Gypsy and Traveller Site Options

Comment

Representation ID: 55766

Received: 28/07/2013

Respondent: Owners and Occupiers of Gypsy / Traveller Site at kites Nest Lane

Agent: Carta Developers

There is a pressing shortage of accommodation for Gypsy/Travellers nationally and regionally and an urgent need for sites locally. Council acknowledge a long-term policy failure to meet the needs of Gypsy Travellers in the District.

Number of sites proposed by the Council do not appear to be realisable if sites within the Council's revised development strategy are to be actually delivered, including Europa Way site in Council's ownership.

Immediate need for eight pitches especially if Kites Nest Lane site is dismissed at inquiry. But majority of other sites proposed by the Council have significantly similar characteristics to the Kites Nest Lane site or are not deliverable without compulsory purchase powers due to landowner opposition.

However, compulsory purchase unlikely if enforcement taken against Kites Nest Lane as other landowners will identify Kites Nest Lane site a functionally similar but more easily deliverable and/or a better suited site.

Significant issue for Council as consulting owners/occupiers of Kites Nest Lane whilst taking enforcement action against them through the Courts. The owners/occupiers agreed to vacate the site if their appeal isn't upheld but nowhere for them to relocate. This site is the only site occupied by Gypsy / Travellers in the district and is the only occupied site that is subject to consultation.

Other sites have similar constraints to Kites Nest Lane (i.e. planning enforcement notices) or have land contamination and/or flooding and/or access issues. A large number are within Green Belt and/or within the Arden Landscape designation. Communities and/or land owners actively opposing some sites. Therefore need to identify 'deliverability' of site.

Sites should be ranked according to deliverability irrespective of scheme based constraints. Therefore need to consider: ownership, green belt, flood risk, agricultural grade, nature reserve, ground water, bus route, mineral consultation zone, flooding, utilities, services (schools, GP's) to establish overall deliverability. On this basis most sites have 'low' deliverability with GT01, GT14, GT17 and GT18 considered to have 'medium' deliverability and only GT13 (Kites Nest Lane) to have a 'high' deliverability. Need to balance needs for sites against constraints and deliverability within the District. Occupiers of Kites Nest Lane would relocate to alternative, affordable site but unable to identify one. Council has had similar problems.

Deliverability of sites is therefore key. Secretary of State should delay determining appeal into Kites Nest Lane until Council has completed its assessment and sure Council agrees sensible to allow impartial identification of the sites.

Would appreciate feedback and clarification how occupants of Kites Nest Lane site will be relocated if required.

Consider Kites Nest Lane is most easily deliverable, and subject to fewer constraints than alternative sites.