Agenda item

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 Action Group addressed the Panel. She said that they were alarmed to read in section 4.9 of the report that at this very late stage there is to be a further unspecified and open period of waiting for a joint update on need from Bristol City and South Gloucester Councils. She added that it cannot be justified that this Councils DPD and Core Strategy process is held up by waiting for adjoining authorities to report. We recommend that a full explanation and definitive timetable should be provided.

In section 4.12 we are advised that 29 sites remain under the list of “new site suggestions” yet we are not advised of the progress made in assessing and consulting on any of these 29 sites. As has been observed earlier, the Council is perilously close to the scheduled dates for hearings on a DPD which as yet has no firm proposals for site allocation.

We concur with the risk management statement made in section 5.0 .The delay of bringing forward the Lower Bristol Road site and the delay in the DPD will expose the authority to speculative, spurious and inappropriate planning applications. The lack of provision provides very special circumstances across the entire authority which will adversely impact on communities and bring financial costs to the Authority. Unauthorised encampments may ensue with associated costs.

The Chair asked for the current number of suggested sites to be confirmed.

The Policy & Environment Manager replied that 27 sites had been suggested through the second Call for Sites which was undertaken during 2012 and a further 2 were suggested through the LDF Steering Group, making a total of 29. He added that these sites were all now subject to a suitability assessment.

Clarke Osborne, Stanton Wick Action Group addressed the Panel. He suggested that the Equalities statement in section 6 of the report should be modified to ensure true compliance and to ensure that the settled communities do not consider that they are being discriminated against during the application of the DPD process.

He added that the statement in section 6.2 should not be accepted as an excuse for unnecessary or unexplained delay to the process. The Panel should scrutinise the reasons for delay and should seek the Councils reassurance that all causes have been identified and procedures put in place to ensure the best performance and speed in delivering the DPD.

He stated the group will continue to play a proactive but questioning role with the Council to ensure that the DPD is delivered and that it proposes deliverable and sustainable sites to meet the properly identified need over the period of the Core Strategy and that the selection of sites assists in the fostering of good and lasting relationships between the traveling and settled communities in B&NES.

Kris Mountford, Stanton Drew Parish Council addressed the Panel. She spoke of how last year the parish council asked the Council to scrutinise the gypsy & traveller DPD due to the deeply flawed process carried out in 2012 concerning the old colliery site at Stanton Wick. She said that the Cabinet resolved in September [2012] to remove that site as a preferred option because of the arguments the parish & action group put forward.

Then in January [2013], a planning application was lodged by the land owner & agent well known to this Council, for a gypsy site, which was classed as a major development. The application was withdrawn two weeks ago, just prior to determination. I come to you to ask you to scrutinise the process by which the planning application was allowed to proceed in the first instance.

She added that many hours had been spent over the last 12 months by her parishioners highlighting errors made by B&NES during the DPD to prevent gypsies & travellers being denigrated to this isolated, contaminated spot. Now, many more copious hours have been wasted having to highlight once again a multitude of errors that should have meant the application being turned down as soon as it hit the B&NES’ Planning Dept reception desk.

The Chair suggested that this statement should be passed to the Planning, Transport & Environment Panel.

The Democratic Services Officer replied that a very similar statement had been made at that Panel the previous week and that he was aware that response to the statement was being drafted.

Councillor June Player commented that she was surprised that some sites remained under consideration and that unsuitable sites should be removed to alleviate the unnecessary fear to the associated communities.

Councillor Nathan Hartley thanked the speakers and commented that he felt the recommendations to the report should be firmer. He proposed the following wording as recommendation 2.2.

The Panel calls on Cabinet to produce a list of feasible sites, according to the existing 2012 criteria and to produce a timeline as part of their June recommendations.

This proposal was seconded by Councillor June Player.

The Panel voted by a majority of 5 to 1 to approve the proposed recommendation.

The Chair wished to propose a further recommendation with regard to the resources associated with this work area. She proposed the following wording as recommendation 2.3.

The Panel requests that Cabinet ensures that adequate resources are provided to complete the work on this matter properly and expeditiously.

This proposal was seconded by Councillor Les Kew.

The Panel voted unanimously to approve the proposed recommendation.

Therefore, the Panel RESOLVED the following recommendations:

(i)  Note the progress and further work on the preparation of the Gypsies, Travellers & Travelling Showpeople Site Allocations Plan

(ii)  The Panel calls on Cabinet to produce a list of feasible sites, according to the existing 2012 criteria and to produce a timeline as part of their June recommendations.

(iii)  The Panel requests that Cabinet ensures that adequate resources are provided to complete the work on this matter properly and expeditiously.

The Chair on behalf of the Panel wished to thank the public speakers for their contributions to the debate as they raised important generic points as well as points relating to Stanton Wick. She added that the latter could not be addressed directly because of a pending planning application and the fact that three of the Panel are the General Development Control group leaders, and there should be no suggestion of pre-judging any planning application.