From the East London and Essex Guardian
Travellers facing eviction from land they own have pleaded with Epping Forest District Council to let them stay.
Families living at the Birch Field site in Epping Lane, Theydon Garnon, have been ordered to move off the land by November 27 or face arrest.
They were found to be in breach of a court order prohibiting use of the land as a Travellers site put in place in 2006 when the group was last there.
All adults on the site were handed suspended sentences, ranging from four to six months, for contempt of court after being found guilty of breaching the order.
Father Patrick Gamble, who lives on the site, said: “We are pleading with the council and asking for their help. We have nowhere else to go.
“We’re willing to move wherever they want us to go but they say they haven’t got anywhere for us to go.
“We own this land and it’s always been hard-standing ground and the gas board has said the site is safe.”
“A few caravans have already left because they’re terrified their kids will be taken off them.
“Some of the kids who have gone were in the local school too.”
The council has deemed the land unsuitable for a Traveller settlement as it lies within the green belt.
Following the recent High Court ruling, district council leader Chris Whitbread said: “I want to thank His Honour Judge Seymour for upholding the injunction and sending a clear message that the laws which protect our Green Belt and countryside apply to us all.
“I hope the Travellers who remain unlawfully on site will understand the implications of the decision and co-operate now to clear the site with the minimum damage or delay.”
Tuesday, 19 November 2013
Watchdog brands Selby Travellers’ site scheme ‘arbitrary and unfair’ - Yorkshire
From the Yorkshire Post
CONTROVERSIAL plans to build a new Travellers’ site on a Second World War airfield in North Yorkshire were “arbitrary and unfair”, a watchdog has ruled.
Residents fiercely opposed proposals to create 15 extra pitches in the village of Burn, near Selby, and they were ultimately rejected last month.
Now the local government ombudsman has found “evidence of fault” and a lack of transparency in the way Selby District Council selected the site.
The search for a new Traveller site for the district began in 2011, when nine preferred sites were selected.
Burn, which already accommodates 12 pitches on another part of the airfield, was not among them, having earlier been ruled out along with 60 others.
The ombudsman’s report noted that part of the reason for its exclusion was that “the balance of ethnic groups in a small community was fragile and domination of one group could lead to tensions, [and] residents of the existing site did not want it to grow”.
But the council’s “principal concern” was that land surrounding the existing site was not for sale at that time.
The nine preferred sites were also later discounted after the criteria were changed to exclude any within the green belt.
Burn was revisited after the Government issued new planning policy ordering councils to have a five-year supply of Travellers’ sites and officers began negotiations to buy a portion of the land in July 2012.
The council said it selected the site outside of the earlier process and under the new policy on the basis that it had become deliverable now the landowner was willing to sell it.
But the ombudsman’s report said there were other sites it could have used but the authority failed to consider them on the same basis. It also failed in a “basic tenet of good administrative practice” to explain the reasons for ruling them out, it added.
The report concluded: “There is evidence of fault in how the council selected a site in a village for a Gypsy and Travellers’ site.
“The council did not reconsider if other sites were available on the same basis that it selected the site in [Burn] and the council’s decision making was not transparent.
“As a result the council’s decision looks to be arbitrary.”
It added that since the plans had been refused there was no “outstanding justice” so its investigation had been completed.
The council’s planning committee rejected the proposals by a majority of seven to four but the authority still needs to find space for an extra 26 pitches by 2015, rising to 33 in 2028.
If it does not, it could lose some power to defend against illegal encampments.
“Delivering these is, inevitably, a complex and emotive issue,” a spokesman said.
“We consider that we did take reasonable steps to consider a range of options for identifying potential sites.
“This report, of course, follows the rejection of the proposed development of new pitches at Burn by the council’s planning committee.
“In light of this decision we intend to bring forward proposals for how we can meet our legal obligation to provide these sites within the district.”
The ombudsman cannot interfere if the council resubmits a planning application for the site.
But Graham Rawlings, of the village action group BANS, said residents would continue to fight any such move.
“We think there is a possibility they will try again but we hope the ombudsman’s findings will make it slightly more difficult for them,” he said.
“Nobody in the village is unhappy with the site that’s here at the moment but the feeling is to add the extra pitches would simply make it far too big.
“It would be the largest in North Yorkshire and the third largest in the whole of Yorkshire and we think for a tiny village of 380 people it is far too big.”
CONTROVERSIAL plans to build a new Travellers’ site on a Second World War airfield in North Yorkshire were “arbitrary and unfair”, a watchdog has ruled.
Residents fiercely opposed proposals to create 15 extra pitches in the village of Burn, near Selby, and they were ultimately rejected last month.
Now the local government ombudsman has found “evidence of fault” and a lack of transparency in the way Selby District Council selected the site.
The search for a new Traveller site for the district began in 2011, when nine preferred sites were selected.
Burn, which already accommodates 12 pitches on another part of the airfield, was not among them, having earlier been ruled out along with 60 others.
The ombudsman’s report noted that part of the reason for its exclusion was that “the balance of ethnic groups in a small community was fragile and domination of one group could lead to tensions, [and] residents of the existing site did not want it to grow”.
But the council’s “principal concern” was that land surrounding the existing site was not for sale at that time.
The nine preferred sites were also later discounted after the criteria were changed to exclude any within the green belt.
Burn was revisited after the Government issued new planning policy ordering councils to have a five-year supply of Travellers’ sites and officers began negotiations to buy a portion of the land in July 2012.
The council said it selected the site outside of the earlier process and under the new policy on the basis that it had become deliverable now the landowner was willing to sell it.
But the ombudsman’s report said there were other sites it could have used but the authority failed to consider them on the same basis. It also failed in a “basic tenet of good administrative practice” to explain the reasons for ruling them out, it added.
The report concluded: “There is evidence of fault in how the council selected a site in a village for a Gypsy and Travellers’ site.
“The council did not reconsider if other sites were available on the same basis that it selected the site in [Burn] and the council’s decision making was not transparent.
“As a result the council’s decision looks to be arbitrary.”
It added that since the plans had been refused there was no “outstanding justice” so its investigation had been completed.
The council’s planning committee rejected the proposals by a majority of seven to four but the authority still needs to find space for an extra 26 pitches by 2015, rising to 33 in 2028.
If it does not, it could lose some power to defend against illegal encampments.
“Delivering these is, inevitably, a complex and emotive issue,” a spokesman said.
“We consider that we did take reasonable steps to consider a range of options for identifying potential sites.
“This report, of course, follows the rejection of the proposed development of new pitches at Burn by the council’s planning committee.
“In light of this decision we intend to bring forward proposals for how we can meet our legal obligation to provide these sites within the district.”
The ombudsman cannot interfere if the council resubmits a planning application for the site.
But Graham Rawlings, of the village action group BANS, said residents would continue to fight any such move.
“We think there is a possibility they will try again but we hope the ombudsman’s findings will make it slightly more difficult for them,” he said.
“Nobody in the village is unhappy with the site that’s here at the moment but the feeling is to add the extra pitches would simply make it far too big.
“It would be the largest in North Yorkshire and the third largest in the whole of Yorkshire and we think for a tiny village of 380 people it is far too big.”
Monday, 18 November 2013
Essex County Council to take court action against Travellers on Harlow land - Essex
From the Harlow Star
ESSEX County Council is set to issue a court summons to remove Travellers from land in Harlow.
The group of Travellers, who were served a direction to leave last week, set up camp on county council-owned land off South Road, Harlow more than a week ago.
An Essex County Council spokesman said: “The Travellers were served a direction to leave under section 77 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order act 1994.
“As this has now expired we will shortly be issuing a court summons to take repossession of the land.”
ESSEX County Council is set to issue a court summons to remove Travellers from land in Harlow.
The group of Travellers, who were served a direction to leave last week, set up camp on county council-owned land off South Road, Harlow more than a week ago.
An Essex County Council spokesman said: “The Travellers were served a direction to leave under section 77 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order act 1994.
“As this has now expired we will shortly be issuing a court summons to take repossession of the land.”
Councillor 'left nervous wreck' by hate campaign over Gypsy site - Leicestershire
From the Birmingham Mail
A councillor has told how she has become the victim of a vicious hate campaign since she launched a court bid to overturn the go-ahead for a 10-pitch Traveller site.
Tory Coun Janice Richards said that she and her husband Anthony have been left “nervous wrecks” as a result of a the abuse.
The “terrifying” vendetta has included 70 year-old Janice’s name appearing alongside national newspaper adverts for prostitutes.
Janice said she has also received obscene phone calls, had visits from funeral directors, who came round to measure up for a coffin, and had takeaway meals delivered which neither she nor Anthony had ordered.
Meanwhile 73 year-old Anthony’s car – his “pride and joy” – has been vandalised with paint stripper.
And Janice has further claimed that an individual has sat outside her family home in a “threatening manner”.
Leicestershire Police arrested a 51 year-old in connection with harassment as a result of her allegations. He has since been released on police bail.
Janice, who represents Earl Shilton for Leicestershire County Council, said her problems began after she helped to raise £10,000 for a High Court bid to overturn the go-ahead for a 10-pitch Traveller site at the back of Dale Brook farm in Earl Shilton.
Other town councillors and residents had also joined the attempt to reverse the green light given to the development by Hinckley and Bosworth Borough Council following the application in May.
The campaigners claim that the land is inappropriate for such a development because it is on a floodplain.
Coun Richards said: “It was not a racist decision to join this campaign so I want whoever is responsible to stop destroying my life.”
“I feel like we are being punished and targeted for something which isn’t our fault.
“I have nothing against Travellers – I am not a racist. My only problem was the fact that the land set aside for the site was a known flooding area and that was the only reason I wanted it halted.
“I had concerns over flooding and would have treated any other planning application the same.
“The incidents we’ve had to put up with over the last few months have been horrible – no-one should have to go through what we’ve been through. It is destroying my life.”
Councillor Richards said that the incidents have left her “terrified”, with her doctor becoming increasingly concerned about her “sky high” blood pressure.
The couple are living in fear despite stepping up security at their home. Janice has asked Hinckley and Bosworth council to install CCTV.
Their letter box has also been boarded up.
“Everything has been quite stressful for me and I’m not usually a person who gets stressed,” she said.
“We’ve had obscene phone calls, takeaway drivers have delivered us meals which we hadn’t ordered and I’ve even taken calls when someone started growling at me down the end of the phone, like a bear.
“It’s evening times which really get to us, that’s when we start to get nervous. Both my husband and I keep waking up at night, jumping out of bed and thinking we can hear things, it’s been awful. I feel sorry for the sad person that is having to do this. Who could put two elderly people through such a traumatic time? We are nervous wrecks.”
Leicestershire Police said: “Local officers have carried out house to house enquiries, examined CCTV footage and an officer has an appointment to visit the address.
“Officers are also working closely with Hinckley and Bosworth Borough Council to look at putting measures in place to reassure the people living at the address.
“Police are also investigating an allegation of harassment between May 2013 and August 2013. A 51-year-old man has been arrested in connection with that investigation and has been released on police bail pending further enquiries.”
A councillor has told how she has become the victim of a vicious hate campaign since she launched a court bid to overturn the go-ahead for a 10-pitch Traveller site.
Tory Coun Janice Richards said that she and her husband Anthony have been left “nervous wrecks” as a result of a the abuse.
The “terrifying” vendetta has included 70 year-old Janice’s name appearing alongside national newspaper adverts for prostitutes.
Janice said she has also received obscene phone calls, had visits from funeral directors, who came round to measure up for a coffin, and had takeaway meals delivered which neither she nor Anthony had ordered.
Meanwhile 73 year-old Anthony’s car – his “pride and joy” – has been vandalised with paint stripper.
And Janice has further claimed that an individual has sat outside her family home in a “threatening manner”.
Leicestershire Police arrested a 51 year-old in connection with harassment as a result of her allegations. He has since been released on police bail.
Janice, who represents Earl Shilton for Leicestershire County Council, said her problems began after she helped to raise £10,000 for a High Court bid to overturn the go-ahead for a 10-pitch Traveller site at the back of Dale Brook farm in Earl Shilton.
Other town councillors and residents had also joined the attempt to reverse the green light given to the development by Hinckley and Bosworth Borough Council following the application in May.
The campaigners claim that the land is inappropriate for such a development because it is on a floodplain.
Coun Richards said: “It was not a racist decision to join this campaign so I want whoever is responsible to stop destroying my life.”
“I feel like we are being punished and targeted for something which isn’t our fault.
“I have nothing against Travellers – I am not a racist. My only problem was the fact that the land set aside for the site was a known flooding area and that was the only reason I wanted it halted.
“I had concerns over flooding and would have treated any other planning application the same.
“The incidents we’ve had to put up with over the last few months have been horrible – no-one should have to go through what we’ve been through. It is destroying my life.”
Councillor Richards said that the incidents have left her “terrified”, with her doctor becoming increasingly concerned about her “sky high” blood pressure.
The couple are living in fear despite stepping up security at their home. Janice has asked Hinckley and Bosworth council to install CCTV.
Their letter box has also been boarded up.
“Everything has been quite stressful for me and I’m not usually a person who gets stressed,” she said.
“We’ve had obscene phone calls, takeaway drivers have delivered us meals which we hadn’t ordered and I’ve even taken calls when someone started growling at me down the end of the phone, like a bear.
“It’s evening times which really get to us, that’s when we start to get nervous. Both my husband and I keep waking up at night, jumping out of bed and thinking we can hear things, it’s been awful. I feel sorry for the sad person that is having to do this. Who could put two elderly people through such a traumatic time? We are nervous wrecks.”
Leicestershire Police said: “Local officers have carried out house to house enquiries, examined CCTV footage and an officer has an appointment to visit the address.
“Officers are also working closely with Hinckley and Bosworth Borough Council to look at putting measures in place to reassure the people living at the address.
“Police are also investigating an allegation of harassment between May 2013 and August 2013. A 51-year-old man has been arrested in connection with that investigation and has been released on police bail pending further enquiries.”
Romany Travellers win permission for judicial review over site provision
From Local Government Lawyer
A High Court judge has given a group of Romany Travellers permission for a judicial review over a council’s decision to evict them from an unauthorised site on Green Belt land.
In Eastwood, R (on the application of) v The Royal Borough of Windsor & Maidenhead [2013] EWHC 3476 (Admin) the claimants occupied a 4½ acre field at Five Oaks Farm, Shurlock Road, Waltham St Lawrence, Reading, Berkshire in December 2009.
The Royal Borough of Windsor & Maidenhead that month obtained an injunction and issued an enforcement notice.
A planning inspector subsequently concluded that an appeal by the Travellers against the enforcement notice and the refusal to grant full planning consent should be dismissed but that the time for compliance with the enforcement notice should be extended to 18 months.
The inspector said the 18-month period would be reasonable as this would enable alternative accommodation and site provision arrangements to be progressed by the council. The inspector’s decision was subsequently adopted by the Secretary of State.
At a meeting on 14 February this year – after the moratorium had run out – the Royal Borough’s cabinet prioritisation committee resolved to take enforcement action pursuant to s. 178 of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990.
However, not one single further pitch had been provided by the local authority during the moratorium period.
Mr Justice Mostyn said: “With some misgivings I have decided that the decision by the meeting to disregard the fundamental premise of the decisions of the Inspector and the Secretary of State is arguably perverse, and I therefore give permission on the sole ground that ‘the decision of the local authority made on 14 February 2013 and confirmed on 10 April 2013 was perverse in that it failed to give any meaningful weight to the failure of the local authority to provide alternative pitches in circumstances where both the Inspector and the Secretary of State in 2011 had expected that it would’."
However, the judge did refuse to grant permission for judicial review of the council’s decision to decline to determine a planning application in February 2013.
Cllr MJ Saunders, cabinet member for planning and property at the Royal Borough, said: "We are of course disappointed that the court has come to this conclusion, especially after ruling in the council's favour on all previous occasions.
"It is particularly frustrating because the reason given is the council's failure to provide alternative pitches, a challenge we have diligently worked towards resolving despite a real lack of suitable sites in the borough and the recent go-ahead for an extension with 10 pitches at Mill Place in Datchet.”
Cllr Saunders added: "There is some small comfort in Mr Justice Mostyn's refusal to grant permission to judicially review the council's decision to decline to determine a planning application.
"This remains a planning issue and, despite today's setback, we will continue our efforts to clear this grassland of unauthorised development and restore it to its original condition."
A High Court judge has given a group of Romany Travellers permission for a judicial review over a council’s decision to evict them from an unauthorised site on Green Belt land.
In Eastwood, R (on the application of) v The Royal Borough of Windsor & Maidenhead [2013] EWHC 3476 (Admin) the claimants occupied a 4½ acre field at Five Oaks Farm, Shurlock Road, Waltham St Lawrence, Reading, Berkshire in December 2009.
The Royal Borough of Windsor & Maidenhead that month obtained an injunction and issued an enforcement notice.
A planning inspector subsequently concluded that an appeal by the Travellers against the enforcement notice and the refusal to grant full planning consent should be dismissed but that the time for compliance with the enforcement notice should be extended to 18 months.
The inspector said the 18-month period would be reasonable as this would enable alternative accommodation and site provision arrangements to be progressed by the council. The inspector’s decision was subsequently adopted by the Secretary of State.
At a meeting on 14 February this year – after the moratorium had run out – the Royal Borough’s cabinet prioritisation committee resolved to take enforcement action pursuant to s. 178 of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990.
However, not one single further pitch had been provided by the local authority during the moratorium period.
Mr Justice Mostyn said: “With some misgivings I have decided that the decision by the meeting to disregard the fundamental premise of the decisions of the Inspector and the Secretary of State is arguably perverse, and I therefore give permission on the sole ground that ‘the decision of the local authority made on 14 February 2013 and confirmed on 10 April 2013 was perverse in that it failed to give any meaningful weight to the failure of the local authority to provide alternative pitches in circumstances where both the Inspector and the Secretary of State in 2011 had expected that it would’."
However, the judge did refuse to grant permission for judicial review of the council’s decision to decline to determine a planning application in February 2013.
Cllr MJ Saunders, cabinet member for planning and property at the Royal Borough, said: "We are of course disappointed that the court has come to this conclusion, especially after ruling in the council's favour on all previous occasions.
"It is particularly frustrating because the reason given is the council's failure to provide alternative pitches, a challenge we have diligently worked towards resolving despite a real lack of suitable sites in the borough and the recent go-ahead for an extension with 10 pitches at Mill Place in Datchet.”
Cllr Saunders added: "There is some small comfort in Mr Justice Mostyn's refusal to grant permission to judicially review the council's decision to decline to determine a planning application.
"This remains a planning issue and, despite today's setback, we will continue our efforts to clear this grassland of unauthorised development and restore it to its original condition."
Mount Merrion earmarked for Traveller accommodation - Ireland
From the Irish Times
A proposal to build Traveller accommodation on a site in one of the wealthiest areas of Dublin is to come up for debate as a draft Traveller accommodation plan is put out to public consultation by Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council.
The site on Mount Anville Road in Mount Merrion with views of Dublin Bay has been proposed for Traveller accommodation since 1985.
Strong local opposition combined with occupation of the site as a council depot had prevented it progressing, but its development now looks closer than ever. The depot is almost vacant and the latest Draft Traveller Accommodation Programme 2014-2018 describes Mount Anville as suitable for five group housing units and at “pre-design stage”.
11 sites
The site is one of 11 listed to provide 48 units of accommodation over the lifetime of the plan. The others are at Cloragh in Rathfarnham; Enniskerry Road in Sandyford; Glenamuck Road in Kiltiernan; Lehaunstown near Cherrywood; Pottery Road in Dún Laoghaire; Rathmichael Road near Cherrywood; Stillorgan Grove in Stillorgan; the West Pier at Dún Laoghaire Harbour; and a site at UCD.
All 11 sites with 48 units of accommodation were proposed as part of the previous accommodation programme.
Mount Anville has also been included on a list of council properties to be sold to help fund the council’s capital programme. Currently, 78 Traveller families are in permanent accommodation in the Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown area, with 36 families waiting for permanent accommodation.
Of the 11 sites proposed, Mount Anville is among three owned by the council and suitable for development in the shorter term.
Local councillor Barry Saul (FG) said councillors had been given assurances Mount Anville would be sold and the proceeds used to fund community facilities. Even in a depressed market, “the premium site overlooking Dublin Bay” could raise €3 or €4 million.
“They could realistically buy three or four other sites for Traveller accommodation in the county for the money they would get for this,” he said.
‘Expensive’ land
“From an economic point of view this makes absolutely no sense. This would be the most expensive Traveller accommodation in the country.”
Mr Saul denied it was a case of “not-in-my-backyard” and said there were three sites for Traveller accommodation in Stillorgan under the new plan, more than any other area.
Catherine Morley, director of Southside Traveller Action Group said the organisation welcomed the council’s acknowledgement that private rented accommodation was not the preferred option. She said the organisation was hopeful the target number of units would be reached in the lifetime of the plan, but were concerned at the lack of provision of a transient site in Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown.
Submissions on the draft plan may be sent to the council up to December 22nd.
A proposal to build Traveller accommodation on a site in one of the wealthiest areas of Dublin is to come up for debate as a draft Traveller accommodation plan is put out to public consultation by Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council.
The site on Mount Anville Road in Mount Merrion with views of Dublin Bay has been proposed for Traveller accommodation since 1985.
Strong local opposition combined with occupation of the site as a council depot had prevented it progressing, but its development now looks closer than ever. The depot is almost vacant and the latest Draft Traveller Accommodation Programme 2014-2018 describes Mount Anville as suitable for five group housing units and at “pre-design stage”.
11 sites
The site is one of 11 listed to provide 48 units of accommodation over the lifetime of the plan. The others are at Cloragh in Rathfarnham; Enniskerry Road in Sandyford; Glenamuck Road in Kiltiernan; Lehaunstown near Cherrywood; Pottery Road in Dún Laoghaire; Rathmichael Road near Cherrywood; Stillorgan Grove in Stillorgan; the West Pier at Dún Laoghaire Harbour; and a site at UCD.
All 11 sites with 48 units of accommodation were proposed as part of the previous accommodation programme.
Mount Anville has also been included on a list of council properties to be sold to help fund the council’s capital programme. Currently, 78 Traveller families are in permanent accommodation in the Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown area, with 36 families waiting for permanent accommodation.
Of the 11 sites proposed, Mount Anville is among three owned by the council and suitable for development in the shorter term.
Local councillor Barry Saul (FG) said councillors had been given assurances Mount Anville would be sold and the proceeds used to fund community facilities. Even in a depressed market, “the premium site overlooking Dublin Bay” could raise €3 or €4 million.
“They could realistically buy three or four other sites for Traveller accommodation in the county for the money they would get for this,” he said.
‘Expensive’ land
“From an economic point of view this makes absolutely no sense. This would be the most expensive Traveller accommodation in the country.”
Mr Saul denied it was a case of “not-in-my-backyard” and said there were three sites for Traveller accommodation in Stillorgan under the new plan, more than any other area.
Catherine Morley, director of Southside Traveller Action Group said the organisation welcomed the council’s acknowledgement that private rented accommodation was not the preferred option. She said the organisation was hopeful the target number of units would be reached in the lifetime of the plan, but were concerned at the lack of provision of a transient site in Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown.
Submissions on the draft plan may be sent to the council up to December 22nd.
Saturday, 16 November 2013
Tenant satisfaction survey widens - Yorkshire
From The Yorker
The City of York Council is conducting its annual Tenant Satisfaction Survey, starting this week. This year, for the first time, will include tenants of York’s Gypsy and Traveller sites.
The survey will be posted to 2,000 randomly-selected tenant households asking how satisfied they are with their homes, neighbourhoods, landlords and a range of community services; and will be completely confidential.
Tenants of York’s three Gypsy and Traveller sites are being consulted in line with the council’s Gypsy, Roma and Traveller Strategy launched in May, which includes a commitment to seek their views on tenancy matters.
Councillor Tracey Simpson-Laing, Cabinet Member for Health, Housing and Adult Social Services said, “This survey is one of the many ways in which we listen to tenants to improve the service we offer and it is really important that as many of the tenants who receive a survey, complete it. The responses can be anonymous, but we know everyone has first-hand experience of our services so their feedback will help us monitor our performance, prioritise our budgets and focus our actions – what matters to our tenants, matters to us.”
What matters to our tenants, matters to us.
The survey covers a number of different service areas including repairs and maintenance, contact with customer services and experience of the council’s complaints procedure, as well as gas servicing and safety checks on properties. It also covers satisfaction with local neighbourhoods in areas such as noise, anti-social behaviour, grounds maintenance and community involvement.
In previous surveys, customers said they thought double-glazing was important. As a result, by April 2015, the council aims to have replaced all single glazed timber windows with UPVC double glazed windows, except in conservation areas where secondary double-glazing will be fitted. The survey has also influenced the development of the council’s anti-social behaviour strategy.
Tenants' feedback will be included in the Tenant and Leaseholder Annual Report and examined by the Tenant Scrutiny Panel, set up a year ago to help champion the interests of local tenants.
Surveys should be returned by Monday 2nd of December, all returned surveys will go into a prize draw to win a £100 high street voucher.
The City of York Council is conducting its annual Tenant Satisfaction Survey, starting this week. This year, for the first time, will include tenants of York’s Gypsy and Traveller sites.
The survey will be posted to 2,000 randomly-selected tenant households asking how satisfied they are with their homes, neighbourhoods, landlords and a range of community services; and will be completely confidential.
Tenants of York’s three Gypsy and Traveller sites are being consulted in line with the council’s Gypsy, Roma and Traveller Strategy launched in May, which includes a commitment to seek their views on tenancy matters.
Councillor Tracey Simpson-Laing, Cabinet Member for Health, Housing and Adult Social Services said, “This survey is one of the many ways in which we listen to tenants to improve the service we offer and it is really important that as many of the tenants who receive a survey, complete it. The responses can be anonymous, but we know everyone has first-hand experience of our services so their feedback will help us monitor our performance, prioritise our budgets and focus our actions – what matters to our tenants, matters to us.”
What matters to our tenants, matters to us.
The survey covers a number of different service areas including repairs and maintenance, contact with customer services and experience of the council’s complaints procedure, as well as gas servicing and safety checks on properties. It also covers satisfaction with local neighbourhoods in areas such as noise, anti-social behaviour, grounds maintenance and community involvement.
In previous surveys, customers said they thought double-glazing was important. As a result, by April 2015, the council aims to have replaced all single glazed timber windows with UPVC double glazed windows, except in conservation areas where secondary double-glazing will be fitted. The survey has also influenced the development of the council’s anti-social behaviour strategy.
Tenants' feedback will be included in the Tenant and Leaseholder Annual Report and examined by the Tenant Scrutiny Panel, set up a year ago to help champion the interests of local tenants.
Surveys should be returned by Monday 2nd of December, all returned surveys will go into a prize draw to win a £100 high street voucher.
Friday, 15 November 2013
New chance to have say on Traveller sites in York - Yorkshire
From the Press
Parish councils and other groups in York have four weeks to have their say on how new sites for Gypsies, Travellers and Showpeople should be chosen.
City of York Council has commissioned a study into how many pitches the city needs and which sites should provide them as part of the process of drawing up its Local Plan development map. Various organisations and neighbouring councils now have until December 12 to submit their comments.
The study will update previous work in this area, with the authority saying it has a responsibility to provide enough land to meet the accommodation needs of Travellers through the lifespan of the Local Plan, which would run to 2030. Coun Dave Merrett, cabinet member for transport, planning and sustainability, said: “The Local Plan addresses that there is a real need for more homes in York and also the need to address overcrowding for all residents, including Gypsy, Roma and Travellers.
“This new study will provide an important insight into their needs in the York area, enabling us to make informed decisions on site allocation. We want to work positively with all York communities to address the location of all new proposed sites.”
Plans to expand the Osbaldwick Traveller site were approved by the council last month despite opposition, while a potential site on Malton Road has also drawn objections.
More details are at york.gov.uk/localplan
Parish councils and other groups in York have four weeks to have their say on how new sites for Gypsies, Travellers and Showpeople should be chosen.
City of York Council has commissioned a study into how many pitches the city needs and which sites should provide them as part of the process of drawing up its Local Plan development map. Various organisations and neighbouring councils now have until December 12 to submit their comments.
The study will update previous work in this area, with the authority saying it has a responsibility to provide enough land to meet the accommodation needs of Travellers through the lifespan of the Local Plan, which would run to 2030. Coun Dave Merrett, cabinet member for transport, planning and sustainability, said: “The Local Plan addresses that there is a real need for more homes in York and also the need to address overcrowding for all residents, including Gypsy, Roma and Travellers.
“This new study will provide an important insight into their needs in the York area, enabling us to make informed decisions on site allocation. We want to work positively with all York communities to address the location of all new proposed sites.”
Plans to expand the Osbaldwick Traveller site were approved by the council last month despite opposition, while a potential site on Malton Road has also drawn objections.
More details are at york.gov.uk/localplan
'Pikey' sign leads to race hate charge - Kent
From the Weald Courier
A HAWKHURST man is facing trial after posting a sign outside his house that branded his village "Pikeyville".
David Jell, 54, of Queens Road in Hawkhurst, pinned the note to the postman on his front door.
It read: "Mr Postman, if I am away from Pikeyville. Any parcels or signed for delivery please leave at No4 (sic) only or return to sorting office for collection, many thanks. Beware of pikeys."
Jell was charged with racially-aggravated harassment by writing and the use of threatening words to cause harassment, alarm or distress, and pleaded not guilty.
On Wednesday last week, Sevenoaks Magistrates Court heard the main issue surrounding the case was the word "pikey" and how it is currently defined.
Prosecuting, Edward Parton, said the note "demonstrated hostility to a racial group".
He said: "They (neighbours) have said this is derogatory to the people of Hawkhurst."
But Matthew Nickolls, defending, said: "The defendant admits being the author of the note but disputes the definition of the word pikey. He believes the word's meaning has been misconstrued."
Jell was granted unconditional bail and will return to Sevenoaks Magistrate's Court for trial on February 27.
A HAWKHURST man is facing trial after posting a sign outside his house that branded his village "Pikeyville".
David Jell, 54, of Queens Road in Hawkhurst, pinned the note to the postman on his front door.
It read: "Mr Postman, if I am away from Pikeyville. Any parcels or signed for delivery please leave at No4 (sic) only or return to sorting office for collection, many thanks. Beware of pikeys."
Jell was charged with racially-aggravated harassment by writing and the use of threatening words to cause harassment, alarm or distress, and pleaded not guilty.
On Wednesday last week, Sevenoaks Magistrates Court heard the main issue surrounding the case was the word "pikey" and how it is currently defined.
Prosecuting, Edward Parton, said the note "demonstrated hostility to a racial group".
He said: "They (neighbours) have said this is derogatory to the people of Hawkhurst."
But Matthew Nickolls, defending, said: "The defendant admits being the author of the note but disputes the definition of the word pikey. He believes the word's meaning has been misconstrued."
Jell was granted unconditional bail and will return to Sevenoaks Magistrate's Court for trial on February 27.
Bury St Edmunds: Businesses happy as Travellers move to new car park - Suffolk
From EADP24
A group of Travellers has pitched up in another car park as they hope for a permanent site somewhere in the town.
The group has moved to the school yard east and west car parks off Risbygate Street in Bury St Edmunds after they left the Parkway surface car park behind Cineworld on Thursday night.
It is the fourth different car park the Travellers have moved to in less than a month after recent spells at Ram Meadow and St Andrews.
Anne Gower, St Edmundsbury’s cabinet member for housing, said: “They’ve made it quite clear they want to live in or around Bury St Edmunds and they would like their children to have an education. It’s their intention to stay.
“My ideal solution would be they can come forward and say we’ve identified this piece of land, we’d like to buy it and here’s a planning application.
“It’s very unfortunate because one of their wishes is their children need education, but how can these children be educated when every month they’re being moved on somewhere?
“It’s not a good situation for the travelling family, but I know about people on the housing register who have got a local connection that also want accommodation.”
Traders in the town had begun to voice concerns about the impact the Travellers were having during their spell at the Parkway surface car park, one of Bury’s busiest car parks, which had to be closed last Saturday as it reached capacity.
While the Travellers have moved closer to the town centre, the car park they are now occupying is much smaller.
Our Bury St Edmunds chief executive Mark Cordell said: “Some of our traders have spoken about concerns around the Travellers taking up valuable car parking space at a very busy time of year, therefore the fact the Travellers are no longer on the Parkway surface car park is welcome.
“With the next seven weeks being such an important trading period for the town, I’m delighted that the Parkway surface car park is now fully available.
“On behalf of businesses, I’m in regular dialogue with the council around this issue and they’re fully aware of traders’ concerns.”
A group of Travellers has pitched up in another car park as they hope for a permanent site somewhere in the town.
The group has moved to the school yard east and west car parks off Risbygate Street in Bury St Edmunds after they left the Parkway surface car park behind Cineworld on Thursday night.
It is the fourth different car park the Travellers have moved to in less than a month after recent spells at Ram Meadow and St Andrews.
Anne Gower, St Edmundsbury’s cabinet member for housing, said: “They’ve made it quite clear they want to live in or around Bury St Edmunds and they would like their children to have an education. It’s their intention to stay.
“My ideal solution would be they can come forward and say we’ve identified this piece of land, we’d like to buy it and here’s a planning application.
“It’s very unfortunate because one of their wishes is their children need education, but how can these children be educated when every month they’re being moved on somewhere?
“It’s not a good situation for the travelling family, but I know about people on the housing register who have got a local connection that also want accommodation.”
Traders in the town had begun to voice concerns about the impact the Travellers were having during their spell at the Parkway surface car park, one of Bury’s busiest car parks, which had to be closed last Saturday as it reached capacity.
While the Travellers have moved closer to the town centre, the car park they are now occupying is much smaller.
Our Bury St Edmunds chief executive Mark Cordell said: “Some of our traders have spoken about concerns around the Travellers taking up valuable car parking space at a very busy time of year, therefore the fact the Travellers are no longer on the Parkway surface car park is welcome.
“With the next seven weeks being such an important trading period for the town, I’m delighted that the Parkway surface car park is now fully available.
“On behalf of businesses, I’m in regular dialogue with the council around this issue and they’re fully aware of traders’ concerns.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)