Agenda item

Report of the Director of Services.

The Head of Planning and Regeneration presented the report to members.  He explained that following the last meeting of the Advisory Committee in July, officers had since finalised the list of potential sites and had written to ward members to notify them and set out the arrangements for viewing the details of sites.  He advised that officers had begun to contact land owners to establish the availability and suitability of the land, and any responses would be taken on board in a report to Council.  It was intended that Council would be asked to endorse the allocations document for formal consultation on 8 November.

In response to questions from Councillor R Adams, the Head of Planning and Regeneration advised that when the chosen sites were announced, this would be considered by Council rather than Planning Committee as this formed part of the development plan.  He highlighted that the process in respect of identification of potential sites differed from a planning application.

Councillor G Jones sought clarification on the criteria used to determine whether there were sufficient suitable sites.  The Head of Planning and Regeneration advised that an independently prepared study had been undertaken in 2013 across North West Leicestershire and the other district councils in Leicestershire which was used to work out the requirements.  He explained that an update to that study was currently in progress and North West Leicestershire District Council was a member of the consortium of councils who were working to update the shared evidence base.  He added that until the new figure was available, it was necessary for the Council to plan to meet the need on the best available evidence.

Councillor J Legrys expressed concern that Hinckley and Bosworth Borough Council had excluded themselves from this methodology and sought clarification on the reasons for this.  The Planning Policy Team Manager advised that this was essentially because they were undertaking an existing piece of work for their own local plan.  He added that they were using the same consultants as employed by the consortium, which should ensure some consistency.

Councillor J Legrys welcomed the report and supported the recommendations.  He expressed concerns about the issue of releasing the list of proposed sites into the public domain and felt this required careful handling.  He asked that the Portfolio Holder study the report to Council and the press releases prior to their publication.

In response to questions from Councillor V Richichi, the Head of Planning and Regeneration advised that land owners had now been contacted in respect of potential sites, however no responses had been received to date.

It was moved by Councillor R Adams, seconded by Councillor J Legrys and

RESOLVED THAT:

a)     The progress being made to identify possible sites and broad locations to meet           the accommodation needs of gypsies, travellers and travelling showpeople be noted;

b)     The broad format and content of the Gypsy and Traveller Site Allocation DPD:         Site Options Consultation Document be noted;

c)     The need to undertake a sustainability appraisal and habitats regulations         assessment be noted; and

d)     The consultation arrangements for the Site Options Document be noted.