Issue - meetings

This report provides an update on the preparation of the Gypsies, Travellers and Travelling Showpeople Site Allocations DPD and sets out the next steps

Judith Chubb (Chair, Stanton Drew Parish Council) in a statement [a copy of which is attached to these Minutes as Appendix 14 and on the Council’s website] spoke of the dismay amongst her parishioners over the lack of progress on the DPD and the perceived mishandling of the two planning applications and urged the Cabinet to resolve the numerous issues.

Simon Whittle (Stanton Wick Action Group) in a statement [a copy of which is attached to these Minutes as Appendix 15 and on the Council’s website] asked for all references to the Stanton Wick site to be removed from all documentation and that the Cabinet’s decision taken in September 2012 to remove Stanton Wick from the list of sites would not be reversed under any circumstances.

Sue Osborne (Stanton Wick Action Group) in a statement [a copy of which is attached to these Minutes as Appendix 16 and on the Council’s website] asked why no progress had been made in developing the Bristol Road site as agreed by Cabinet in September 2012 which she felt was leaving the Council vulnerable to inappropriate planning applications.

Karen Abolkheir (Stanton Wick Action Group) in a statement [a copy of which is attached to these Minutes as Appendix 17 and on the Council’s website] said she believed that the pursuit of a site at Stanton Wick was highly inappropriate.  She felt that the delays had caused stress and uncertainty to the local community.

Clarke Osborne (Chair, Stanton Wick Action Group) in a statement [a copy of which is attached to these Minutes as Appendix 18 and on the Council’s website] highlighted failings in the progress of the DPD and in the way planning applications had been handled.  He regretted the resulting estrangement of settled and travelling communities.

Chris Ree (Stanton Wick Action Group) in a statement [a copy of which is attached to these Minutes as Appendix 19 and on the Council’s website] felt that the reviewed site assessment criteria document was too brief.  He regretted that the scoring matrix had been abandoned in favour of a new process.  The progress made since September 2012 had been unsatisfactory.

Phil Townshend read a statement on behalf of Tony Heaford (Chair of Publow with Pensford Parish Council) [a copy of which is attached to these Minutes as Appendix 20 and on the Council’s website] in which he said that the process had been badly managed and had distressed the local community.  He asked for care to be taken in dealing with the major planning application at Stanton Wick.

Councillor Geoff Ward said in an ad hoc statement that this had now become extremely urgent because of the need to agree the Core Strategy.

Peter Duppa-Miller (Secretary, Local Councils Association) in an ad hoc statement [a copy of which is attached to these Minutes as Appendix 21 and on the Council’s website] urged the Cabinet to finalise the assessment of the sites as soon as possible to remove the uncertainty being experienced by the settled communities.  He  ...  view the full minutes text for item 23

Cabinet agreed at its meeting of 12 September 2012 to conduct a ‘stock take’ of progress on the preparation of the Gypsies, Travellers and Travelling Showpeople Site Allocations DPD. This report provides an update on the work and sets out the next steps.

The Chair of the Panel introduced this item and gave a brief presentation on the work the Council had carried out so far.

Sue Osborne, Stanton Wick Action Group addressed the Panel. She asked for the Panel to not accept the recommendation to ‘note progress” but should scrutinise the members and officers and question the lamentable lack of progress in this key project. She added that the report was confusing and offered no insight into the extended timescales which are themselves vague and offered no future measure for the Panel to scrutinise.

In section 3.2 of the report it states that the ‘progression and eventual adoption of the DPD will demonstrate the Councils commitment to the provision of sites to meet identified need’; however there is no demonstration of progress and no confirmation that the adoption of the DPD is on track for December this year.

She asked why a significant and relevant resolution of the September 2012 Cabinet meeting had been omitted from the list scheduled in 4.2.  The Resolutions read ''To AGREE that whilst the Council is progressing the DPD in light of the absence of any authorised permanent sites within the District the Council should progress a planning application at Lower Bristol Road for gypsy and traveller pitches.'' She also questioned why the Plan was still in its preparatory stages, some 7 months after the Cabinet resolved to review a process which then had a solid backbone of information and 19 months from the launch of the Councils DPD.

We have questioned the Cabinet in respect of the commissioning of the updating GTAA report (as noted in 4.4). We consider its methodology to be flawed to the extent that its accuracy cannot be relied on. We ask that this Panel requests urgent and detailed assessment of the GTAA report by a senior officer of the Council, not connected with the procurement or implementation of the report.

We note elsewhere that the Fox Hill development site has been sold to Curo Social Housing; surely this is an ideal opportunity to incorporate a traveller site with social rents applied? 

The Chair asked for the statement to be passed to the relevant officer for a response.

Councillor Nathan Hartley commented that he felt the Council should be further along in the process than it is.

The Chair asked if any comment could be made on the status of the Lower Bristol Road site.

The Associate Director for Housing replied that planning consultants had been appointed to the site and that a scheme was being worked upon. He added that the Council had made a successful bid to the HCA for funding for the site but stressed that there were many steps to carry out as part of the process.

Councillor Les Kew commented that he wished to see a firm timeline for these events.

The Associate Director for Housing replied that he would be happy to provide that information to a future meeting of the Panel.

Karen Abolkheir, Stanton Wick  ...  view the full minutes text for item 90