Meeting documents

1.1 The role of the Structure Plan in providing for gypsy sites is set out in Circular 1/94 `Gypsy Sites and Planning'. It states that the Plan should `set out broad strategic policies and provide a general framework for site provision'. Policy 37 of the Joint Replacement Structure Plan (JRSP), adopted in 2002, is intended to ensure that local plans set out policies to secure an appropriate level of site provision for gypsies and travellers including the provision of stopping places to help reduce the occurrence of unauthorised encampments.

1.2 Policy HG.16 in the Local Plan is a criterion based policy against which proposals for public and private gypsy sites can be assessed. The policy has been drafted in accordance with Policy 37 of the JRSP and in the context of guidance in Circular 1/94. It does not identify sites for gypsy encampments. Policy HG.16 applies to the areas of the District outside the sites listed in Policy GDS.1 (General Development Sites), and the main urban areas and other settlements as identified in Policy SC.1.

2.0 The Quashing of Policy 37 in the Joint Replacement Structure Plan

2.1 In October 2003, Policy 37 of the JRSP was quashed in the Court of Appeal on the basis that the four constituent local authorities had disregarded, without giving clear reasons, recommendation R21 of the Examination in Public (EIP) Panel (EIP held in March 1999) to `require the identification of locations for Gypsy sites in local plans'.

2.2 Following the quashing of the policy, the Joint Committee for Strategic Planning and Transportation meeting of January 2004 resolved that in the absence of a Structure Plan policy for gypsy sites, local plan policies on gypsy sites will continue to stand on their merits within the context of Circular 1/94. The third part of the resolution refers to the need for the constituent authorities to consider their individual responses to the Court of Appeal judgement. The full resolution is set out at Annex 7a.

2.3 Since the B&NES Local Plan does not identify sites for gypsies, the ruling has implications for Policy HG.16 in terms of whether the Local Plan policy should identify sites rather than being criterion based.

3.0 Government Guidance on the Assessment of Need for Gypsy Accommodation

3.1 Circular 1/94 advises that as part of the preparation of Local Plan, local planning authorities should be ready to discuss gypsy accommodation needs with gypsies, their representative bodies and local support groups as well as taking advice from Gypsy Liaison Officers and consulting with other departments and agencies with an interest such as the highway authority (para 7) and notes that a `tradition of sites occupied by gypsies and the demonstration of local need will help authorities to make proposals for sites in suitable locations.'

3.2 Although statistical information held by the Council suggests there is a low level of demand for gypsy sites, no assessment of need for gypsy accommodation has been undertaken in consultation with gypsies and their representative bodies during the preparation of the Local Plan as advised in Circular 1/94. This is because at the time of the drafting of Policy HG.16, this policy was in line with the emerging Policy 37 of the JRSP which required local plans to set out `policies to secure an appropriate level of site provision for gypsies and travellers within their area', not identify sites. The drafting of the policy also took account of the apparent low levels of demand.

3.3 With the quashing of Policy 37, Circular 1/94 becomes the planning policy framework for gypsy and traveller sites. Although Policy HG.16, as a criterion based policy, does allow each planning application for a gypsy or traveller site to be assessed on its merits, further demonstration of local or latent need for gypsy sites should be ascertained in accordance with advice in Circular 1/94 to complement the information held by the Council regarding the frequency and location of unauthorised gypsy encampments. This will help determine whether a site (or sites) is needed.

4.1 Ten representations were received in response to the Deposit Draft version of Policy HG.16, two of which are fully supportive of the policy. The principal thrust of half the objections relates to the lack of a locational policy identifying sites. The other main issue centres on lack of acknowledgement in the policy of the impact a proposal for a gypsy sites would have on the Green Belt, AONBs, SSSIs and other wildlife and countryside considerations. One objector drew attention to a number of Government guidelines relating to gypsies, which it is suggested, should be reflected in the policy. It was agreed that Policy HG.16 and preceding text should be amended in the Revised deposit Local Plan to refer to access and highway issues, the provision of mixed use sites and to the pollution that can be caused as a result on on-site business activities to accord more fully with Circular 1/94.

4.2 Revisions to the section on gypsies and other travelling people in the Revised Deposit Local Plan have attracted six representations, of which four are expressions of support. One objector has suggested that the phrase `and other travelling people' be inserted after `gypsies' in para B7.129. However, no changes to the Local Plan are recommended until an assessment of need for gypsy sites has been undertaken, the results of which will determine whether a site should be identified in the Local Plan (see Annex 4 of this report).

5.1 In conclusion, it is recommended that an assessment of need for gypsy accommodation should be undertaken, to accord with advice in Circular 1/94, in consultation with gypsies and their representatives and other interested parties, either through the Housing Needs Survey or independently, to assess whether a need exists for the provision of a site or sites within the District. This survey should also take account of other statistical information regarding gypsy sites within the District and adjoining areas.

5.2 In the meantime, Policy HG.16 should remain in place until such time a decision can be made on whether it should be abandoned in favour of a locational policy pending the outcome of the assessment.

5.3 It is also recommended that an assessment is undertaken in time to be presented as part of the Council's evidence relating to objections to Policy HG.16 for the forthcoming Local Plan Inquiry.