pdw03175 gypsy subject: site in the plan hg7-3

PDW03175 Gypsy

HG7-3 - Bullerthorpe Lane, Temple Newsam

NoAgree with proposed use?

NoConsider the plan sound?

Positively prepared Effective Justified Consistent with NPPF

1 Should strictly limit new traveller site development in open countryside that is away from existing settlements, or outside areas allocated in the development plan. This proposal is within 100m of existing properties.2 Consideration for extending the cottingley Springs site should be considered.3.There are other areas brown field sites in and around Leeds on which new communities could be generated.4.There is plenty of brownfield space within the Aire Valley Action planning area, with easier access to trunk roads & the motorway network. Use this instead.

Changes required to make sound:

HMCA\Topic:

Subject: Site in the plan

Ref:

Site:

Test of soundness addressed:

Soundness

Issues

Legal compliance

NoConsider the plan legally compliant?

Local Development. Scheme Statement of community involvement Consultation of statutory bodiesDuty to co-operate

Legal compliance issues addressed:

Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act Sustainability appraisal Town and Country Planning Regs

3.3. Please set out why you think the Plan is sound / unsound?

GREENBELTDuring this document I refer to the Planning policy for traveller sites (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/planning-policy-for-traveller-sites). This document contains the following statements, which indicate that the proposal for a traveller site at Bullerthorpe Lane is in breach of this document, in particular:

Reference: -1.Introduction point 4.d "Government aims.... that plan-making and decision-taking should protect Green Belt from inappropriate development"2.Policy E point 16 "Inappropriate development is harmful to the Green Belt and should not be approved, except in very special circumstances. Traveller sites (temporary or permanent) in the Green Belt are inappropriate development"

Responses: -1.The proposed site at Bullerthorpe Lane is Green Belt land; therefore the proposal is NOT in accordance with existing planning policies. 2.This site is on a greenbelt area with historical and archaeological significance. It would seem more prudent to build on other known brown field sites in and around Leeds on which new communities could be generated. There are also other council owned housing in Leeds, which could be refurbished to provide ideal starter homes for young professionals and first time buyers at a much lower cost.3 Creating a new access route to the Traveller site from Colton would disturb wildlife habitat (known animals in Temple Newsam Park are deer, Great Crested Newt and the Bat. There are also some ancient trees on the site, some of which could possibly have Tree Preservation orders against them.4.The Traveller site is very close to Temple Newsam House, a lovely stately home with beautiful landscaped gardens and woods. This house is not only visited regularly by local residents across the whole of Leeds for recreation but also visited by residents living further afield. A Traveller site nearby, by reputation (fact or belief), would have a negative impact on bringing people to the park – affecting the local economy. 5.There is a risk of flooding to the area as the profile of the landscape is such that the water cannot effectively drain away creating the water to collect. There are known instances of homes on the edge of the proposed housing site being flooded. Building house and roads in this area will exacerbate this problem and cause an even greater risk to flooding.6.The Gypsy site is close to a Bridal path used by public, children and horses. LOCAL SERVICES/FACILITIESDuring this document I refer to the Planning policy for traveller sites (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/planning-policy-for-traveller-sites). This document contains the following statements, which indicate that the proposal for a traveller site at Bullerthorpe Lane is in breach of this document, in particular:

Reference: -1.Policy B point 13.b. “Local planning authorities should promote, in collaboration with commissioners of health services, access to appropriate health services.”

Responses: -1.It currently takes up to 2 weeks, in some cases longer, to get an appointment with a GP at Colton Medical centre (even with the partnership with the Grange at Seacroft). Building 165 houses in Colton along with the Travellers site on Bullerthorpe Lane will most certainly increase waiting times beyond which are already unacceptable.2.Noise & light pollution would disturb the residents of Colton as the proposed Traveller site is very close to the housing in Colton.3.The traveller site is very close to an access path used by residents in the area to horse ride, cycle, jog and wa k. Any materials of a hazardous nature left there by travellers would potentially cause an accident or serious injury.

Comments on legal compliance:

Future updates

4.The recent settled community in the new estate at Temple Point has heavily invested in property in these particular locations to ensure an enhanced degree of privacy due to the semi-rural location; a site at Bullerthorpe would destroy this privacy.5.NO evidence provided that substantiates the theory that the G&T community want social integration, in fact the opposite in that the G&T community prefer an enclosed settlement on the edge of a rural setting.6.The size of the pitches would accommodate far greater numbers than can be controlled by planning restriction.7.What proof has been provided to show this is a recognized traveller route?8 Concern that there was no consultation with local Councillors or residents on the issue before the formal planning application was submitted.9.Pressures on all other amenities including waste disposal and refuse collection.

SCHOOLDuring this document I refer to the Planning policy for traveller sites (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/planning-policy-for-traveller-sites). This document contains the following statements, which indicate that the proposal for a traveller site at Bullerthorpe Lane is in breach of this document, in particular:

Reference: -1.Policy B point 13.c. “Local planning authorities should ensure that children can attend school on a regular basis”

Responses: -1.If there are up to 4 caravans per pitch with say up to 2 children per caravan that is an extra 32 children who need schooling and Colton Primary is oversubscr bed with in some cases over 30 children currently in one class. This will limit the places for the current residents.

HIGHWAYS/TRANSPORTDuring this document I refer to the Planning policy for traveller sites (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/planning-policy-for-traveller-sites). This document contains the following statements, which indicate that the proposal for a traveller site at Bullerthorpe Lane is in breach of this document, in particular:

Reference: -1.Policy B point 10.b. “Local planning authorities should protect local amenity and environment.” 2.Policy B point 13.e. “Local planning authorities should provide for proper consideration of the effect of local environmental quality (such as noise and air quality) on the health and well-being of any travellers that may locate there or on others as a result of new development”3.Policy B point 13.f. “Local Planning authorities should avoid placing un due pressure on local infrastructure and services.”4.Policy B point 13.g. “Local Planning Authorities should not locate sites in areas at high risk of flooding, including functional floodplains, given the particular vulnerability of caravans.”

Responses: -1 Building 165 houses in Colton and Traveller Site in Bullerthorpe Lane would add to the already congested roads in and out of Colton and add to the traffic on Bullethorpe Lane. This would definitely cause an increased risk of safety to children going to and from Colton Primary School. I believe that there has been a recent fatality on Colton Road East and rape incidents on Bullerthorpe Lane. 2 Creating a new route to the Traveller site from Colton would add to the congestion in Colton, which is already too high, which would increase the risk of safety to Children going to and from the Primary School. 3.The Traveller site is very close to Bullethorpe Lane. Any loose animals/horses/ponies wandering onto the road would cause a very serious accident, as this is a fast and busy road.4.The burning of rubbish by Travellers so close to Bullethorpe lane would cause smoke to cross over onto this road affecting the visibility of drivers and potentially causing a major accident.5.There is a risk of flooding to the area as the profile of the landscape is such that the water cannot effectively drain away creating the water to collect. There are known instances of homes on the edge of the proposed housing site being flooded. Building house and roads in this area will exacerbate this problem and cause an even greater risk to flooding.6 Significant turning space on Bullerthorpe Lane would be required for the size of caravans, which would cause additional traffic in congested area.7.The location is not suitable. The proposed site is very close to Bullerthorpe, which is not a suitable location for an open traveller site. Of particular concern is the fact that children will live and play so close to a busy section of road.

RELATIONSHIP WITH LOCAL COMMUNITYReference: -1.Introduction point 4.i "The Government aims.... to reduce tensions between settled and traveller communities in plan-making and planning decisions"2.Policy B.13.a - "Promote peaceful and integrated co-existence between the site and the local community"

Responses: - 1.The established community has made it overwhelmingly clear (by over 2,500 petition votes and attendance at public meetings) that they do not want community cohesion forced upon then. The Leeds Council has not been active in promoting any broader strategies to improve community cohesion.2 Contact with local residents has been poor. I live at the nearest estate to the travelers site at the Temple point site and no contact has directly been made to me – I found out about the proposal by accident through a neighbour.

3.4. Please set out what change(s) you consider necessary to make the Plan sound.

1 Should strictly limit new traveller site development in open countryside that is away from existing settlements, or outside areas allocated in the development plan. This proposal is within 100m of existing properties.2 Consideration for extending the cottingley Springs site should be considered.3.There are other areas brown field sites in and around Leeds on which new communities could be generated.4.There is plenty of brownfield space within the Aire Valley Action planning area, with easier access to trunk roads & the motorway network. Use this instead.

Take part in public examination? Be informed of submission to examination? Be informed of adoption of the plan?

Submitter details

Mark

Womersley

3 Dealtry Road

Colton

Leeds

LS159JW

Title

Forename

Surname

Address 1

Address 2

Address 3

Town

PostCode

PDP01258Ref

Mr

Agent details

Title

Forename

Surname

Address 1

Address 2

Address 3

Town

PostCode

Ref

August 2015 Department for Communities and Local Government

Planning policy for traveller sites

© Crown copyright, 2015

Copyright in the typographical arrangement rests with the Crown.

You may re-use this information (not including logos) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence. To view this licence,http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/ or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or email: [email protected].

This document/publication is also available on our website at www.gov.uk/dclg

If you have any enquiries regarding this document/publication, complete the form at http://forms.communities.gov.uk/ or write to us at:

Department for Communities and Local Government Fry Building 2 Marsham Street London SW1P 4DF Telephone: 030 3444 0000

For all our latest news and updates follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/CommunitiesUK

August 2015

ISBN: 978-1-4098- 4670-3

Contents

Introduction 1

Using evidence 2 Policy A: Using evidence to plan positively and manage development 2

Plan-making 3 Policy B: Planning for traveller sites 3

Policy C: Sites in rural areas and the countryside 4

Policy D: Rural exception sites 5

Policy E: Traveller sites in Green Belt 5

Policy F: Mixed planning use traveller sites 5

Policy G: Major development projects 6

Decision-taking 6 Policy H: Determining planning applications for traveller sites 6

Policy I: Implementation 8

Annex 1: Glossary 9

1

Introduction

1. This document sets out the Government’s planning policy for traveller1

sites. It should be read in conjunction with the National Planning Policy Framework. Guidance on the Framework can be found at: http://planningguidance.planningportal.gov.uk/

2. Planning law requires that applications for planning permission must be

determined in accordance with the development plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise. This policy must be taken into account in the preparation of development plans, and is a material consideration in planning decisions. 2 Local planning authorities preparing plans for and taking decisions on traveller sites should also have regard to the policies in the National Planning Policy Framework so far as relevant.

3. The Government’s overarching aim is to ensure fair and equal treatment

for travellers, in a way that facilitates the traditional and nomadic way of life of travellers while respecting the interests of the settled community.

4. To help achieve this, Government’s aims in respect of traveller sites are:

a. that local planning authorities should make their own

assessment of need for the purposes of planning b. to ensure that local planning authorities, working

collaboratively, develop fair and effective strategies to meet need through the identification of land for sites

c. to encourage local planning authorities to plan for sites over a reasonable timescale

d. that plan-making and decision-taking should protect Green Belt from inappropriate development

e. to promote more private traveller site provision while recognising that there will always be those travellers who cannot provide their own sites

f. that plan-making and decision-taking should aim to reduce the number of unauthorised developments and encampments and make enforcement more effective

g. for local planning authorities to ensure that their Local Plan includes fair, realistic and inclusive policies

1 See Annex 1 for the definition of traveller for the purposes of this statement.

2 Sections 19(2)(a) and 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and section

70(2) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. In relation to neighbourhood plans, under section 38B and C and paragraph 8(2) of new Schedule 4B to the 2004 Act (inserted by the Localism Act 2011 section 116 and Schedules 9 and 10) the independent examiner will consider whether having regard to national policy is appropriate to make the plan.

2

h. to increase the number of traveller sites in appropriate locations with planning permission, to address under provision and maintain an appropriate level of supply

i. to reduce tensions between settled and traveller

communities in plan-making and planning decisions j. to enable provision of suitable accommodation from

which travellers can access education, health, welfare and employment infrastructure

k. for local planning authorities to have due regard to the protection of local amenity and local environment

5. To benefit those engaged in planning for traveller sites, specific planning

policies for traveller sites are clearly set out in this separate document. The Government intends to review this policy when fair and representative practical results of its implementation are clear.

6. The Government still intends to review in the future whether Planning Policy for Traveller Sites should be incorporated within the wider National Planning Policy Framework. This will be considered as part of any wider review of the Framework.

Using evidence

Policy A: Using evidence to plan positively and manage development 7. In assembling the evidence base necessary to support their planning

approach, local planning authorities should:

a) pay particular attention to early and effective community engagement with both settled and traveller communities (including discussing travellers’ accommodation needs with travellers themselves, their representative bodies and local support groups)

b) cooperate with travellers, their representative bodies and local support groups; other local authorities and relevant interest groups to prepare and maintain an up-to-date understanding of the likely permanent and transit accommodation needs of their areas over the lifespan of their development plan, working collaboratively with neighbouring local planning authorities

c) use a robust evidence base to establish accommodation needs to inform the preparation of local plans and make planning decisions.

3

Plan-making

Policy B: Planning for traveller sites 8. Local Plans must be prepared with the objective of contributing to the

achievement of sustainable development. To this end, they should be consistent with the policies in the National Planning Policy Framework, including the presumption in favour of sustainable development and the application of specific policies in the Framework, and this planning policy for traveller sites.

9. Local planning authorities should set pitch targets for gypsies and

travellers as defined in Annex 1 and plot targets for travelling showpeople as defined in Annex 1 which address the likely permanent and transit site accommodation needs of travellers in their area, working collaboratively with neighbouring local planning authorities.3

10. Local planning authorities should, in producing their Local Plan:

a) identify and update annually, a supply of specific

deliverable sites sufficient to provide 5 years’ worth of sites against their locally set targets 4

b) identify a supply of specific, developable sites, or broad locations for growth, for years 6 to 10 and, where possible, for years 11-15 5

c) consider production of joint development plans that set targets on a cross-authority basis, to provide more flexibility in identifying sites, particularly if a local planning authority has special or strict planning constraints across its area (local planning authorities have a duty to cooperate on planning issues that cross administrative boundaries)

d) relate the number of pitches or plots to the circumstances of the specific size and location of the site and the surrounding population’s size and density

e) protect local amenity and environment.

3 See Annex 1 for definitions of ‘pitch’ and ‘plot’. 4 To be considered deliverable, sites should be available now, offer a suitable location for

development, and be achievable with a realistic prospect that development will be delivered on the

site within five years. Sites with planning permission should be considered deliverable until

permission expires, unless there is clear evidence that schemes will not be implemented within 5

years, for example they will not be viable, there is no longer a demand for the type of units or sites

have long term phasing plans. 5 To be considered developable, sites should be in a suitable location for traveller site development

and there should be a reasonable prospect that the site is available and could be viably developed at

the point envisaged

4

11. Criteria should be set to guide land supply allocations where there is identified need. Where there is no identified need, criteria-based policies should be included to provide a basis for decisions in case applications nevertheless come forward. Criteria based policies should be fair and should facilitate the traditional and nomadic life of travellers while respecting the interests of the settled community.

12. In exceptional cases, where a local planning authority is burdened by a large-scale unauthorised site that has significantly increased their need, and their area is subject to strict and special planning constraints, then there is no assumption that the local planning authority is required to plan to meet their traveller site needs in full.

13. Local planning authorities should ensure that traveller sites are sustainable economically, socially and environmentally. Local planning authorities should, therefore, ensure that their policies:

a) promote peaceful and integrated co-existence between

the site and the local community b) promote, in collaboration with commissioners of health

services, access to appropriate health services c) ensure that children can attend school on a regular

basis d) provide a settled base that reduces both the need for

long-distance travelling and possible environmental damage caused by unauthorised encampment

e) provide for proper consideration of the effect of local environmental quality (such as noise and air quality) on the health and well-being of any travellers that may locate there or on others as a result of new development

f) avoid placing undue pressure on local infrastructure and services

g) do not locate sites in areas at high risk of flooding, including functional floodplains, given the particular vulnerability of caravans

h) reflect the extent to which traditional lifestyles (whereby some travellers live and work from the same location thereby omitting many travel to work journeys) can contribute to sustainability.

Policy C: Sites in rural areas and the countryside 14. When assessing the suitability of sites in rural or semi-rural settings, local

planning authorities should ensure that the scale of such sites does not dominate the nearest settled community.

5

Policy D: Rural exception sites 15. If there is a lack of affordable land to meet local traveller needs, local

planning authorities in rural areas, where viable and practical, should consider allocating and releasing sites solely for affordable traveller sites. This may include using a rural exception site policy for traveller sites that should also be used to manage applications. A rural exception site policy enables small sites to be used, specifically for affordable traveller sites, in small rural communities, that would not normally be used for traveller sites.6 Rural exception sites should only be used for affordable traveller sites in perpetuity. A rural exception site policy should seek to address the needs of the local community by accommodating households who are either current residents or have an existing family or employment connection, whilst also ensuring that rural areas continue to develop as sustainable, mixed, inclusive communities

Policy E: Traveller sites in Green Belt 16. Inappropriate development is harmful to the Green Belt and should not be

approved, except in very special circumstances. Traveller sites (temporary or permanent) in the Green Belt are inappropriate development. Subject to the best interests of the child, personal circumstances and unmet need are unlikely to clearly outweigh harm to the Green Belt and any other harm so as to establish very special circumstances.

17. Green Belt boundaries should be altered only in exceptional

circumstances. If a local planning authority wishes to make an exceptional, limited alteration to the defined Green Belt boundary (which might be to accommodate a site inset within the Green Belt) to meet a specific, identified need for a traveller site, it should do so only through the plan- making process and not in response to a planning application. If land is removed from the Green Belt in this way, it should be specifically allocated in the development plan as a traveller site only.

Policy F: Mixed planning use traveller sites 18. Local planning authorities should consider, wherever possible, including

traveller sites suitable for mixed residential and business uses, having regard to the safety and amenity of the occupants and neighbouring residents. Local planning authorities should consider the scope for identifying separate sites for residential and for business purposes in close proximity to one another if mixed sites are not practical.

6 Small rural settlements have been designated for enfranchisement and right to acquire purposes

(under Section 17 of the Housing Act 1996) by SI 1997/620-25 inclusive and 1999/1307.

6

19. Local planning authorities should have regard to the need that travelling showpeople have for mixed-use yards to allow residential accommodation and space for storage of equipment.

20. Local planning authorities should not permit mixed use on rural exception

sites.

Policy G: Major development projects 21. Local planning authorities should work with the planning applicant and the

affected traveller community to identify a site or sites suitable for relocation of the community if a major development proposal requires the permanent or temporary relocation of a traveller site. Local planning authorities are entitled to expect the applicant to identify and provide an alternative site, providing the development on the original site is authorised.

Decision-taking

Policy H: Determining planning applications for traveller sites 22. Planning law requires that applications for planning permission must be

determined in accordance with the development plan7, unless material considerations indicate otherwise8.

23. Applications should be assessed and determined in accordance with the

presumption in favour of sustainable development and the application of specific policies in the National Planning Policy Framework and this planning policy for traveller sites.

24. Local planning authorities should consider the following issues amongst

other relevant matters when considering planning applications for traveller sites:

a) the existing level of local provision and need for sites b) the availability (or lack) of alternative accommodation

for the applicants c) other personal circumstances of the applicant

7 Section 38(1) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004: this includes adopted or approved

development plan documents i.e. the Local Plan and neighbourhood plans which have been made in relation to the area (and the London Plan). 8 Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and section 70(2) of the

Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

7

d) that the locally specific criteria used to guide the allocation of sites in plans or which form the policy where there is no identified need for pitches/plots should be used to assess applications that may come forward on unallocated sites

e) that they should determine applications for sites from any travellers and not just those with local connections

However, as paragraph 16 makes clear, subject to the best interests of the child, personal circumstances and unmet need are unlikely to clearly outweigh harm to the Green Belt and any other harm so as to establish very special circumstances. 25. Local planning authorities should very strictly limit new traveller site

development in open countryside that is away from existing settlements or outside areas allocated in the development plan. Local planning authorities should ensure that sites in rural areas respect the scale of, and do not dominate, the nearest settled community, and avoid placing an undue pressure on the local infrastructure.

26. When considering applications, local planning authorities should attach weight to the following matters:

a) effective use of previously developed (brownfield), untidy or derelict land

b) sites being well planned or soft landscaped in such a way as to positively enhance the environment and increase its openness

c) promoting opportunities for healthy lifestyles, such as ensuring adequate landscaping and play areas for children

d) not enclosing a site with so much hard landscaping, high walls or fences, that the impression may be given that the site and its occupants are deliberately isolated from the rest of the community

27. If a local planning authority cannot demonstrate an up–to-date 5 year supply of deliverable sites, this should be a significant material consideration in any subsequent planning decision when considering applications for the grant of temporary planning permission9. The exception is where the proposal is on land designated as Green Belt; sites protected under the Birds and Habitats Directives and / or sites designated as Sites of Special Scientific Interest; Local Green Space, an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, or within a National Park (or the Broads).

9 There is no presumption that a temporary grant of planning permission should be granted

permanently. For further guidance please see: http://planningguidance.planningportal.gov.uk/blog/guidance/use-of-planning-conditions/what-approach-should-be-taken-to-imposing-conditions/ (paragraph14)

8

28. Local planning authorities should consider how they could overcome planning objections to particular proposals using planning conditions or planning obligations including:

a) limiting which parts of a site may be used for any

business operations, in order to minimise the visual impact and limit the effect of noise

b) specifying the number of days the site can be occupied by more than the allowed number of caravans (which permits visitors and allows attendance at family or community events)

c) limiting the maximum number of days for which caravans might be permitted to stay on a transit site.

Policy I: Implementation

29. The policies in this revised Planning Policy for Traveller Sites apply from the day of publication. This replaces the version published in March 2012.

30. The implementation policies set out in the National Planning Policy Framework will apply also to plan-making and decision-taking for traveller sites. In applying those implementation provisions to traveller sites, references in those provisions to policies in the National Planning Policy Framework should, where relevant, be read to include policies in this planning policy for traveller sites.

9

Annex 1: Glossary

1. For the purposes of this planning policy “gypsies and travellers” means:

Persons of nomadic habit of life whatever their race or origin, including such persons who on grounds only of their own or their family’s or dependants’ educational or health needs or old age have ceased to travel temporarily, but excluding members of an organised group of travelling showpeople or circus people travelling together as such. 2. In determining whether persons are “gypsies and travellers” for the

purposes of this planning policy, consideration should be given to the following issues amongst other relevant matters:

a) whether they previously led a nomadic habit of life b) the reasons for ceasing their nomadic habit of life c) whether there is an intention of living a nomadic habit of

life in the future, and if so, how soon and in what circumstances.

3. For the purposes of this planning policy, “travelling showpeople” means:

Members of a group organised for the purposes of holding fairs, circuses or shows (whether or not travelling together as such). This includes such persons who on the grounds of their own or their family’s or dependants’ more localised pattern of trading, educational or health needs or old age have ceased to travel temporarily, but excludes Gypsies and Travellers as defined above.

4. For the purposes of this planning policy, “travellers” means “gypsies and

travellers” and “travelling showpeople” as defined above. 5. For the purposes of this planning policy, “pitch” means a pitch on a “gypsy

and traveller” site and “plot” means a pitch on a “travelling showpeople” site (often called a “yard”). This terminology differentiates between residential pitches for “gypsies and travellers” and mixed-use plots for “travelling showpeople”, which may / will need to incorporate space or to be split to allow for the storage of equipment.

3.3. Please set out why you think the Plan is sound / unsound? GREENBELT During this document I refer to the Planning policy for traveller sites (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/planning-policy-for-traveller-sites). This document contains the following statements, which indicate that the proposal for a traveller site at Bullerthorpe Lane is in breach of this document, in particular: Reference: - 1. Introduction point 4.d "Government aims.... that plan-making and decision-taking should

protect Green Belt from inappropriate development" 2. Policy E point 16 "Inappropriate development is harmful to the Green Belt and should not be

approved, except in very special circumstances. Traveller sites (temporary or permanent) in the Green Belt are inappropriate development"

Responses: - 1. The proposed site at Bullerthorpe Lane is Green Belt land; therefore the proposal is NOT in

accordance with existing planning policies. 2. This site is on a greenbelt area with historical and archaeological significance. It would seem

more prudent to build on other known brown field sites in and around Leeds on which new communities could be generated. There are also other council owned housing in Leeds, which could be refurbished to provide ideal starter homes for young professionals and first time buyers at a much lower cost.

3. Creating a new access route to the Traveller site from Colton would disturb wildlife habitat (known animals in Temple Newsam Park are deer, Great Crested Newt and the Bat. There are also some ancient trees on the site, some of which could possibly have Tree Preservation orders against them.

4. The Traveller site is very close to Temple Newsam House, a lovely stately home with beautiful landscaped gardens and woods. This house is not only visited regularly by local residents across the whole of Leeds for recreation but also visited by residents living further afield. A Traveller site nearby, by reputation (fact or belief), would have a negative impact on bringing people to the park – affecting the local economy.

5. There is a risk of flooding to the area as the profile of the landscape is such that the water cannot effectively drain away creating the water to collect. There are known instances of homes on the edge of the proposed housing site being flooded. Building house and roads in this area will exacerbate this problem and cause an even greater risk to flooding.

6. The Gypsy site is close to a Bridal path used by public, children and horses.

LOCAL SERVICES/FACILITIES During this document I refer to the Planning policy for traveller sites (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/planning-policy-for-traveller-sites). This document contains the following statements, which indicate that the proposal for a traveller site at Bullerthorpe Lane is in breach of this document, in particular: Reference: - 1. Policy B point 13.b. “Local planning authorities should promote, in collaboration with

commissioners of health services, access to appropriate health services.” Responses: - 1. It currently takes up to 2 weeks, in some cases longer, to get an appointment with a GP at Colton

Medical centre (even with the partnership with the Grange at Seacroft). Building 165 houses in Colton along with the Travellers site on Bullerthorpe Lane will most certainly increase waiting times beyond which are already unacceptable.

2. Noise & light pollution would disturb the residents of Colton as the proposed Traveller site is very close to the housing in Colton.

3. The traveller site is very close to an access path used by residents in the area to horse ride, cycle, jog and walk. Any materials of a hazardous nature left there by travellers would potentially cause an accident or serious injury.

4. The recent settled community in the new estate at Temple Point has heavily invested in property in these particular locations to ensure an enhanced degree of privacy due to the semi-rural location; a site at Bullerthorpe would destroy this privacy.

5. NO evidence provided that substantiates the theory that the G&T community want social integration, in fact the opposite in that the G&T community prefer an enclosed settlement on the edge of a rural setting.

6. The size of the pitches would accommodate far greater numbers than can be controlled by planning restriction.

7. What proof has been provided to show this is a recognized traveller route? 8. Concern that there was no consultation with local Councillors or residents on the issue before the

formal planning application was submitted. 9. Pressures on all other amenities including waste disposal and refuse collection. SCHOOL During this document I refer to the Planning policy for traveller sites (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/planning-policy-for-traveller-sites). This document contains the following statements, which indicate that the proposal for a traveller site at Bullerthorpe Lane is in breach of this document, in particular: Reference: - 1. Policy B point 13.c. “Local planning authorities should ensure that children can attend school on a

regular basis” Responses: - 1. If there are up to 4 caravans per pitch with say up to 2 children per caravan that is an extra 32

children who need schooling and Colton Primary is oversubscribed with in some cases over 30 children currently in one class. This will limit the places for the current residents.

HIGHWAYS/TRANSPORT

During this document I refer to the Planning policy for traveller sites (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/planning-policy-for-traveller-sites). This document contains the following statements, which indicate that the proposal for a traveller site at Bullerthorpe Lane is in breach of this document, in particular: Reference: - 1. Policy B point 10.b. “Local planning authorities should protect local amenity and environment.” 2. Policy B point 13.e. “Local planning authorities should provide for proper consideration of the

effect of local environmental quality (such as noise and air quality) on the health and well-being of any travellers that may locate there or on others as a result of new development”

3. Policy B point 13.f. “Local Planning authorities should avoid placing un due pressure on local infrastructure and services.”

4. Policy B point 13.g. “Local Planning Authorities should not locate sites in areas at high risk of flooding, including functional floodplains, given the particular vulnerability of caravans.”

Responses: - 1. Building 165 houses in Colton and Traveller Site in Bullerthorpe Lane would add to the already

congested roads in and out of Colton and add to the traffic on Bullethorpe Lane. This would definitely cause an increased risk of safety to children going to and from Colton Primary School. I believe that there has been a recent fatality on Colton Road East and rape incidents on Bullerthorpe Lane.

2. Creating a new route to the Traveller site from Colton would add to the congestion in Colton, which is already too high, which would increase the risk of safety to Children going to and from the Primary School.

3. The Traveller site is very close to Bullethorpe Lane. Any loose animals/horses/ponies wandering onto the road would cause a very serious accident, as this is a fast and busy road.

4. The burning of rubbish by Travellers so close to Bullethorpe lane would cause smoke to cross over onto this road affecting the visibility of drivers and potentially causing a major accident.

5. There is a risk of flooding to the area as the profile of the landscape is such that the water cannot effectively drain away creating the water to collect. There are known instances of homes on the edge of the proposed housing site being flooded. Building house and roads in this area will exacerbate this problem and cause an even greater risk to flooding.

6. Significant turning space on Bullerthorpe Lane would be required for the size of caravans, which would cause additional traffic in congested area.

7. The location is not suitable. The proposed site is very close to Bullerthorpe, which is not a suitable location for an open traveller site. Of particular concern is the fact that children will live and play so close to a busy section of road.

RELATIONSHIP WITH LOCAL COMMUNITY Reference: - 1. Introduction point 4.i "The Government aims.... to reduce tensions between settled and

traveller communities in plan-making and planning decisions" 2. Policy B.13.a - "Promote peaceful and integrated co-existence between the site and the local

community" Responses: - 1. The established community has made it overwhelmingly clear (by over 2,500 petition votes

and attendance at public meetings) that they do not want community cohesion forced upon then. The Leeds Council has not been active in promoting any broader strategies to improve community cohesion.

2. Contact with local residents has been poor. I live at the nearest estate to the travelers site at the Temple point site and no contact has directly been made to me – I found out about the proposal by accident through a neighbour.

3.4. Please set out what change(s) you consider necessary to make the Plan sound. 1. Should strictly limit new traveller site development in open countryside that is away from existing

settlements, or outside areas allocated in the development plan. This proposal is within 100m of existing properties.

2. Consideration for extending the cottingley Springs site should be considered. 3. There are other areas brown field sites in and around Leeds on which new communities could be

generated. 4. There is plenty of brownfield space within the Aire Valley Action planning area, with easier

access to trunk roads & the motorway network. Use this instead.