Agenda item

To receive the report of the Gypsy Traveller Service Refugee Resettlement Manager which provides the Outer North Community Committee with an update on the work of the Gypsy Traveller Service.

The report of the Gypsy Traveller Service provided the Outer North East Community Committee with an update regarding the ongoing work of the service.

The Gypsy Traveller Service Manager presented the report, noting the following information:

·  The service was comprised of a small team and was responsible for statutory administration of social housing, unauthorised traveller encampments and management of settled traveller sites.

·  There had been an increase in encampments, historically these were in East and South Leeds but had become more prevalent in North Leeds, particularly with the opening of the East Leeds Orbital Road (ELOR) and associated open areas.

·  The policy approach was to negotiate terms for the encampment or a managed move, with consultation with Asset Management to determine better suited locations.

·  Alternative locations were becoming more difficult to identify given the Council’s financial position and land being sold off.

·  The process for dealing with encampments was informed by Government guidance and law, requiring a welfare assessment to be conducted for determination of eviction or negotiation and the use of Policy Section 61 powers for removal of an encampment were in place.

·  Facilities, such as portable toilets, were often provided to limit the environmental impact an encampment may have on an area and local communities.

·  The following relevant statistics were provided;

·  The more frequent encampments that had occurred in the Outer North East were at Wetherby Leisure Centre, The Ings and the Wilderness Car Park.

·  Partners the service worked with were West Yorkshire Police, Leeds Anti-social Behaviour Team (LASBAT) and Localities as well as charities and organisations that advocate for travellers.

·  An update from a Highways perspective was provided by a Principal Engineer, noting the following; 

o  Numerous measures had been installed to deter illegal camping and fly-tipping. In particular, these included installation of concrete and steel bollards along with large stone boulders. Demountable bollards had been installed where vehicular access needs to be maintained for mowing etc. Unfortunately, criminals (who are equipped with industrial equipment) had vandalized some of these items. The maintenance teams were working hard to replace these items as swiftly as possible.

o  Many incremental adjustments had been made to the road signs and roadmaking’s etc. Further adjustments were due on site over the coming weeks. On request of the Police, a number of bays had been installed to facilitate the use of mobile speed cameras.

·  The majority of travellers passing through Leeds were in the summer travelling to events such as Appleby fair, with the route down the A1 within the proximity of ELOR.

·  The requirements for a suitable negotiated stopping site were outlined and suggestions from Members for any proposed sites were welcomed.

In response to questions from Members, the following points were discussed:

·  Given the need to identify negotiated stopping sites and the reduced amount of Council owned land, renting land from private owners was queried as an option. It was noted that liaison with the Planning department was addressing this, with the potential for a private land strategy.

·  Some concerns for the accuracy of the provided data were raised with many more encampments noted within the Outer North East. There were some discrepancies with cross Ward borders and where an encampment was recorded, but during the consultation for ELOR it had been raised multiple times that the open spaces will encourage encampments. It was agreed that the figures would be reviewed.

·  As the ELOR encampments had starkly increased and had incurred multiple cases of criminal damage to gain access to sites, to then provide facilities could be perceived as essentially aiding criminals.

·  It was confirmed the agreed settled sites were at capacity with 41 families residing at Cottingley Springs and 8 at Kidacre Park. Some land had been identified for new permanent sites as part of the Planning Site Allocations Plan.

·  The Programmes Board was to be re-established to discuss best practise for negotiated stopping and permanent site procedures, but it was noted the service was unable to relocate unauthorised encampments to existing permanent sites.

·  The Cottingley Springs site had existed since the 1970’s, with 20-30 families on the waiting list for the site. The Kidacre Park site was established in 2018 and the strategy was currently under review to understand need and expansion up to 2040. There were around 1 or 2 vacancies per year which were filled on a priority need measurement.

·  As encampments can incur high costs to the Council, analysis of mitigation measures and preventative methods were quired. In response it was noted that target hardening was difficult as heavy equipment can be used to destroy blockades such as bollards.

·  The Environmental Crime Team were seeking additional funding to install more CCTV at repeatedly encamped sites and evidence was needed to prosecute crimes such as fly tipping.

·  The measures to deter or negotiate were not serving the end purpose as disruption to the Outer North East had increased, with community events being cancelled due to encampments. Proactive alternatives needed to be sought.

·  Work across district borders was queried as there was a settled site at Spring Lane in North Yorkshire that could potentially be utilised. This issue was to be discussed at the next meeting of services across regional Local Authorities, however, it was noted neighbouring authorities did not hold the same negotiated stopping policy.

·  The number of permanent settled sites under the jurisdiction of nearby Local Authorities were requested. There was a 38 plot site in Wakefield and 2 sites within Bradford but further details were to be provided back to Members.

·  No sites had been negotiated with private landlords yet as considering this as a potential option was at an early stage.

·  The direction of the service as facilitation or enforcement was queried as some sites were left in a dire state despite Council money being used to provide facilities, potentially impacting the perception of the service for Council taxpayers. Public perception was a challenge given the length and cost of the eviction process outside of Section 61 orders.

·  The service had an enforcement role, in liaison with relevant partners, alongside its statuary requirements for welfare. The public were encouraged to contact all relevant services to express concerns.

·  As disregard for the wider community had occurred previously at some encampment sites, the success of the facilitation and negotiation approach was queried. It was noted that different groups of travellers responded differently, and issues caused by a group entail different actions and evidence was required to prosecute criminal acts.

·  It was suggested that as Leeds was often being used as a stop off on the way to events, such as Appleby fair, cross border conversations and identification of routes travellers use may be best to facilitate negotiated stopping sites through various districts.

·  Negotiated stopping sites were only available for up to 28 days, any permanent or semi-permanent site was required to go through the planning process.

·  There was a database with over 20 years of input outlining locations, negotiation processes and outcomes.

·  Although the behaviour of traveller encampments differed, the businesses around ELOR had been negatively impacted, the Police seemed unwilling to proactively use Section 61 powers and the cost to the Council was increasing annually, the negotiated stopping method was queried as best practise.

·  It was noted there were cultural differences between residents and traveller groups. The need for education and understanding to find common ground and reduce the feeling of contempt, were stressed.

·  A suggestion was made that Wetherby Racecourse may be appropriate as a negotiated site, as although far from an ideal location and the likely difficulty of public perception, solutions to improve the situation were needed to reduce disturbance and crime.

RESOLVED –

1.)  That the contents of the report, along with Members comments, be noted.

2.)  That the following suggested suitable locations that could potentially be used as stopping sites, be noted.