Agenda item

Response to public consultation held in May-July 2012 on the proposed Preferred Sites

Judith Chubb-Whittle (Chair, Stanton Drew Parish Council) in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 9 and on the Council's website] opposed the inclusion of the Stanton Wick site in the list.

Patrick Harrison (Chelwood Parish Council) in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 10 and on the Council's website] opposed the inclusion of the Stanton Wick site in the list.

Mary Walsh (Joint Chair, Whitchurch Village Action Group) in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 11 and on the Council's website] opposed the inclusion of the Woollard Lane site in the list.

Christine Saunders (Whitchurch Village Action Group) in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 12 and on the Council's website] opposed the inclusion of the Woollard Lane site in the list.

Paul Baxter (Stanton Wick Action Group) made a statement opposing the inclusion of the Stanton Wick site in the list.  He stressed that all the sites should be reconsidered, now that the criteria had been amended.

Chris Ree (Stanton Wick Action Group) in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 13 and on the Council's website] opposed the inclusion of the Stanton Wick site in the list.

Jennie Jones (Stanton Wick Action Group) in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 14 and on the Council's website] opposed the inclusion of the Stanton Wick site in the list.

Sue Osborne (Stanton Wick Action Group) in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 15 and on the Council's website] opposed the inclusion of the Stanton Wick site in the list.

Simon Whittle (Stanton Wick Action Group) in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 16 and on the Council's website] opposed the inclusion of the Stanton Wick site in the list.

Karen Abolkheir (Stanton Wick Action Group) in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 17 and on the Council's website] opposed the inclusion of the Stanton Wick site in the list.

Clarke Osborne (Stanton Wick Action Group) in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 18 and on the Council's website] opposed the inclusion of the Stanton Wick site in the list.

Phil Townshend (Stanton Wick Action Group) in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 19 and on the Council's website] opposed the inclusion of the Stanton Wick site in the list.

Ken Sutton (Bath Old Road Action Group) in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 20 and on the Council's website] opposed the inclusion of the Bath Old Road site in the list.

Cllr Eleanor Jackson in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 21 and on the Council's website] made a number of observations and recommendations for Cabinet to consider.

Richard Fox (a local farmer) referred to the site off Mill Lane, Radford and said that there were access issues, lack of mains water and flood risk.  He appealed to Cabinet to remove the site from the list.

Rosemary Collard (Snapdragons Nursery) in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 22 and on the Council's website] reminded Cabinet that unless the 3 relevant sites were removed, the Council would face a judicial review from 3 local action groups.

Alyson Lampard (Resident of Whitchurch) in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 23 and on the Council's website] appealed to Cabinet to remove the Woollard Lane site from the list.

Councillor Patrick Anketell-Jones in an ad hoc statement felt that the site allocation plans had been a failure.  He warned the Cabinet not to seek a solution with one large site.  Many small sites would better meet the need of the travelling population and would cause less disruption to local communities.  He observed that the site in Lower Bristol Road was already running and suggested that Cabinet should go ahead with that site without further delay.

Councillor Geoff Ward in an ad hoc statement said that the site allocation plan had been handled badly and had blighted the lives of a number of small communities.  He felt that the report being considered by Cabinet did not live up to the promises that 3 sites would be removed from the list.

Tracey Cuthbert (a resident of Twerton Travellers Site) in an ad hoc statement explained the history of the site and said that she and her family had been very happy there for 2 years.  Her children had made friends at school and the teachers had been very supportive.  She appealed to the public to tolerate travellers on well managed sites in the area.

Councillor Tim Ball, in proposing the item, referred to an update report which had been placed in the public gallery before the meeting [and which has been attached to these minutes as Appendix 24 and on the Council’s website].  He explained that there had been a perfectly good reason for removing the 17 sites – they had all been rejected for planning reasons.  He moved the recommendations but added a further paragraph, which would have the effect of removing a further 3 sites from the list going forward.

Councillor Paul Crossley seconded the proposal.  He said that this Council was the only one in the country with no sites at all.  He promised to evaluate all suggestions put forward.  He thanked the planning officers for their hard work in bringing the issue to the current point.

Councillor Simon Allen asked the proposer and seconder to consider an amendment to the effect that the Cabinet would make progress on a planning application at Lower Bristol Road for gypsy and traveller pitches.

The proposer and seconder agreed to accept the amendment.

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

RESOLVED (unanimously)

(1) To NOTE that a post consultation ‘stock take’ of the Gypsies and Travellers Site Allocations Plan preparation process is underway which entails:

• responding to the issues arising from the Preferred Options consultation;

• ongoing assessment of the 6 sites previously consulted on;

• assessment of new sites suggested through the Call for Sites, including a review of the existing unauthorised Gypsy and Traveller sites;

• a review of the site selection process which will be used to review existing sites and assess new sites (see draft in Appendix 3);

• review of major development sites, as part of the Core Strategy review, to assess opportunities for Gypsy and Traveller sites;

• a review of capacity outside the Green Belt, including opportunities for provision in neighbouring local authorities;

• an update to the assessment of need for pitches to establish the level of need for 5 and 10 year supply of sites in accordance with Planning for Traveller Sites; and

• ongoing engagement with neighbouring local authorities in accordance with the duty to cooperate.

(2) To NOTE the progress of the ongoing site assessment work conducted following the public consultation (see paragraphs 5.12 to 5.26); and

(3) To CONSULT on the results of the stock take referred to in (1) above before preparing a Draft Plan.

(4) To AGREE that in light of the additional evidence arising from the ongoing assessment of sites as summarised in paragraphs 5.14 to 5.26 to the report, and based on an evaluation of these sites against the selection criteria in Appendix 3, the following sites should no longer be pursued as potential sites for allocation as gypsy or traveller pitches in the site allocations Development Plan document: Site GT2: Old Colliery Buildings, Stanton Wick; Site GT4: Former Radstock Infants’ School Canteen; Site GT14: Land near Ellsbridge House, Keynsham; and

(5) 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.

[Note: Resolution (5) above was proposed as an amendment by Councillor Simon Allen which was accepted by the proposer and seconder of the main motion].