Agenda item

The Gypsies, Travellers and Travelling Showpeople Site Allocations Development Plan Document is a formal planning document which will allocate land for the development of authorised Gypsy and Traveller pitches across the District. The Preferred Options document is the second stage of consultation, following on from the Issues and Options consultation that took place between November 2011 and January 2012. It puts forward seven ‘preferred’ sites which have the potential to be allocated for development which could meet the identified unmet need in Bath and North East Somerset. The Preferred Options paper seeks public feedback on those sites.

Councillor Judith Chubb-Whittle (Chair, Stanton Drew Parish Council) in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 3 and on the Council's website] expressed the view of the Parish Council that the site at Stanton Wick should be removed from the consultation list.

Councillor Ashton Broad (Whitchurch Parish Council) made a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 21 and on the Council's website] asking for the Woollard Lane site to be removed from the consultation list.

Cllr Maggie Hutton (Vice-Chair, Camerton Parish Council) made a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 4 and on the Council's website] explaining why the Parish Council felt so strongly that the open site at Daglands in Camerton should be removed from the consultation list.  She presented two petitions, one of 370 signatures from residents of Camerton, and one of 75 signatures from Camerton children together with their art, letters and poems asking for the site to be saved.

The Chair referred the petitions to Councillor Tim Ball for his consideration.

Philip Townshend (Stanton Wick Action Group) in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 5 and on the Council's website] asked the Cabinet to remove the Stanton Wick site from the consultation list.

Clark Osborne (Stanton Wick Action Group) in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 6 and on the Council's website] asked the Cabinet to remove the Stanton Wick site from the consultation list.

Dr Christopher Ree (Stanton Wick Action Group) in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 7 and on the Council's website] asked the Cabinet to remove the Stanton Wick site from the consultation list.

Karen Abolkheir (Stanton Wick Action Group) in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 8 and on the Council's website] asked the Cabinet to remove the Stanton Wick site from the consultation list.

Liz Richardson (Stanton Wick Action Group) in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 9 and on the Council's website] asked the Cabinet to remove the Stanton Wick site from the consultation list.

Sue Osborne (Stanton Wick Action Group) in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 10 and on the Council's website] asked the Cabinet to remove the Stanton Wick site from the consultation list.

Jennie Jones (Stanton Wick Action Group) in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 11 and on the Council's website] asked the Cabinet to remove the Stanton Wick site from the consultation list.  She presented a petition to Cabinet of 1161 signatures objecting to the inclusion of the site in the consultation.

The Chair referred the petition to Councillor Tim Ball for his consideration.

Paul Baxter (Stanton Wick Action Group) in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 12 and on the Council's website] asked the Cabinet to remove the Stanton Wick site from the consultation list.

Cllr David Veale in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 22 and on the Council's website] asked the Cabinet to remove the Camerton play area from the consultation list.  He felt that access onto the highway made the site unviable and the loss of the play area to the community would be too great.

Mary Walsh (Joint Chair, Whitchurch Action Group) made a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 13 and on the Council's website] asking the Cabinet to remove the Woollard Lane site from the consultation list.  She disputed the contention that the site was brown-field, and explained that it had historically been acknowledged as green belt.

Peter Duppa-Miller (Secretary, B&NES Local Councils Association) in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 14 and on the Council's website] said that the West of England Gypsies and Travellers Accommodation Assessment 2007 was out of date and should be reviewed.  He felt that further suitable non green-belt land should be identified to the far south of the area.

Cllr John Kelly (Publow with Pensford Parish Council) in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 23 and on the Council's website] said he was horrified and angered by the inclusion of the Stanton Wick site which he felt was totally unsuitable.

Cllr Tony Marwood (Chair, Clutton Parish Council) in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 15 and on the Council's website] asking Cabinet to remove the Clutton open space from the consultation list.

Christine Saunders (a resident of Whitchurch) in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 16 and on the Council's website] asked Cabinet to remove the Woollard Lane site from the consultation list.

Alison Ginty (a resident of Camerton) in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 17 and on the Council's website] appealed to Cabinet to remove the Camerton play park from the consultation list.  She reminded Cabinet that the play park had been developed by local people and that it was the only safe play area in the village.

Suzanne Arnold in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 18 and on the Council's website] appealed to Cabinet to remove the Stanton Wick site from the consultation list.

Debbie Saunders (a resident of Stanton Wick) in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 19 and on the Council's website] referred to the extremely low matrix score achieved by the Stanton Wick site and asked Cabinet to remove it from the consultation list.

Jacqui Darbyshire (a past resident of Stanton Wick) made a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 20 and on the Council's website] appealing to Cabinet to remove the Stanton Wick site from the consultation list.

Tracey Cuthbert (a resident of Twerton Travellers Site) in an ad hoc statement explained that she felt part of the community and had no problems with the local community.  Her daughter was at the local school and they had found the Head, staff and other children very helpful and friendly.  She felt that gypsies and travellers can be valued members of a local community.

Councillor Jeremy Sparks in an ad hoc statement supported the concept of suitably managed sites.  He felt however that Stanton Wick would not be a suitable site because there were highway concerns and no local shops or facilities.  He felt the site had only been shortlisted because of its size.

Councillor Tim Warren in an ad hoc statement expressed grave concerns that the list was unbalanced and that some of the sites did not meet government guidelines.  He asked Cabinet to reconsider the list.

Councillor Vic Pritchard in an ad hoc statement said he was against the Stanton Wick site.  The Cabinet proposals were based on an out-of-date government directive and a Regional Spatial Strategy which was now defunct.  He felt that Cabinet should review the requirements now it had more freedom.

Councillor Tim Ball introduced the item by reminding Cabinet that the Council had been guilty of failing in its duty for not identifying sites after so many years.  He emphasised that the proposals would be the beginning of at least 8 weeks of consultation.  The Cabinet was determined to consult as widely as possible on the proposals.  He emphasised that if a site were shown not to be suitable, he would not allow it to stay on the list at the end of the consultation.  He explained that there would be another Cabinet report in September, then a government inspector would make comments, then a final decision would be made by Cabinet in December.  He made brief mention of the key points about each site. Finally, he said that after visiting all the sites he had been struck that the Camerton play park space was totally inappropriate, so that site would be removed from the list before consultation.  He explained therefore that the proposal he was moving was different from the one published in the report.

Councillor Paul Crossley seconded the proposal and emphasised that what was being proposed was that the Council would start the statutory consultation process.

Councillor David Dixon said he understood why residents were turning out in large numbers about the proposals.  He felt it was because in the past the Council had not appeared to be listening to residents – but he assured those present that the Cabinet was determined to listen to what the community was saying during the consultation process. 

Councillor Nathan Hartley thanked all those who had spoken.  He reminded the Cabinet of the obligation to identify gypsy sites in the area.  He thanked Tracey Cuthbert for her statement and for making him welcome when he visited the Lower Bristol Road site.  He knew that many people had a particular interest in home to school transport issues, and confirmed that gypsy children had exactly the same rights as other children.  He responded to one comment that secondary schools had been excluded from the matrix by saying that many gypsy children’s attendance past the age of about 12 is sporadic; the law specifically protects gypsy parents from prosecution because it is recognised that many gypsy children start training in the family business at that age.  He referred to a chart, which had been put into the public galley before the meeting [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 24 and on the Council's website] which he had asked to be prepared and which showed the places available and the walking distances from each proposed site to each of the nearest primary and secondary schools.  He expressed support for the recommendations.

Councillor Simon Allen thanked all the speakers.  He acknowledged that there was a lot of detail to take in, and that there would be more to come.  He promised an open and honest consultation.  He had attended a meeting in his ward at which about 150 people had expressed their opposition, and he asked everyone to take part in the consultation.  He himself was supportive of the proposals.

Councillor Cherry Beath said that the debate proved that people felt passionate about their communities.  It was precisely this kind of debate which would ensure that the right sites would be eventually chosen.  Her main concern was to get assurances about the wellbeing of local communities and about the suggestions of contamination on some of the sites.

Councillor David Bellotti thanked Councillor Ball for making it clear that this would be only the beginning of the consultation period and that sites could and would be withdrawn if they were shown to be unviable; other sites would be added as they were suggested.  He emphasised the huge risk of taking no action – which might end in a costly legal battle as had been seen in the news.  He explained that if the Council had no identified sites, it would not be possible to clear an illegal encampment.  But if the Council had designated sites, then it was possible to clear an illegal encampment.  He observed that travellers were real people, with real needs which the Council had a duty to support.

Councillor Roger Symonds responded to the some of the comments about the pressure on the local transport infrastructure at some of the proposed sites.  He guaranteed that transportation officers would properly appraise the viability of each site to make sure that local road systems could support any proposed sites.

Councillor Tim Ball summed up by thanking all the speakers.  He confirmed that at the end of the process he did not expect all the sites to go forward because the Cabinet would listen to all the comments made during the consultation.

On a motion from Councillor Tim Ball, seconded by Councillor Paul Crossley, it was

RESOLVED (unanimously)

(1) To NOTE that an Issues and Options consultation was carried out between 21 November 2011 and 16 January 2012 during which the broad site assessment criteria were consulted on and a Call for Sites conducted. The response to that consultation is set out in the Consultation Statement (Appendix 3) and formed the basis for the technical site assessment (Appendix 2);

(2) To NOTE that the list of preferred sites in the report was derived from the longer list of sites considered in the technical assessment (Appendix 2);

(3) To AGREE that the Preferred Options document (Appendix 1), which includes the list of preferred sites in para. 5.8, is taken forward for public consultation;

(4) To AGREE that the public consultation on the preferred sites is undertaken over an extended period of 8 weeks to run from mid-May 2012 to maximise the period over which comments can be submitted;

(5) To NOTE that an initial report on the Preferred Options public consultation will be made to Cabinet in September 2012, which may include an assessment of additional sites coming forward;

(6) To NOTE that the list of preferred sites will be reviewed in light of the public consultation and as part of the preparation of the draft Plan which is due to be considered by Cabinet in December 2012 for formal public consultation;

(7) To AGREE that only new sites will be considered for inclusion and not those already rejected through the initial site assessment;

(8) To NOTE that the Council will seek to review and update the 2007 needs assessment in liaison with the West of England partner authorities;

(9) To DELEGATE authority to the Divisional Director of Planning & Transport, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Homes and Planning, to make minor textual amendments prior to publication of the Preferred Options document; and

(10) To NOTE as an erratum to paragraph 5.8 of the report that the site at Camerton is deleted from the list and that it could accommodate only 8 not 9 pitches.