

6. SITES WHICH CAN BE INTEGRATED INTO THE LANDSCAPE WITHOUT HARMING THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA
The GT02 site is located in a large valley, it will be visible from three routes leading to it. The valley is the southern gateway to Leamington and is a spectacular landscape and is a magnificent rural vista at the periphery of the major historic town of Royal Leamington Spa.
7. PROMOTES PEACEFUL AND INTEGRATED CO-EXISTENCE BETWEEN THE SITE AND THE LOCAL COMMUNITY
The proposed site GT02 is situated in an isolated, rural location, with a small hamlet of properties nearby. The addition of a site housing 15 pitches would increase the population by over 100%. This is not so much integrating with the existing community, as the existing community integrating with the 'new' community.

OBJECTION TO GT02 - PROPOSED GYPSY AND TRAVELLER SITE

On behalf of FOSSE WAY RAID - Residents Against Inappropriate Development, I would like it to be noted that during the first Consultation Period, ending July 2013, a total of 701 objections were submitted.

A meeting of local residents held in June 2013 to discuss the proposal of the GT02 site resulted in 450 people attending, again showing the support for the campaign against the proposed site.

We have been advised by Lorna Coldicott that it was not necessary to resubmit this quantity of objections again during Consultation Period 2, but obviously we would like the number of original objections to be noted at this stage.

These objections ranged in their scope but almost exclusively rejected the GT02 site based on the criteria which have been sited by WDC in the consultation process. Additionally, residents and business owners - including the owner of the Warwickshire Exhibition Centre - strongly objected on the grounds of damage to the local economy as a consequence of the development of GT02. The thrust of their objections were that with the development of GT02, the closure of the exhibition centre would follow with a significant, precipitous impact on other local businesses.

While it is clear that councillors have, since the July 2013 initial consultation, suggested that business impact be recognised as a new criteria, it is not apparent how this criteria can be introduced into the new consultation unless a further consultation is undertaken. Therefore, we want to place on record that the development of GT02 will lead to the closure of a 'unique' business which will impact the local economy with a loss of jobs and a reduction in discretionary spend in the area.

The GT02 site has raised public awareness in general to the WDC process for the development of Gypsy and Traveller sites. The news agencies including the Leamington Courier, local radio and ITV Central News have all featured the story of the potential closure of the Exhibition Centre and resulting impact on the local economy, therefore adding credibility to the strength of the argument.

We would respectfully request that this information be made available to your process as part of the Consultation Period 2.

Further to the preferred options published for the above, I have the following observations:
- Most of the preferred options are available without recourse to compulsory purchase. Compulsory purchase should always be a last resort, both on principle (given it should be a landowners right to retain ownership of their land), and for practical reasons - any compulsory purchase will inevitably be more costly to deliver, take longer, and has significant delivery risks given the high likelihood of legal challenge by affected landowners. It seems some of the alternative sites are also available without compulsory purchase, and indeed one which is actively being encouraged by the landowner. This should be given significant weight in the decision making, ahead of any theoretical better planning status
- It is suggested that the first consultation will now not be considered any further. I find this inappropriate and patronising to those who made the effort to respond to the specific sites where comment was requested in the first consultation. The first consultation provided a strong response against some sites (specifically GT 02) which is dismissed in the report to the Executive on the consultation as the result of a campaign by the landowner. Those responses should stand - they were from people motivated to respond to the first consultation. It is offensive to be dismissive of those responses based on who the planning officers arbitrarily determine ot have prompted the repsonses.

As to the sites, I would like to raise concerns over GT 02 specifically:
- this site would require CPO - it is therefore in principle not appropriate as above
- the site lies adjacent to a Roman road, with a high probability of archaeological interest from this and the toll house that stood here
- it would be difficult or impossible to mitigate the visual impact of the site given it lies at the bottom of a valley visible from above from 3 directions - this seems to be an important part of the assessment for other sites, but not this one
- there is no sustainable public transport connection - the bus stops cited in the report are not used, as they are not accessible from public footpaths and not safely accessible at all
- there are no amenities accessible without access to public transport
- WCC cite the Fosse Way as a Red Risk route with high likelihood of road accident. Any addition of housing, based on an assessment of the accessibility of the site by public transport, would need mitigating measures to calm this traffic if it was to be delivered safely, so that the public transport can be accessed
- moving the area of search away from the Warwickshire Exhibition Centre does not mitigate the impact on this business, which is a successful, growing local employer which draws people and external spend to the district. With Stoneleigh Exhibition Centre to be affected by HS2, the demand for this site is likely to increase. The existence of a G&T site across the road from the WEC would inevitably impact on the trade of that business, given the perception of the security of the site from its customers. To adopt this site would be to wilfully jeopardise a business which need not be jeopardised.
- WDC has made no assessment, or attempt to assess, the impact of the proposed development on local employment or employers. This is inappropriate.

Thank you for reading

I recently attended a consulatation in Whitnash regarding this issue, to get an overview of the options and current proposals. I remain very much opposed in particular to the site proposed at GT04 Harbury Lane/Fosse Way for the following reasons:

Safety:

The junction Harbury Lane Fosse Way is a notorously dangerous junction, with a speed camera having been required to be installed there to slow northbound vehicles. Approaching fast moving Fosse Way traffic is very difficult to see when approaching from either Harbury or Harbury Lane, and as a Harbury resident I have observed regular accidents there, many serious enough to require the air ambulance. If you care to visit the junction you will see the remaining debris from the multiple accidents there over time quite clearly.

An increase in vans, lorries, trailers and caravans right next to this junction, as travellers enter and exit the site at GT04 and turn on to the Fosse Way at relatively low speed, will only increase the accident risk even further with the speed and volume of traffic currently using the Fosse Way. This junction has a very serious accident history, and I do not believe thatGT04 therefore offers safe access to the road network.

Flood Risk:

GT04 is not a sustainable or appropriate site as the surrounding area is at risk of flooding as noted on the Environment Agency website, and I have personally observed on many occasions. I believe that WDC should research this site and obtain a full flood risk assessment.


Health Care:

The consultation document states that 'GP surgeries are located at Bishops Tachbrook(2.7 miles), Whitnash or Harbury(2.6 miles)'.The nearest and most convenient medical facility to this site is at Harbury and the surgery is already struggling to cope with demand as it has more than 6000 registered patients. As a resident of Harbury I can confirm that, excellent surgery though it is, they are completely overloaded with the current demand. I do not believe the surgery could accept additional patients, and that there are therefore any suitable medical facilities close to the proposed site.

Education:

The consultation document states that 'the nearest school with places is likely to be Bishops Itchington Primary School.. This does not take into consideration the 115 houses which have already been granted planning permission in Bishop's Itchington or the 200 proposed houses for the former cement works site between Bishop's Itchington and Harbury. It is therefore unlikely that there will be any spare capacity at either Harbury or Bishop's Itchington schools. As a consequence, any school age children from GT04 would have to travel into Leamington Spa to attend school. I do not believe that there are no suitable educational facilities close to the proposed site.

GT04 would also have an impact on the historic landscape and setting of Chesterton Windmill which is a heritage asset of international value. It is adjacent to the Roman Fort at Chesterton.This site would have a detrimental impact on the historic landscape.


Alternative Option Site GT02: Land abutting the Fosse Way close to its junction with the A425:

The landowner is not willing to sell this site and the Government is no longer supporting compulsory purchase powers. I support Harbury Parish Council's view that this site is no longer viable.


In summary there are far more appropriate sites which satisfy the criteria for convenient access to shops, schools and medical facilities.

I do not believe that either GT04 and GT02 satisfy the criteria for reasons of safety, flood risk, local health care, local education facilities and environmental concerns as above, and very strongly feel they should be disregarded.

OBJECTION TO GT02 - PROPOSED GYPSY AND TRAVELLER SITE

On behalf of FOSSE WAY RAID - Residents Against Inappropriate Development, I would like it to be noted that during the first Consultation Period, ending July 2013, a total of 701 objections were submitted.

A meeting of local residents held in June 2013 to discuss the proposal of the GT02 site resulted in 450 people attending, again showing the support for the campaign against the proposed site.

We have been advised by Lorna Coldicott that it was not necessary to resubmit this quantity of objections again during Consultation Period 2, but obviously we would like the number of original objections to be noted at this stage.

These objections ranged in their scope but almost exclusively rejected the GT02 site based on the criteria which have been sited by WDC in the consultation process. Additionally, residents and business owners - including the owner of the Warwickshire Exhibition Centre - strongly objected on the grounds of damage to the local economy as a consequence of the development of GT02. The thrust of their objections were that with the development of GT02, the closure of the exhibition centre would follow with a significant, precipitous impact on other local businesses.

While it is clear that councillors have, since the July 2013 initial consultation, suggested that business impact be recognised as a new criteria, it is not apparent how this criteria can be introduced into the new consultation unless a further consultation is undertaken. Therefore, we want to place on record that the development of GT02 will lead to the closure of a 'unique' business which will impact the local economy with a loss of jobs and a reduction in discretionary spend in the area.

The GT02 site has raised public awareness in general to the WDC process for the development of Gypsy and Traveller sites. The news agencies including the Leamington Courier, local radio and ITV Central News have all featured the story of the potential closure of the Exhibition Centre and resulting impact on the local economy, therefore adding credibility to the strength of the argument.

We would respectfully request that this information be made available to your process as part of the Consultation Period 2.

Reference the subject Gypsy and Traveller Sites.

Please accept this e-mail as my formal method of opposing the two proposed gypsy sites GT02 and GT04.

My comments are as follows:
Both sites are not required. The so called need is based on an out of date report produced by Salford university some years ago.
I believe several councils are questioning the data presented in this report.
I propose Warwick District Council, like other councils, investigate the validity of this document before progressing with this extremely costly and unnecessary activity.

If there is such a desperate need for G&T sites in this area why is it, "just up the road"at Ryton, the site is three quarters empty.

With regard to the actual local proposals.

GT02 (Warwickshire Exhibition Centre site):
* Would close this prosperous business after taking many years to build up. It would destroy the owner.
* Would make staff redundant (jobs in the countryside being extremely hard to find).

GT04 (Leamington Football Club site):
* It says this site isn't in a flood area yet the ground becomes very wet, that's why the pitch itself had to undergo extensive drainage work when being constructed.
* On certain days the smell of the chicken farm is intolerable. Ask any local, particularly in summer. I wouldn't want to take up permanent residence in this area.
* The cost of moving the football club wouldn't make this site viable.
ie:
Cost of securing a new site within Leamington.
Cost of building an equivalent, or better, facilities than the current site.
Transferring the flood light system.
This would be the minimum requirements, before you then need to consider the costs incurred in constructing the G&T requirements.
* I assume the residents will becoming to Harbury school and the doctor's surgery. Both of these are currently over subscribed. Warwick District Council would state they've achieved the G&T requirements, but Stratford district would have to fund all educational & health needs. This isn't acceptable and certainly not to the locals who will suffer even worse services and will have to fund it.
* This site would place travellers at risk. They would have to cross one of Warwickshire's most dangerous crossroads on their daily trek to school, or visit to the doctors (check statistics).
* This site would harm the views from the historic Chesterton windmill. This attracts many visitors to the area and is used in tourism advertising. To place a large G&T site at the foot of this landmark is an ill thought-out move.

I wish to object to the Gypsy and Traveller preferred site GT04 Land at Harbury Lane, Fosse Way.

My comments and some of my concerns are as follows:

- WDC utilised the findings in the Salford GTAA report in order to establish need, however there is no
evidence of WDC's due diligence in validating the accuracy of the report and /or the relevance of the
established need.
- The WDC consultation does not consider as required the existing capacity of current sites within
Warwickshire county and adjacent districts.
- The GTAA ignores the impact of the planned Transit site near Southam which has been agreed
since completion of the GTAA
- According to the Government's planning policy framework, adjacent DCs are required to
collaborate, and yet Warwick DC and Stratford DC are very much out of phase with their
consultations so logically they cannot collaborate. Further there is no evidence that WDC has
collaborated or discussed with Stratford DC other than a reported "10 minute long but un-minuted
meeting" or with Rugby DC
- there is no evidence in WDC's consultation report that as required by NPFF and CLG , that WDC
have weighed up the cost to council of Compulsory purchase vs development of underutilised
brownfield sites including those that the council already own.
. - The WDC proposals will provide for more accommodation than there are G&T residents within
WDC boundary the vast majority of whom already live in houses so the requirement is clearly
seriously over-stated
- There is clear evidence via Hansard that MP's now want a fair planning policy that should result
in the abolition of the G&T planning requirement
- There has been little (and passive) publicity of the Consultation process and key milestones. Had
it not been for the local Community group I would not have known about it - it feels and looks
like this is a deliberate underhanded approach.

Specific to Site GT04:

- The site does not meet the fundamental planning criteria laid out in the NPPF, guidance from
Department of Communities and Local Government and WDC's own consultation documents for
Gypsy & Traveller sites. GT04 does not comply with planning policy whereby sites should provide
access to nearby services and quality of life. Specifically:-
- Accessibility to shops and local services: GT04 does not meet national planning framework
guidelines recommended 5-10mins walk on a pavement.
-Proximity to local community: GT04 does not meet the national planning framework
guidelines recommendation for sites to be on community periphery to encourage integration.
-Establishing 5-10 pitches at GT04 would be disproportionate to the local community
(8 residential properties, with 16 adults and 4 children). This is contradictory to national
planning framework guidelines recommendations.
- GT04 does not meet national planning framework guidelines recommendations for
accessibility to good local transport.
- GT04 does meet national planning framework guidelines recommendations for availability
of good infrastructure (roads, pavement, street lighting, broadband, cellphone reception).The
infrastructure at GT04 is poor and would require considerable investment to rectify. And this is an
expense that WDC should not incur during times of cutbacks in public expenditure and services.
- The area is prone to flooding with Harbury Lane and surrounding fields are often under water.
In accordance with planning and building regs, GT04 would be unable to use soak away or runoff
based drainage systems since the soil is clay based and will require connection to mains sewerage
which does not exist in Harbury Lane.
-Planning policy for G&T requires schools / GP surgeries to be a 5-10 minute walk away, GT04 is at
least a 45 minute walk away.
- The nearest GP surgery is three miles away
- that GP surgery is at capacity.
- The nearest primary, junior and senior schools are already at capacity.
- GT04 is located on Harbury Lane and Fosse Way cross roads that is a high risk travel route with high
volumes of traffic and an increasing number of accidents. Speed cameras and warning signs
highlight this fact. Children will be at risk if allowed to stand on a busy road to wait for transport to
school if indeed such transport exists
- According to aroma maps GT04 is within zone of aerial discharge from Barnwell Chicken farm. This
raises serious environmental and health concerns, and was a primary reason that the potential G&T
site at Barnwell farm was previously rejected. Simply -Barnwell chicken farm can smell awful and
GT04 would not be a good place to live
GT04 is within 400m of the Harbury Lane Breakers yard, which generates noise and air pollution and
which would make GT04 an unpleasant place to live but also an unhealthy one.
- The NPFF requires that the assessment of site suitability should be consistent with other
planning requests. However I understand that other residential planning applications within
200m of GT04 have been recently rejected by council planning authorities, referencing rural
policy on the grounds that the proposal would have an adverse "impact on the character of the
area".

- the cost to create 5 to 10 permanent pitches ranges between £325k to £650k, using government's
figures (£65k per pitch). In addition to this, G04 site may require relocation of Football club. There
is no firm evidence that G&T can or will pay these sums of money and WDC have not suggested an
alternative if G&T cannot or will not pay. GT04 should not be considered if there is not proof that
G&T can and will buy and develop it
- GT04 is an area of good quality farmland fully utilised for livestock and arable farming.
- GT04 will lack of Integration into the landscape and would spoil the views from Chesterton
Windmill, a 17th-century Grade I listed building and a striking landmark in South-East Warwickshire
- The proposed site will have an adverse visual impact from Harbury and The Fosse Way (Roman
Road).
- If GT04 were to be developed, the use of a vehicle or public transport to shops and schools is a
necessity and not considered eco-friendly.
- The site will have a detrimental impact on tourism and visitors to Warwickshire especially including
Mallory Court Hotel and a consequential effect on local employment.
- The site will damage wildlife habitat.
I wish to object to the Gypsy and Traveller preferred site GT02 Land abutting the Fosse Way at its junction with the B425.

My comments and some of my concerns are as follows:
- WDC utilised the findings in the Salford GTAA report in order to establish need, however there is no
evidence of WDC's due diligence in validating the accuracy of the report and /or the relevance of the
established need.
- The WDC consultation does not consider as required the existing capacity of current sites within
Warwickshire county and adjacent districts.
- The GTAA ignores the impact of the planned Transit site near Southam which has been agreed
since completion of the GTAA
- According to the Government's planning policy framework, adjacent DCs are required to
collaborate, and yet Warwick DC and Stratford DC are very much out of phase with their
consultations so logically they cannot collaborate. Further there is no evidence that WDC has
collaborated or discussed with Stratford DC other than a reported "10 minute long but un-minuted
meeting" or with Rugby DC
- there is no evidence in WDC's consultation report that as required by NPFF and CLG , that WDC
have weighed up the cost to council of Compulsory purchase vs development of underutilised
brownfield sites including those that the council already own.
. - The WDC proposals will provide for more accommodation than there are G&T residents within
WDC boundary the vast majority of whom already live in houses so the requirement is clearly
seriously over-stated
- There is clear evidence via Hansard that MP's now want a fair planning policy that should result
in the abolition of the G&T planning requirement
- There has been little (and passive) publicity of the Consultation process and key milestones. Had
it not been for the local Community group I would not have known about it - it feels and looks
like this is a deliberate underhanded approach.
Specific to Site GT02:
- The site does not meet the fundamental planning criteria laid out in the NPPF, guidance from
Department of Communities and Local Government and WDC's own consultation documents for
Gypsy & Traveller sites. GT02 does not comply with planning policy whereby sites should provide
access to nearby services and quality of life. Specifically:-
- Accessibility to shops and local services: GT02 does not meet national planning framework
guidelines recommended 5-10mins walk on a pavement.
-Proximity to local community: GT02 does not meet the national planning framework
guidelines recommendation for sites to be on community periphery to encourage integration.
- GT02 Relies on the Fosse Way for access, a route which is becoming busier and more dangerous every year,
with road signs emphasising the high and growing casualty rates.
There is also no pavement making access difficult and highly hazardous for pedestrians, particularly children.
- GT02 does not meet national planning framework guidelines recommendations for
accessibility to good local transport.
- GT02 does not meet national planning framework guidelines recommendations for availability
of good infrastructure (roads, pavement, street lighting, broadband, cellphone reception).The
infrastructure at GT02 is poor and would require considerable investment to rectify. And this is an
expense that WDC should not incur during times of cutbacks in public expenditure and services.
- The area is prone to flooding with surrounding fields often under water.
In accordance with planning and building regs, GT02 would be unable to use soak away or runoff
based drainage systems since the soil is clay based and will require connection to mains sewerage
which does not exist.
-Planning policy for G&T requires schools / GP surgeries to be a 5-10 minute walk away, GT02 is at
least a 45 minute walk away.

I wish to object to the Gypsy and Traveller preferred site GT02 Land abutting the Fosse Way at its junction with the B425.

My comments and some of my concerns are as follows:
- WDC utilised the findings in the Salford GTAA report in order to establish need, however there is no
evidence of WDC's due diligence in validating the accuracy of the report and /or the relevance of the
established need.
- The WDC consultation does not consider as required the existing capacity of current sites within
Warwickshire county and adjacent districts.
- The GTAA ignores the impact of the planned Transit site near Southam which has been agreed
since completion of the GTAA
- According to the Government's planning policy framework, adjacent DCs are required to
collaborate, and yet Warwick DC and Stratford DC are very much out of phase with their
consultations so logically they cannot collaborate. Further there is no evidence that WDC has
collaborated or discussed with Stratford DC other than a reported "10 minute long but un-minuted
meeting" or with Rugby DC
- there is no evidence in WDC's consultation report that as required by NPFF and CLG , that WDC
have weighed up the cost to council of Compulsory purchase vs development of underutilised
brownfield sites including those that the council already own.
. - The WDC proposals will provide for more accommodation than there are G&T residents within
WDC boundary the vast majority of whom already live in houses so the requirement is clearly
seriously over-stated
- There is clear evidence via Hansard that MP's now want a fair planning policy that should result
in the abolition of the G&T planning requirement
- There has been little (and passive) publicity of the Consultation process and key milestones. Had
it not been for the local Community group I would not have known about it - it feels and looks
like this is a deliberate underhanded approach.
Specific to Site GT02:
- The site does not meet the fundamental planning criteria laid out in the NPPF, guidance from
Department of Communities and Local Government and WDC's own consultation documents for
Gypsy & Traveller sites. GT02 does not comply with planning policy whereby sites should provide
access to nearby services and quality of life. Specifically:-
- Accessibility to shops and local services: GT02 does not meet national planning framework
guidelines recommended 5-10mins walk on a pavement.
-Proximity to local community: GT02 does not meet the national planning framework
guidelines recommendation for sites to be on community periphery to encourage integration.
- GT02 Relies on the Fosse Way for access, a route which is becoming busier and more dangerous every year,
with road signs emphasising the high and growing casualty rates.
There is also no pavement making access difficult and highly hazardous for pedestrians, particularly children.
- GT02 does not meet national planning framework guidelines recommendations for
accessibility to good local transport.
- GT02 does not meet national planning framework guidelines recommendations for availability
of good infrastructure (roads, pavement, street lighting, broadband, cellphone reception).The
infrastructure at GT02 is poor and would require considerable investment to rectify. And this is an
expense that WDC should not incur during times of cutbacks in public expenditure and services.
- The area is prone to flooding with surrounding fields often under water.
In accordance with planning and building regs, GT02 would be unable to use soak away or runoff
based drainage systems since the soil is clay based and will require connection to mains sewerage
which does not exist.
-Planning policy for G&T requires schools / GP surgeries to be a 5-10 minute walk away, GT02 is at
least a 45 minute walk away.

I am writing to register my objection to the proposed Gypsy and Traveller site GT02 (Warwickshire Exhibition Centre).

I am objecting to the site on the basis of:

- The site is on Green Belt land and will directly affect the Green Belt

- The site is overlooked by Ufton, Leamington and Harbury and will have a detrimental effect on the landscape. Due to the elavation of the land around it it will not be possible to screen the site.

- Both the Fosse and A425 are busy routes and the access to and from the site will be unsafe.

- The Exhibition Centre will need to closed and it's heritage will disappear

- There is no infrastructure at this site and no facilities. The travellers will have to walk on busy public highways leading to risk to themselves and other.

I also feel that the study that was used to establish the requirement for gypsy sites is out of date and floored and has been driven by the current affairs and at that time. The requirement for these sites at all needs review.

I am also concerned that the site is on the Warwickshire DC and Stratford DC boundary and any implication and effects of this site will cross this boundary leading to inefficiencies and ineffectiveness of response.

I wish to report my objection to the proposed gypsy sites GT02 and GT04.

I have read the recent literature and attended the meeting/exhibition earlier in the spring at Harbury Village Hall. I have concerns about the original research that sourced these potential Gypsy & Traveller Sites and the fact that the research was not done locally and that gypsys were actually involved in the direction of the research.

GT04

I am concerned about its proximity to my home and village and if this site were successful I fear for the drain on resources that the site would create as school and doctors places are already at maximum capacity.

I am aware that the football club will only agree to the use of the land as a G&T site if they are able to relocate to a city centre site, if this is not possible they do not wish to move so if you choose this land it would be an attempt at a compulsory purchase.

GT02

I object to the suggestion that this site is put forward as a proposed G&T site based on the following facts:

1. I am employed at the Warwickshire Exhibition Centre (WEC) and am clearly aware that the land owners do not wish to sell, so if this site is forced through it would need to be via compulsory purchase which would be costly for the council and take years to complete if it ever would.

2. The threat of this site alone has been sufficient to deter potential event organisers from using our exhibition hall and it has also deterred current organisers working with us from signing extended contracts to work with us over the next 5 years.

3. I am one of 7 permanent employees at the WEC and when we have exhibitions on we employ many more people on a temporary basis, sometimes up to 30 or 40. If the site at GT02 was approved the WEC would be forced to close down and myself and all colleagues would be forced into unemployment.

4. The WEC brings significant revenue into the county/district through the thousands of visitors and hundreds of exhibitors it brings to the Centre each year. Revenue for the district is source through hotels, B&Bs, restaurants, other tourist attractions in the area etc. For some of our events we will book directly accommodation for our exhibitors and we promote local facilities via our website.

5. I have concerns about the location of the proposed site being on such a main road - this does not prove safe access to and from the site for vehicles and there is really no pedestrian access from the proposed site.

6. The proposed site is opposite a business but also a residential home.

7. The adjacent site is protected ancient woodland and igf a G&T site were placed next to it is would have severe damage to wildlife habitat.

8. The land is a historic toll site from medieval times.

9. The land is on the archaeological site.

10. I do question why all the sites are in the south of Warwickshire and I also question the governments suggestion on how manysirte are required - it is far too many for our asre and the proposed sites are too close to each other.

I do sincerely hope that Warwick District Council do remove these 2 options from the local G&T lists.

I object to the proposed Gypsy and Travellers Site GT02.

The proposal identified land at the Warwickshire Exhibition Centre which was suitable for a gypsy and travellers site. I do not believe that any land at the site is suitable as any area chosen will dramatically affect the operation of the Warwickshire Exhibition Centre which has been a trading business on the site for over 10 years (part of Meridienne Exhibitions Ltd).

This is a viable and thriving exhibition centre which attracts nearly 40,000 visitors a year to a full range of events.

I work at the exhibition centre and my role is to specifically grow the venue usage which I have achieved over the past few years. We are now enjoying significant growth in new events and also retaining most clients year on year.

As news of the proposed site has spread most of my clients have phoned for assurance as to how this will affect their event. If you are unaware the exhibition and event industry normally has a 6-12 month lead time from when an event is booked at a venue to actually operating. In some cases this can be extended up to 2 years. Clearly any potential usage of our site for a gypsy or travellers site is a huge concern for clients and potential clients. They simply do not know what impact this will have on the venue's ability to service their event as they need all the surrounding land for their parking and event operations.

I have already lost potential bookings because of the adverse publicity to date of our venue being named so clearly in the proposals. Customers simply want to book a venue that they know will be suitable for their event and at the moment, what we will become over the coming years is not clear or stable.

I must also stress that we contribute massively to the local economy in terms of additional spend from thousands of visitors and hundreds of exhibitors we attract to the area, be it on entertainment, accommodation, travel or leisure. The value of this should not be underestimated to the local economy when there are shops closing every day.

The exhibition centre also directly supports a team of up to 40 employees during events - all whose jobs are at risk should the proposed site be granted. Without doubt whatsoever the exhibition centre would cease to exist as clients would simply move to other venues where there was no external issues which affected their event.

I understand that some of the suitability and sustainably of the proposed site is judged on public transport - although there is a bus route close to the site stops were implemented only in recent years since a local resident on the Radford Semele hill wanted his young son to have independence and hence formal bus stops were introduced. We very rarely recommend to visitors to use this as it is a treacherous road to walk along, and an infrequent service, in fact, we put on a mini bus for most events from the station direct to the venue to ensure visitors safety.

The Fosse Way itself has had numerous accidents in recent years hence the volume of traffic warning signs and the installation of a speed camera in an attempt to manage the traffic and reduce accidents on this stretch of road.

The final point I would like to make is that one of the criteria is to promote peaceful and integrated co-existence between the site and the local community. Because of the location, the immediate residents who would become the "local community" have their homes in 6 dwellings. Within these 6 dwellings there are no more than 30 residents. From what I understand the proposed site could be home to more than 120 gypsies and travellers - this is not integration into the local community but rather a take over which makes residents who have been in their homes for over 10+ years the minority community.

I could continue to answer the many other criteria by which you will deem whether this site is suitable or not but following the meeting where nearly 400 local residents attended I feel you may have evidence from them on these points.

My concern is that the Enfusion report simply could not ascertain the effect on the local economy of the proposed site. Clearly if you name in the site location an active and thriving business you will affect the local economy and hopefully you can understand from my objective the risk to jobs, local economy and a thriving businesses.

I fail to understand why the economic importance of the proposed site has never been evaluated or understood properly by anyone involved in this process. You have been told time and time again and yet no one is listening.

I am unable to access your on-line response website hence an e-mail. I have to ask myself if this is due to the closing date for responses being imminent!

Comments on site GT02 to which I object.

My responses to the suitable of this site remain those which I submitted during the first consultation, to summarize:

a) a great visual impact as the site lies in a valley and is visible from all directions
b) with much house building forecast for Radford Semele an already full primary school will be unable to accommodate even more children. The next nearest primary schools all fall into the district of Stratford on Avon making the siting of a G & T site in Warwick District something of a misnomer.
c) the Fosseway is recognised as being of particular historical importance and ground works which will be required for the site risk disturbing this.
d) the access to and from the site will be particularly unsafe for pedestrians and vehicles due to the volume of traffic using the Fosseway.
e) compulsory purchasing land at Warwickshire Exhibition Centre will result in the closure of the business with the loss of employment and financial loss to the local economy.

I feel sure that many people are unaware of the requirement to respond to this second consultation, feeling that they have already made their feeling known the first time!!

As a further point may I mention that since the first consultation Stratford District Council has given approval for a G & T site (temporary stays only) on land just outside Southam on the Daventry road. As an Ufton resident is our very small village to become a frequently used thoroughfare by the travelling community, this in addition to the heavy lorries travelling to the Biffa waste tip and the greenwaste recycling facility just outside our village plus the inevitable major disruption the construction of HS2 will bring.

I am writing to register my objection to the proposed Gypsy and Traveller site GT02 (Warwickshire Exhibition Centre).

I am objecting to the site on the basis of:

- The site is on Green Belt land and will directly affect the Green Belt

- The site is overlooked by Ufton, Leamington and Harbury and will have a detrimental effect on the landscape. Due to the elavation of the land around it, it will not be possible to screen the site.

- Both the Fosse and A425 are busy routes and the access to and from the site will be unsafe.

- The Exhibition Centre will need to closed and it's heritage will disappear

- There is no infrastructure at this site and no facilities. The travellers will have to walk on busy public highways leading to risk to themselves and other.

I also feel that the study that was used to establish the requirement for gypsy sites is out of date and floored and has been driven by the current affairs and at that time. The requirement for these sites at all needs review.

I am also concerned that the site is on the Warwickshire DC and Stratford DC boundary and any implication and effects of this site will cross this boundary leading to inefficiencies and ineffectiveness of response.
I am writing to register my objection to the proposed Gypsy and Traveller site GT04 (Leamington FC).

I am objecting to the site on the basis of:

- The site is overlooked by Leamington and Harbury and will have a detrimental effect on the landscape.

- Both the Fosse and Harbury Lane are busy routes and regular access to and from the site will be unsafe. During football matches, stewards have to guide traffic in to and out of the site.

- Leamington FC will need to be relocated and it's history tarnished.

- There is no infrastructure at this site and no facilities. The travellers will have to walk on busy public highways leading to risk to themselves and other.

I also feel that the study that was used to establish the requirement for gypsy sites is out of date and floored and has been driven by the current affairs at that time. The requirement for these sites at all needs review.

I am also concerned that the site is on the Warwickshire DC and Stratford DC boundary and any implication and effects of this site will cross this boundary leading to inefficiencies and ineffectiveness of response.

I wish to register my objection to the proposed Gypsy Traveller site near to Harbury (GT02, GT04).

My concerns are as follows.

1. The strain on local amenities. Our doctors surgery and village school is struggling to meet the needs of the community at it's current size. To add more families to this would require a large investment of public money (which given the current economic climate is unrealistic) to adequately meet the needs of the local tax payers. We have recently have Harbury fields phase 1 and 2 which has added many more families. When phase 3 and 4 are complete the strain will be even greater.

2. There are currently no footpaths and very limited public transport options close to the proposed site. This will mean that another significant investment of tax payers money to make it safe for the inhabitants of the proposed site.

3. The fosse way is a saturated travel network. The volume of traffic already traveling to jaguar land rover, and Aston Martin at Gaydon results in challenging and sometime dangerous travel environments for families taking their children to school in Leamington or Warwick during the commuting hours. If you add a gypsy settlement at the proposed sites along the fosse way you will be adding significantly to an already struggling transport system. This will result in treacherous traveling conditions and more accidents as well as potential loss of life.

These reasons make it inappropriate for the site to be positioned along the fosse way and close to Harbury. At the consultation we were told that Warwick district council does not have any permanent sites. I believe it is only fair that the needs (school doctors surgery etc) of any sites be met by the Warwick district. Stratford on Avon district council already provides homes and amenities to the travelling community and so it does not make sense that we meet the needs of your districts travelling community as well as our own.

I understand that the report upon which the local plan has been based is fundamentally flawed and challenged by local MPs. I implore you to suspend this project until thorough and unbiased research base on an actual need can be carried out and an adequate and professional consultation can be completed.

I would be very interested to hear your thoughts on the above points.

I attempted to complete the online form but I was unable to select the document I wished to comment on. I fear the link may have broken. For this reason I emailing my objection and request that the deadline be extended to ensure that residents have the opportunity to make their feelings known.

I wish to register my objection to the proposed Gypsy Traveller site near to Harbury (GT02, GT04).

My concerns are as follows.

1. The strain on local amenities. Our doctors surgery and village school is struggling to meet the needs of the community at it's current size. To add more families to this would require a large investment of public money (which given the current economic climate is unrealistic) to adequately meet the needs of the local tax payers. We have recently have Harbury fields phase 1 and 2 which has added many more families. When phase 3 and 4 are complete the strain will be even greater.

2. There are currently no footpaths and very limited public transport options close to the proposed site. This will mean that another significant investment of tax payers money to make it safe for the inhabitants of the proposed site.

3. The fosse way is a saturated travel network. The volume of traffic already traveling to jaguar land rover, and Aston Martin at Gaydon results in challenging and sometime dangerous travel environments for families taking their children to school in Leamington or Warwick during the commuting hours. If you add a gypsy settlement at the proposed sites along the fosse way you will be invertible be adding significantly to an already struggling transport system. This will result in treacherous traveling conditions and more accidents as well as potential loss of life.

These reason make it inappropriate for the site to be positioned along the fosse way and close to Harbury. At the consultation we were told that Warwick district council does not have any permanent sites. I believe it is only fair that the needs (school doctors surgery etc) of any sites be met by the Warwick district. Stratford on Avon district council already provides homes and amenities to the travelling community and so it does not make sense that we meet the needs of your districts travelling community as well as our own.

I understand that the report upon which the local plan has been based is fundamentally flawed and challenged by local MPs. I implore you to suspend this project until thorough and unbiased research base on an actual need can be carried out and an adequate and professional consultation can be completed.

I would be very interested to hear your thoughts on the above points.

I OBJECT - SITE GT02
30th April 2014
1. PUBLIC TRANSPORT
Concerning public transport, there are two bus stops in the vicinity of the GT02 site. The first is on the Southam Road and the second is on the roundabout on the Fosse Way. These are positioned on the narrow grass verge. I requested a site visit from Peter Garrison from WCC Highways Department to assess the viability of the GT02 site for use by the gypsy and traveller community. He looked at both areas and his immediate thoughts were that the site was not viable and would not have the highway department's support at a prima facie level.
Mr Garrison went on to say that the site was not sustainable when assessing it on bus links, cycle paths, footway links and general amenities. It was suggested that a pavement would need to be built all the way to Radford and that this would have to be lit and maintained and would also introduce urbanisation into the countryside.
On a personal note, I have two children aged 16 and 12, one of which is registered disabled. I have not allowed either of them to walk along the overgrown, narrow verge to use these bus stops in the 2 1/2 years we have lived here. I have felt it is just too dangerous. I have also not allowed them to walk the 1.5 miles into Radford Semele as there is no pathway, just high grass, and no street lighting.
Below is a turning movement diagram, supplied by Roger Harding, Principal Technical Advisor, Transport & Highways, Warwickshire County Council, showing the movements at the Fosse Way and Southam Road roundabout. This is a 12 hour survey (0700 - 1900).



There is a speed camera positioned on the Fosse Way opposite the proposed site, there are also signs advising us of it being a 'High Risk Crash Route', '12 Casualties over 2 miles in 3 years', 'Think Bike'. These enforce the fact that both the Fosse Way (60 mph Speed Limit) and Southam Road (50 mph Speed Limit) are both busy, dangerous road.
Therefore, based on Peter Garrison's observations, information from Roger Harding and my own personal experience, I would comment that the two bus stops are not suitable for regular use and, I have been advised, that it would require a lit path or pavement structure from the roundabout, on both sides of the road, all the way to the village, to make this area safe for pedestrians. Peter Garrison advised that the verge area was too narrow for this in several areas.

2. FLOODING
We own the land immediately above the proposed Site GT02. Last year, (2012) we experienced flooding as a large amount of surface water collected on the fields above. This 'overflow' happened on several occasions.
This volume of water caused extensive pooling of surface water in our four paddocks (situated above the GT02 site). This resulted in an outbreak of Liver Fluke in the
horses that use those paddocks. If concrete, hard standing areas were placed on the land below this, it could cause the back-up of excess water to increase, as the natural draining process would be interrupted and could result in more ill-health in our animals.
3. PROVISION OF UTILITIES (RUNNING WATER, TOILET FACILITIES WASTE DISPOSAL ETC.)
There would be no mains gas to the proposed site. Our property only uses oil or LPG gas. All the surrounding properties are serviced by individual septic tanks. There is no mains sewage system.
A large septic tank - notoriously problematic - while an obvious solution would cause ponding of effluent, given the principals of septic tank operation is such that fluids theoretically drain into surrounding land while solid waste collects to be either anaerobically broken down or removed from the site by a waste disposal contractor. The ponding of effluent from either one large septic tank or a series of smaller ones would present health concerns to both residents on that immediate site, livestock and nearby population.
Additionally, the mains power supply would need to be upgraded because it apparently has no further capacity and could not cope with a further addition of 12 'properties'.
4. AVOIDING AREAS WHERE THERE COULD BE AN ADVERSE IMPACT ON IMPORTANT FEATURES OF THE NATURAL AND HISTORIC ENVIRONMENT.

The proposed GT02 site is adjacent to an historic wood, owned and managed by ourselves. This covers 12 acres of land and in January this year a survey was carried out by Richard Finch, a Contractor for the Forest Commission (Site Survey 42856 - Parlour Spinney) to collect data for the National Forestry Inventory.

He informed us of a badger set in the wood, along with the presents of bats and a honey buzzard nest, with a breeding family located there. There are also owls, sparrow hawks, woodpeckers and a variety of deer naturalised in the wood. Mr Finch advised me that the badgers were protected and that it was against the law to develop 30m from their set. He also informed me that by placing any additional lighting on the land below the wood would affect the commuting route of the bats as they fly from the Warwickshire Exhibition site to the wood.


There are also two natural pond areas, one on the lower edge of the wood and one on the road edge, adjacent to proposed site. These contain various reptiles including adders, grass snakes, frogs, toads, aquatic insects and newts.


There are also sporting shoots that take place around the wood area on a regular basis, which obviously poses a danger to anyone inhabiting the surrounding land.

The Fosse Way, at this junction is the site of a Toll Station and is also a significant Roman Road. Roman potter has been found on the site and the record of this is below.

http://timetrail.warwickshire.gov.uk/detail.aspx?monuid=WA1916
Information for record number 1916
Summary Findspot - a pottery sherd dating to the Roman period was found 200m south east of Parlour Spinney.
What Is It?
Type: Findspot

Period: Romano-British (43 AD - 409 AD)
Where Is It?
Parish: Radford Semele
District: Warwick, Warwickshire
Grid Reference: SP 36 63

http://timetrail.warwickshire.gov.uk/detail.aspx?monuid=WA1908
Information for record number 1908
Summary The site of a toll house, where tolls were collected from travellers using the toll road. The toll house is marked on the Tithe Award Map of 1843. It was situated at the junction of Southam Road and Fosse Way, Radford Semele.
What Is It?
Type: Toll House

Period: Imperial (1751 AD - 1913 AD)

Where Is It?
Parish: Radford Semele
District: Warwick, Warwickshire
Grid Reference: SP 36 63


5. SITES WHICH CAN BE INTEGRATED INTO THE LANDSCAPE WITHOUT HARMING THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA
The GT02 site is located in a large valley, it will be visible from three routes leading to it. The valley is the southern gateway to Leamington and is a spectacular landscape and is a magnificent rural vista at the periphery of the major historic town of royal Leamington Spa.
Pictured are the views of the GT02 site from the land adjacent to the proposed site. It shows that it will be clearly visible from Ufton, the Southam Road and the Fosse Way. No amount of natural screening will disguise the site.





6. PROMOTES PEACEFUL AND INTEGRATED CO-EXISTENCE BETWEEN THE SITE AND THE LOCAL COMMUNITY
The proposed site GT02 is situated in an isolated, rural location, with a small hamlet of properties nearby. The addition of a site housing 15 pitches would increase the population by over 100%. This is not so much integrating with the existing community, as the existing community integrating with the 'new' community.
7. LOCAL ECONOMY
THE WARWICKSHIRE EXHIBITION CENTRE - The land proposed for GT02 is opposite The Warwickshire Exhibition Centre. Local residents have commissioned a study to outline the affect the proposed development will have on this business. This has stated that extensive business will be lost and with inevitable closure of the business within a few years. At this time of economic hardship, the loss of this major local business and subsequent job losses is an unacceptable consequence of such a development. It is apparently the perception among clients at the exhibition centre that the location of the gypsy and traveller site will have a negative impact on attendance and the success therefore of events and exhibition. Given the business owner has stated that he has already lost business due to the two consultation periods, it can never be argued at some future juncture that this was an unintended consequence of the development and go ahead for GT02.
Living opposite the centre, I am aware that there are many thousands of visitors to the centre each year. These people obviously bring trade to the local businesses including B&Bs, restaurants, petrol stations, shops etc. All adding to the local economy. A total of nearly 40,000 visit the exhibition centre each year.
In between the exhibitions, the car park and land around the exhibition centre are always maintained beautifully and are never an eyesore on the views from the surrounding approaches.
8.
LDF EVIDENCE BASE, STRATEGIC HOUSE LAND AVAILABILITY ASSEMESSMENT REPORT 2012
Crucially, the LDF rejected land to the south of Radford for development of new homes towards the Fosse Way as being too distant from amenities.
The LDF Evidence Base, Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment Main Report in May 2012 concluded: 'This area is not adjacent to the existing built up area and would not be considered to be suitable location for development in terms of access to schools, services, shops and employment'.
There seem to be mixed views from the Gypsy and Traveller community as to whether urban or rural sites are preferred. However, the council has a responsibility to provide viable sites and if this land could not fulfil the criteria for housing needs, how could it be feasible for a gypsy and travellers site.

1 Convenient access to a GP surgery, school, and public transport
In my initial objection I pointed out that the nearest surgery and local school were already oversubscribed. As the plan is to build many hundreds of extra houses in the nearest village ( Radford Semele) the situation will only being made worse by the use of this site for travellers.
The lack of footpath and bus stop facilities to the schools, surgery etc. has not changed i.e. none existing
2 Avoiding areas with a high risk of flooding
Standing water and poor drainage in this area when heavy rain.
3 Safe access to the road network and provision for parking, turning and servicing on site
Busy roads (look at the councils own surveys for traffic issues) means no safe access to the road network.
4 Avoiding areas where there is the potential for noise and other disturbance
The addition of the site can only mean additional noise and disturbance.
5 Provision of utilities (running water, toilet facilities, waste disposal, etc.)
No access to main drainage, much expense to provide any utilities. Also more power supply to area.
6 Avoiding areas where there could be adverse impact on important features of the natural and historic environment
No change to the issues of impact on the historical and natural aspects of the site.
7 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 site will is in a valley and will be clearly visible from all points of the compass.
8 Promotes peaceful and integrated co-existence between the site and the local community
The site would totally overwhelm the small existing community.
9 Avoids placing undue pressure on local infrastructure and services
Local infrastructure and services already oversubscribed use of this site can only add to the pressure.
10 Reflects the extent to which traditional lifestyles (whereby some travellers live and work-from the same location thereby omitting many travel to work journeys) can contribute to sustainability
The current site owners/dwellers have been denied planning permission to make business use of the land. I cannot see that granting travellers the right to set up a business is right or proper
6.2 In addition, some of these factors have to be looked at in greater detail to ensure that all environmental factors are taken into account when reducing the list of sites to a 'Preferred Option' for further consultation, in particular, Criteria 6 which has a number of elements to consider. The assessment of sites has therefore been undertaken using the following 19 headings:

1 Landscape character
Presently a quiet area of countryside with few dwellings basically farmland would be destroyed by the creation of a travellers site
2 Nature conservation designation
An area already listed as special interest
3 Historical designation
Already listed as special interest
4 Infrastructure requirements
Much expenditure needed to make the site usable for drainage, power and access
5 Ecology
Damage to the local wildlife must occur if the site goes ahead.
6 Flooding
Poor drainage exists. The use of the land for a traveller's site can only make this worse
7 Contamination and other constraints
What use of the land are the travellers allowed to make? If it's for typical traveller occupation e.g. scrap metal working etc. then there is a contamination issue and introduces industry into a rural environment.
8 Agricultural land quality
The use of the land is changing as the local farmers are improving their processes.
9 How visible and open in character is the site?
The location cannot be hidden it sits in a valley visible from all points of the compass.
10 Can the site be visually screened adequately?
Possible with great expenditure.



11 Is the site close to other residential property?
Very close to isolated property
12 How far away is the primary road network?
Very near, high impact
13 Distance to GP surgeries, schools, dentists, hospitals, shops, community facilities?
Within three miles of overcrowded facilities
14 Is the potential site on previously developed land?
No
15 Access issues
Very busy roads. (See council's road surveys) which paint a poor picture for the use of this site
16 Level site
Yes
17 Suitable size
Yes
18 Availability
Not available existing owner will fight Compulsory Purchase
19 Deliverability
Not within timescales required

Objections to the Proposed Gypsy and Traveller Site
at GT02 Land abutting the Fosse Way at its junction with the B425
The WARWICKSHIRE EXHIBITION CENTRE - Alternative site

- In addition to my initial lengthy objection submitted during consultation round one, I now offer the following objections:

1. I am astounded that despite nearly 1,000 objections to the original plans for a Gypsy and Traveller site on the above land, GT 02 still remains second on the list of 'alternative sites' with a clear number of local residents objecting to the plan as unworkable. There remains no adequate explanation as to why the Warwickshire Exhibition Centre is 'a green' on the G&T short list.

2 The naming of The Warwickshire Exhibition Centre - gross negligence
The naming of The Warwickshire Exhibition Centre (as a business) has already had a negative financial impact on the business which is likely to increase in the event of GT02 remaining on the list of sites. In short, it should never have been singled out for naming as such and someone, somewhere, must be held responsible for gross negligence in doing so.
It is clear that the planning process has been "fundamentally flawed" from the outset.

3 The Warwickshire Exhibition Centre - UNIQUE LOCAL BUSINESS
The Warwickshire is a UNIQUE LOCAL BUSINESS. There are countless other sites in the area which will not necessitate the closure of a UNIQUE LOCAL BUSINESS such as The Warwickshire Exhibition Centre.

4 Financial loss to the Warwickshire Exhibition Centre business
Building a gypsy and traveller site on exhibition centre owned land would have a devastating business impact on The Warwickshire Exhibition Centre's existing and planned business growth. This visible foreseen affect could eventually be responsible for the closure of the exhibition centre with considerable financial loss over a long period of time.

5 Financial impact on the local economy
A gypsy and traveller site on G"02 would have a major negative impact upon the economic success of the Warwickshire Exhibition Centre and the amount of visitors it draws in nationally, as well as the valuable income these visitors produce for the local community and businesses with resultant costs for local tax payers.

6. Local Job losses
A recent impact study estimated that as many as 80 jobs could be lost and the impact cost-wise on the local economy could be in excess of £2 million per year.

Thank you for considering my objections to GT02 Land abutting the Fosse Way at its junction with the B425
The WARWICKSHIRE EXHIBITION CENTRE - Alternative site

see attached

see attached

see attached

see attached

Both these sites are unsuitable for sustainable accommodation of any kind due to the following reasons:- 1. Lack of public access via foot paths to any amenities with walking distance.

2. By vehicle, Harbury is the nearest local village with any shops. There are no shops in Ufton. Harbury is already having to accept additional housing and the road network in Harbury is already restrictive, with narrow roads and very limited parking.

3. Likewise this will cause addition demand on local surgeries and schools, again causing additional traffic problems in the already traffic congested village of Harbury or equally Radford Semele.

4. The proposed site would be overlooked by Ufton so can't fail to have a visual impact on the surrounding area.

5. The Fosse Way and the Leamington to Southam road are already very busy, unlit roads with no foot paths. The additional traffic to and from a proposed site during the hours of darkness can only result in a much higher risk of accidents.

6. Being located in a wide open space any sound generated from the site can't fail to be heard from local residents and surrounded villages. This could be a cause of noise polution.


To conclude, any developments planned in and around this area would be objected to due the the same above issues.

see attached

see attached

see attached

see attached

see attached

see attached