East Riding of Yorkshire Council Gypsy and Traveller Need Assessment 2012 Need Assessment

Transcription

1 Gypsy and Traveller Need Assessment Issue 21 November 2012 This report takes into account the particular instructions and requirements of our client. It is not intended for and should not be relied upon by any third party and no responsibility is undertaken to any third party. Job number Ove Arup & Partners Ltd Admiral House Rose Wharf 78 East Street Leeds LS9 8EE United Kingdom

2 Document Verification Job title Job number Document title File reference Document ref Revision Date Filename Issue.docx Issue 21 Novemb er Description Issue 2012 Prepared by Checked by Approved by Fiona Boden, Dr Name Lisa Scullion, Dr Philip Brown, Nicole Harrison Nicole Harrison Jane Healey Brown Signature Filename Description Name Signature Filename Description Prepared by Checked by Approved by Name Signature Filename Description Prepared by Checked by Approved by Name Signature Prepared by Checked by Approved by Issue Document Verification with Document

3 Contents Glossary 1 Executive Summary 3 1 Introduction 7 Page 1.1 Overview Background This Study Research Approach Structure of the Report 9 2 Policy Context Introduction Planning Policy Defining Gypsies and Travellers Housing and Accommodation Need Defining a Pitch Conventions 21 3 Baseline Information on the Gypsy and Traveller Population Introduction Caravan Numbers and Trends from the Caravan Count The Size of the Local Gypsy and Traveller Community 24 4 Authorised Private Sites Introduction Socially Rented Sites Authorised Private Sites 35 5 Planning and Unauthorised Sites Introduction Planning Applications Unauthorised Development of Gypsy and Traveller Sites Unauthorised Encampments 38 6 Gypsies and Travellers in Social and Private Bricks and Mortar Accommodation Introduction Estimating the Size of Gypsy and Traveller Population in Bricks and Mortar Housing 42

4 6.3 Survey Findings of Residents Living in Bricks and Mortar Housing 43 7 Future Accommodation, Household Formation and Accommodation Affordability Introduction Future accommodation intentions Household Concealment Household Formation Accommodation Affordability 50 8 Travelling Showpeople 53 9 An Assessment of Accommodation Need Introduction A Note on the Assessment of Accommodation Need Explanation of the Need Requirement Elements In Summary Transit Accommodation Introduction Need for Transit Sites and Stopping Places Planning for Transit Sites and Stopping Places Implications for the Emerging Strategy Document Overview Cross Boundary Matters Identifying where there is demand for additional pitches Options for identifying broad areas of search in East Riding Conclusions Concluding Comments 72

5 Glossary The following terms are used in this report and or are used in conjunction with planning for Gypsy, Traveller and Showpeople accommodation. In the case of those terms which are related to Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation and culture, it is noted that a number of these terms are often contested and debated. It is not the intention of the authors to present these terms as absolute definitions; rather, the explanations provided are those the authors used in this assessment as their frames of reference. Term Amenity block/shed Authorised social site Authorised private site Bricks and mortar Caravan Caravan Count Chalet Core Strategy Department for Communities and Local Government (CLG) Development Plan Documents (DPDs) Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Needs Assessment (GTAA) Green Belt Gypsy Gypsies and Travellers (as used in this report) Explanation On most residential Gypsy/Travellers sites these are buildings where basic plumbing amenities (bath/shower, WC and sink) are provided at the rate of one building per pitch. An authorised site owned by either the local authority or a Registered Housing Provider. An authorised site owned by a private individual (who may or may not be a Gypsy or a Traveller). These sites can be owner-occupied, rented or a mixture of owner-occupied and rented pitches. Permanent mainstream housing. Mobile living vehicle used by Gypsies and Travellers. Also referred to as trailers. Bi-annual count of Gypsy and Traveller caravans conducted every January and July by local authorities, published by the CLG In the absence of a specific definition the term chalet is used here to refer to single storey residential units, which resemble mobile homes but can be dismantled. Provides an overall vision for how the area and places within it should develop; strategic objectives for the area and a delivery strategy for achieving these objectives. The main government department responsible for Gypsy and Traveller accommodation issues Development plan documents set out planning policies in localauthority areas for a 15 to 20 year period. The main document that identifies the accommodation requirements of Gypsies and Travellers. A policy designation, the fundamental aim of which is to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land open. Members of Gypsy or Traveller communities. Usually used to describe Romany (English) Gypsies originating from India. This term is not acceptable to all Travellers. Consistent with the Housing Act 2004, inclusive of: all Gypsies, Irish Travellers, New Travellers, Show People, Circus People and Gypsies and Travellers in bricks and mortar accommodation. Page 1

6 Homes and Communities Agency (HCA) Local Plan Pitch/plot Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS) Settled community/people Site Static caravan Stopping place Suppressed/concealed household Trailer Transit site Travelling Showpeople Unauthorised Development Unauthorised Encampment Yard National housing and regeneration agency. Has been responsible for administering the Gypsy and Traveller Site Grant since 2009/10. A set of documents which a Local Planning Authority creates to describe their strategy for development and use of land in their area of authority. Area of land on a site/development generally home to one licensee household. Can be varying sizes and have varying caravan occupancy levels. Often also referred to as a plot, particularly in relation to Travelling Showpeople. There is no agreed definition as to the size of a pitch. Previous planning approach across England. In July 2010 the government announced its decision to revoke RSSs. Reference to non-travellers (those who live in houses). An authorised area of land on which Gypsies and Travellers are accommodated in trailers/chalets/vehicles. Can contain one or multiple pitches. Larger caravan than the tourer type. Can be moved but only with the use of a large vehicle. Often referred to simply as a trailer. Locations frequented by Gypsies and Travellers, usually for short periods of time. Households, living within other households, who are unable to set up separate family units and who are unable to access a place on an authorised site, or obtain or afford land to develop one. Term commonly used by Gypsies and Travellers to refer to a moveable caravan. Site intended for short stays. Such sites are usually permanent, but there is a limit on the length of time residents can stay. Commonly referred to as Showmen, these are a group of occupational Travellers who work on travelling shows and fairs across the UK and abroad. This refers to a caravan/trailer or group of caravans/trailers on land owned (possibly developed) by Gypsies and Travellers without planning permission. Residing in caravans/trailers on private/public land without the landowner s permission (for example, at the side of the road, on a car park or on a piece of undeveloped land). Term used by Travelling Showpeople to refer to a site. Page 2

7 Executive Summary The Requirement for the Study The Housing Act 2004 placed a duty upon local authorities to produce assessments of accommodation need for Gypsies and Travellers. In 2006, Sheffield Hallam University produced a report for the Yorkshire and Humber Regional Assembly Identifying Gypsy & Traveller accommodation Needs in Yorkshire and The Humber 1. This report provided a regional overview of the needs of Gypsies and Travellers, including identifying specific local authorities that were experiencing unmet need. In 2008 Arc4 produced a Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Needs Assessment (GTAA) for East Riding 2. Our Brief In July 2012, East Riding of Yorkshire Council (ERYC) commissioned Arup, working with the Salford Housing & Urban Studies Unit (SHUSU) at the University of Salford, to produce an updated Gypsy, Traveller and Travelling Showpeople Accommodation Assessment. The primary purpose of this assessment was to provide up to date information and data regarding the needs and requirements of the Gypsy, Traveller and Travelling Showpeople communities. This report presents the projection of requirements for the period The assessment was undertaken by conducting a review of the following data sources: Previous assessments of need and information submitted through the previous regional planning process; The policy and guidance context; The bi-annual Caravan Count; Information from the local authority with regards to pitch provision and supply; Information from key stakeholders; and A survey of 92 Gypsy and Traveller households. From the estimation of a base population of 132 households in East Riding, we consulted with 85 resident households 3 ; this equates to 64% of the estimated resident Gypsy and Traveller community. We believe that the sample is as representative as can be reasonably expected, given the relatively hidden nature of the population (a national issue) and the timescale available for the consultation 1 Powell, R. (2006) Identifying Gypsy & Traveller accommodation Needs in Yorkshire and The Humber, Sheffield: Centre for Regional, Economic and Social Research (CRESR), Sheffield Hallam University. 2 Arc4 (2008) Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Assessment East Riding of Yorkshire 2008 Revised Draft 3 Resident households excludes those on unauthorised encampments and showgrounds Page 3

8 period. The fieldwork took place during a two week period in the middle of July The base date used in this assessment is the 23rd July Local Accommodation Provision There is no one source of information about the size of the Gypsy and Traveller population across East Riding. Our best estimate in relation to the resident population is that there are at least 488 individuals or 132 households in East Riding. The population was found across the following accommodation types: There are 3 socially rented sites managed by ERYC across the study area. These sites currently accommodate 55 households. It is estimated that there are at least 66 households living in bricks and mortar accommodation. There is one yard for Travelling Showpeople which accommodates a single household located within Gowdall. There are 2 authorised private sites in the study area but it is not known whether these sites are still occupied. One site is located in Barmby Moor and the other is located in Snaith. There are 3 unauthorised developments. It is estimated that these currently accommodate 2 households. Two of these are occupied and are located in Howden and Nafferton. One is thought to be unoccupied and is located in Keyingham. There is evidence of need for permanent accommodation arising from the presence of unauthorised encampments within the study area. Characteristics of Local Gypsies and Travellers The survey of Gypsies and Travellers identified some of the important characteristics of the local population: Household size varied between different accommodation types; for example, the average household size for those in bricks and mortar was 4, compared to 3 on site based forms of accommodation. The majority of Gypsies and Travellers in trailers and in housing can be seen to belong, in some way, to the area. The vast majority of people had lived in the study area for over ten years. Many of these were born or had strong family links to the area. The local population consists mainly of Romany Gypsies who form 96% of the sample in the survey. There was a mix of households who still travelled and those who no longer travelled. Accommodation Need and Supply There are no signs that the growth in the Gypsy and Traveller population will slow significantly. Research from the Equalities and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) has indicated that around 6,000 additional pitches for Gypsies and Page 4

9 Travellers are immediately required to meet the current shortage of accommodation within England. This study has taken a thorough assessment of the need arising in East Riding from all accommodation types present at the time of the survey. As such this assessment of need should be regarded as a reasonable and robust assessment of need upon which to base planning decisions going forward. Sites developed and pitches approved after 23rd July 2012 contribute to the need requirements detailed in the table below. Table i: Summary of Gypsy and Traveller accommodation and pitch need ( ) Current authorised residential provision (pitches) 61 Residential need (pitches) 34 Residential need (pitches) 11 Residential need (pitches) 18 Gross Residential need (pitches) 63 Gypsy and Traveller Pitch Need Total (No. of pitches) It is recommended that this assessment of accommodation need is repeated in due course (circa 5 years) to ensure it remains as accurate as possible. An estimate of transit requirements has not been provided, and an indication of how provision for short-stay households could be made is detailed in the main report. No additional need for Travelling Showpeople accommodation was found. Identification of Demand The findings from this study indicate that the majority of need for additional pitches in East Riding arises from overcrowding and concealed households, particularly over the next five years. With the majority of respondents (89%) stating that they do not wish to move it would follow that this demand is focused where the existing population is located. Through discussions with ERYC Officers it is clear that even if an extension is completed at one of the sites, then all three existing sites will be at capacity. Consequently, new sites will be required to meet the needs of Gypsy and Traveller communities. The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF, 2012) requires local planning authorities to identify and update annually a supply of specific deliverable sites sufficient to provide for 5 years worth of sites against locally set targets. This study has identified three broad areas of search for new sites and the likely number of pitches required over the next 5 years (in addition to the supply in the pipeline) in each areas of search as follows: pitches in the Cottingham to Beverley area; and pitches in the Driffied to Bridlington corridor. Page 5

10 There are a number of options for how specific sites could be identified in these broad areas of search: Providing an approach governed by land availability, predicated on land owners putting forward sites for Gypsies and Travellers. Selecting sites which are in good proximity to services and facilities; and Using a demand led approach, focusing on those areas where there is already an established Gypsy and Traveller population; We believe that in order to meet the needs of the Gypsy and Traveller community it may be necessary to adopt an approach that combines these options to provide an appropriate and deliverable strategy to address need. Page 6

11 1 Introduction 1.1 Overview This Chapter sets out the reasons for needing to undertake a Gypsy and Traveller Needs Assessment, the brief set out by the East Riding of Yorkshire Council and the methodological approach to the study. 1.2 Background The Housing Act 2004 placed a duty upon local authorities to produce assessments of accommodation need for Gypsies and Travellers. In 2006, Sheffield Hallam University produced a report for the Yorkshire and Humber Regional Assembly Identifying Gypsy & Traveller accommodation Needs in Yorkshire and The Humber 4. This report provided a regional overview of the needs of Gypsies and Travellers, including identifying specific local authorities that were experiencing unmet need. In 2008 Arc4 produced a Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Needs Assessment (GTAA) for East Riding 5. Planning guidance contained within Circular 01/2006 indicated that the district level requirements identified in Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Assessments (GTAAs) were to be submitted to the Regional Planning Body (RPB), in this case the Yorkshire and Humber Regional Assembly, and a strategic view of need taken. The intention was that these figures, once agreed, would be incorporated into the Regional Spatial Strategy which in turn would be adopted by each local authority s Local Development Framework (LDF). In July 2010 the Secretary of State announced the proposed revocation of Regional Spatial Strategies, although currently they remain part of the Development Plan. Local Authorities were advised to continue to develop LDF Core Strategies and, where these had already been adopted, use the adopted Development Plan Documents as the local planning framework. In early 2012 a revised policy for the planning of Gypsy and Traveller sites was released replacing previous guidance in this area. 1.3 This Study In July 2012, East Riding of Yorkshire Council commissioned Arup and the Salford Housing & Urban Studies Unit (SHUSU) at the University of Salford to produce an updated Gypsy and Traveller Needs Assessment. The primary purpose of this assessment was to provide up to date information and data regarding the needs and requirements of the Gypsy, Traveller and Travelling Showpeople 4 Powell, R. (2006) Identifying Gypsy & Traveller accommodation Needs in Yorkshire and The Humber, Sheffield: Centre for Regional, Economic and Social Research (CRESR), Sheffield Hallam University. 5 Arc4 (2008) Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Assessment East Riding of Yorkshire 2008 Revised Draft Page 7

12 communities. This report presents the projection of permanent and transit requirements for the period Research Approach The approach to this assessment involved bringing together various existing data sources with empirical research with the Gypsy, Traveller and Travelling Showpeople communities across East Riding. Details about the methodology for the assessment can be found in Appendix 1. The methodology entailed a review of the following data sources: Previous assessments of need and information submitted through the previous regional planning process; The policy and guidance context; The bi-annual Caravan Count; Information from the local authority with regards to pitch provision and supply; Information from key stakeholders. These included representatives from: East Riding of Yorkshire Council (including Housing Strategy, Development and Forward Planning, Gypsy and Traveller Liaison, Minority and Ethnic Traveller Attainment Service, Public Protection (Environmental Health) and Development Management); Hidden Voices; Minority Ethnic and Traveller Attainment Service; Humberside Police; and The Showmen s Guild Consultations (written and verbal) were undertaken in order to develop a clearer understanding about the context of provision and need within East Riding and to help inform the assessment of need. This information has been incorporated into this report in the appropriate places. A survey of Gypsies, Travellers and Travelling Showpeople. This entailed the completion of interviews with 92 households living in trailer-based and bricks and mortar accommodation across East Riding. See Appendices for specific details of this sample and the research process. Table 1.1 summarises the response to the survey by number of sites and estimated/ known number of households across East Riding. Page 8

13 Table 1.1: Sample in relation to local Gypsy, Traveller and Showpeople population Type of accommodation No. of sites Total Sample % Total No. of known occupied pitches/households Interview Sample Socially rented sites Private sites Unauthorised developments Travelling Showpeople Unauthorised encampments NA NA NA NA 3 NA Other NA NA NA NA 4 NA Housed NA NA NA NA 33 NA The key points to note from the methodological approach adopted is that: % From the estimation of the site based population of 65 resident households across the area, we consulted with 52 residents which equates to at least 80% of the site based population. In addition, we consulted with 33 households who were living in bricks and mortar housing across the area. Attempts were made to engage on all sites although this was not possible on the Travelling Showpeople yard or the two occupied private sites. Our experience was that one of the private sites was empty of households/occupied living units whilst the other private site was inaccessible due to restricted access. Similarly, the Travelling Showpeople yard appeared empty of households/occupied living units. It is unclear whether this means the households had moved away permanently or were travelling at the time of the research. It is considered that (with the possible exception of the small sample size on unauthorised encampments) the sample is representative given the relatively hidden nature of the population and the timescale available for the consultation period. Due to the size of the sample, it is reasonable to gross up findings from the survey to the total population of Gypsies, Travellers and Travelling Showpeople in the study area. See Chapter 9 for a description of how the survey findings have been translated into accommodation need. 1.5 Structure of the Report This report is intended to assist East Riding of Yorkshire Council in their formulation of planning policies for the provision of accommodation for the Gypsy, Traveller and Travelling Showpeople communities. It sets out the background and current policy context, identifies the estimated Gypsy, Traveller and Travelling Showpeople population and presents evidence of need arising within the study area. Page 9

14 Chapter 2 looks at the past, present and emerging policy context in the area of Gypsy, Traveller and Travelling Showpeople accommodation. Chapter 3 looks at the trends in caravan numbers evident from the bi-annual count of caravans and estimates the size of the local Gypsy and Traveller community. Chapter 4 discusses current authorised provision across East Riding, including the views of households living on the authorised sites. Chapter 5 looks at the level of planning applications made in East Riding, the presence of unauthorised sites and the views of households on unauthorised sites obtained through the survey. Chapter 6 looks at the numbers of Gypsies and Travellers living in bricks and mortar accommodation as well as drawing upon the views of households obtained through the survey. Chapter 7 looks at a range of issues including the movement intentions of the sample, the formation of new households, the concealment of existing ones and the accommodation preferences of the Gypsy and Traveller population. Chapter 8 looks at the issue of Travelling Showpeople in the study area. Chapter 9 provides the numerical assessment of accommodation need for East Riding. Chapter 10 provides an analysis of the need for transit provision. Chapter 11 provides an overview of the implications of the findings for the Emerging Core Strategy. Chapter 12 provides concluding comments on the assessment. The base date for this assessment is the 23rd July 2012 Page 10

15 2 Policy Context 2.1 Introduction This chapter looks at the current and past housing and planning policy context impacting on the assessment of need and the provision of accommodation for Gypsies, Travellers and Travelling Showpeople. 2.2 Planning Policy National Policy The main document for detailing planning policy in England over the period was ODPM Circular 01/2006 Planning for Gypsy and Traveller Caravan Sites. This specifies that the aims of legislation and policy were to: ensure that Gypsies and Travellers have fair access to suitable accommodation, education, health and welfare provision; reduce the number of unauthorised encampments and developments; increase significantly the number of Gypsy and Traveller sites in appropriate locations and with planning permission in order to address under-provision by 2011; protect the traditional travelling way of life of Gypsies and Travellers; underline the importance of assessing accommodation need; promote private site provision; and avoid Gypsies and Travellers becoming homeless, where eviction from unauthorised sites occurs and where there is no alternative accommodation. The circular directed local authorities to assess needs through Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Assessments which should then form part of the evidence base for subsequent Development Plan Documents. Travelling Showpeople were the subjects of separate planning guidance, CLG Circular 04/07, which aimed to ensure that the system for pitch assessment, identification and allocation as introduced for Gypsies and Travellers was also applied to Travelling Showpeople Current National Planning Policy In March 2012 the government published the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) for England and Wales. This Framework represents a core aspect of the Government s reforms to the planning system to make it less complex and more accessible, to protect the environment and to promote sustainable growth. Page 11

16 In tandem with the publication of the NPPF the Government published a new policy on Gypsy and Travellers 6 and the two documents should be read in conjunction. This replaces Circulars 01/06 and 04/2007. Paragraph 3 of this Policy states that the Government s overarching aim is to: 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. Further detail on this overarching aim is subsequently provided in paragraph 4 of this policy which states that the Government s aims for Traveller sites are: that local planning authorities should make their own assessment of need for the purposes of planning; to ensure that local planning authorities, working collaboratively, develop fair and effective strategies to meet need through the identification of land for sites; to encourage local planning authorities to plan for sites over a reasonable timescale; that plan-making and decision-taking should protect Green Belt from inappropriate development; to promote more private Traveller site provision while recognising that there will always be those Travellers who cannot provide their own sites; that plan-making and decision-taking should aim to reduce the number of unauthorised developments and encampments and make enforcement more effective; for local planning authorities to ensure that their Local Plan includes fair, realistic and inclusive policies; to increase the number of Traveller sites in appropriate locations with planning permission, to address under provision and maintain an appropriate level of supply; to reduce tensions between settled and Traveller communities in plan-making and planning decisions; to enable provision of suitable accommodation from which Travellers can access education, health, welfare and employment infrastructure; for local planning authorities to have due regard to the protection of local amenity and local environment. Policy A: Using evidence to plan positively and manage development sets out that Local Planning Authorities (LPAs) should consider the following in developing the evidence base: 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); 6 CLG (2012) Planning policy for Traveller sites Page 12

17 B. co-operate 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. Policy B: Planning for Traveller sites states that LPAs should set pitch targets for Gypsies and Travellers and plot targets for travelling showpeople to meet needs in their area, working collaboratively with neighbouring planning authorities. Paragraph 9 in this policy states that LPAs should, in producing their Local Plan: A. identify and update annually, a supply of specific deliverable sites sufficient to provide five years worth of sites against their locally set targets; B. identify a supply of specific, developable; C. sites or broad locations for growth, for years six to ten and, where possible, for years 11-15; D. consider production of joint development plans that set targets on a crossauthority 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); E. 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; F. protect local amenity and environment. Paragraph 10 notes that criteria should be set out to guide land supply allocations where there is an identified need. It states that: 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 Regional Planning Policy The Government has made clear its intention to abolish Regional Strategies. However, it has been made clear that the evidence base used to compile these Strategies can still be used to inform the development of Local Plans as appropriate 7. Specific guidance is provided in terms of Gypsy and Traveller needs, this states that: 7 Chief Planner, CLG (6 July 2010) Chief Planning Officer Letter: Revocation of Regional Strategies Page 13

18 Local councils are best placed to assess the needs of Travellers. The abolition of Regional Strategies means that local authorities will be responsible for determining the right level of site provision, reflecting local need and historic demand, and for bringing forward land in DPDs. They should continue to do this in line with current policy. Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Assessments (GTAAs) have been undertaken by all local authorities and if local authorities decide to review the levels of provision these assessments will form a good starting point. However, local authorities are not bound by them. We will review relevant regulations and guidance on this matter in due course. Two main studies were undertaken in the Yorkshire and Humber Region to improve understanding and knowledge of these issues 8. However, in light of the above guidance and that these documents were published prior to the latest Government policy on Gypsy and Travellers then they appear to be of less weight How have Gypsy and Traveller issues been considered by Planning Inspectors since the publication of the NPPF Four Core Strategies outside London have been found Sound by the Planning Inspectorate since the publication of the NPPF in March In tandem with the publication of the NPPF the government also published a new approach to planning for Gypsies and Travellers as set out in the Planning policy for Traveller sites document. The table below sets out the approach to this issue within the submitted Core Strategies and the Inspector s conclusions on these issues. These four examples illustrate that: Assessments need to be up-to-date and be for the same period as the plan period; None of the four Core Strategies that have been found sound outside of London have contained specific site allocations, with this instead being specified as being dealt with through the Allocations DPD; two Core Strategies were found sound even without pitch targets in order to avoid delay the approval of Core Strategies; and Criteria based policies for the allocation of sites have been incorporated in the Core Strategies found sound. It is understood that the ERYC plan to proceed with both a Core Strategy ( The Strategy ) and the Site Allocations DPD in parallel so would therefore not be able to defer decision making on site allocations to meet Gypsy and Traveller needs until a later plan making process. 8 University of Salford (2009) Overview of Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Assessments and Sheffield Hallam University (2006) Identifying Gypsy & Traveller Accommodation Needs in Yorkshire and The Humber 9 As at the 6 th of August 2012 Page 14

19 Table 2.1: Review of approach to Gypsy and Traveller needs in Core Strategies found sound since the publication of the NPPF Local Authority Does the submitted Core Strategy allocate sites to meet future need? No The GTANA found no additional need for pitches in their evidence base study. The Plan therefore included a policy setting out criteria that could be applied to any applications for any proposals for Gypsy and Traveller or Travelling Showpeople sites. Policy approach to Gypsies and Travellers Comments in Inspector s Report Central Lancashire Policy 8: Gypsy and Traveller and Travelling Showpeople Accommodation in the Publication Core Strategy sets out a range of criteria to be applied to relevant applications. This includes the need to consider: Location in respect of proximity to services; Suitable road access and sufficient space for parking; Avoidance of residential use on contaminated and otherwise unsuitable land; and No unacceptable impact on the immediate surrounding areas and the wider landscape. The Inspector noted that there was no convincing evidence that contravened the need in the Policy. Paragraph 64 notes that the policy comprises relevant criteria and is in accordance with policy in the NPPF that highlights where there is no identified need, criteria-based policies should be included to provide a basis for decisions in case applications nevertheless came forward. This paragraph states that if pitches are needed at the local level, authorities can identify specific sites through a separate DPD and that such an approach does not conflict with the Government Planning Policy for Traveller Sites. As such the Inspector states in paragraph 64 that the Local Plan s approach is entirely reasonable. West Berkshire No the policy states that the Council will make appropriate provision through the identification Policy CS9 in the West Berkshire Submission Core Strategy Incorporating Main Modifications (March 2012) sets out a range of criteria which will be used to allocate sites and to consider planning applications against. This criteria for sites outside settlement Paragraph 128 states that the Inspector has considered the policy in light of the NPPF and the Government s Policy on Traveller sites. They state that: Page 15

20 Local Authority Does the submitted Core Strategy allocate sites to meet future need? of sites within the Site Allocations DPD. It does not specify how many pitches will be required. Previous wording in the Policy Explanation that had states the number of pitches required was removed and replaced by a reference to understand this issue through the Allocations DPD. Policy approach to Gypsies and Travellers boundaries includes: Access to roads and public transport; Easy access to services; Being located outside areas of high flood risk; Provide adequate on site facilities for play, storage, parking and residential amenity; The possibility of integration with the site and the surrounding residential community; Opportunities for an element of authorised mixed uses; The compatibility of the use with surrounding land uses; Not materially harming the physical and visual character of the area; and Where applicable have regard for the character and policies affecting the North Wessex Downs AONB. Comments in Inspector s Report The policy rightly makes clear that identified needs will be met by allocations in the Site Allocations and Delivery DPD. The criteria for allocations and any other applications are reasonable for sites outside settlement boundaries, but would be unjustified within settlement boundaries, where such sites should be treated in the same way as other residential development. Their applicability only outside settlement boundaries is needed for the policy to be justified and is made clear in MM Woking No specific sites are not identified within the Core Strategy, with this stating that this will be undertaken through the Allocations DPD. Policy CS14: Gypsies, Travellers and Travelling Showpeople in the Woking Core Strategy Publication document (June 2011) states that provision will be made for a specified number of pitches in the Borough. The Policy states that sites will be allocated to meet this need through the Allocations DPD and that a sequential approach will be adopted during this process. This will mean that sites in the urban area will be considered before those in the Green Belt and where no sites in the urban area exist priority will be given to those to sites on the edge of the urban area that benefit from good access to jobs, infrastructure and services. The Policy notes that a demonstrated lack of any deliverable sites in the urban area would provide very special circumstances necessary to allocate sites in the Green Belt. The Policy sets out a range of criteria to be considered when The Inspector states in regards to this policy that the GTAA which the policy is based is not up-to-date and that it does not cover the plan period. As such it cannot be considered to be based on robust evidence. The Inspector notes in paragraph 109 that the Council has proposed to amend the policy wording to reflect that they will undertake a fresh assessment in 2012and that provision will be made for the appropriate number of pitches through the Allocations DPD. The Inspector states: In the interests of plan making efficiency, rather than delaying the examination process Page 16

21 Local Authority Does the submitted Core Strategy allocate sites to meet future need? Policy approach to Gypsies and Travellers determining the allocation of land for Gypsies, Travellers and Travelling Showpeople and any planning applications for nonallocated sites: Safe vehicular access to the highways network and adequate parking and turning provision; Provide adequate amenity for occupiers; Not having unacceptable adverse impacts on the visual amenity and character of the area; Have adequate infrastructure and on-site utilities; and Have safe and reasonable access to schools and other services. Comments in Inspector s Report to enable the evidence base to be updated and pitch provision to be made for the entire plan period, I consider that the Sites Allocation DPD provides a reasonable mechanism by which locations for additional pitch provision may be found. The Inspector proposes modifications to reflect this approach and which deletes the pitch requirements set out in the Publication document. Taunton Deane No specific sites are not identified within the policy although a target requirement is set out and phased over the plan period. Policy CP 4 Housing in the Taunton Deane Published Plan Core Strategy sets out the need to provide pitches for Gypsies and Travellers in the area. The policy states that sites will be provided through the Site Allocations DPD and that individual sites that come forward should be consistent with policy DM3: Gypsy and Traveller Site Selection Criteria. This requires the following criteria to be fully satisfied: That the proposal is to help meet a clear and evidenced need as set out in the GTAA or other evidence submitted with the application; The site is well-related to local service and facilities; The environmental impacts of the proposal are minimised; The proposal would not unacceptably prejudice the amenity of adjoining or adjacent occupiers; The site can be adequately served by the appropriate infrastructure; and The impact of the proposal will not give rise to an unacceptable traffic movement impact. The Core Strategy contains a strategic policy for housing (CP4) which includes a pitch target for Gypsies and Travellers. This is to be read with policy DM3 which sets criteria for site selection. This aspect of the policy can therefore be seen to conform with national policy advice at the time of the plan s submission. The Inspector highlights that the council have acknowledged that the plan is not consistent with the new national policy statement for Traveller sites in that it does not demonstrate a five-year supply of sites or identify longer term needs. The Inspector accepted that this matter will need to be addressed in a subsequent local plan and that it would not be appropriate to delay adoption of this Core Strategy while further work is undertaken. Page 17

22 Page 18

23 Gypsy and Traveller N 2012 N Planning Policy Summary Cumulatively this policy context makes it clear that there is a fundamental need for LPAs to understand and plan for the needs of Gypsy and Traveller communities. This represents an integral part of the evidence base upon which Local Plans should be developed in order to be found sound. 2.3 Defining Gypsies and Travellers Defining Gypsies and Travellers is not straightforward. Different definitions are used for a variety of purposes. At a very broad level the term Gypsies and Travellers is used by non-gypsies and Travellers to encompass a variety of groups and individuals who have in common a tradition or practice of nomadism. More narrowly both Romany Gypsies and Irish Travellers are recognised minority ethnic groupings. At the same time Gypsies and Travellers have been defined for accommodation and planning purposes. The statutory definition of Gypsies and Travellers for Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Assessments required by the Housing Act 2004 is: a) persons with a cultural tradition of nomadism or of living in a caravan; and b) all other persons of a nomadic habit of life, whatever their race or origin, including: a. such persons who, on grounds only of their own or their family s or dependant s educational or health needs or old age, have ceased to travel temporarily or permanently; and b. members of an organised group of travelling showpeople or circus people (whether or not travelling together as such). The new planning policy contains a separate definition for planning purposes which offers a narrower definition and excludes Travelling Showpeople: 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 or permanently, but excluding members of an organised group of travelling show people or circus people travelling together as such. This definition focuses more narrowly upon people who either still travel or have ceased to do so as a result of specific issues and can as a consequence demonstrate specific land use requirements. A separate definition of Travelling Showpeople is provided within the planning policy: 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 Page 19

24 Gypsy and Traveller N 2012 N temporarily or permanently, but excludes Gypsies and Travellers as defined above. The new planning policy document uses the term Traveller to refer to both Gypsy and Traveller communities and populations of Travelling Showpeople. This has been used as it is recognised that this definition is " more pragmatic and wider and enables local planning authorities to understand the possible future accommodation needs of this group and plan strategically to meet those needs" 10. However, the study has also taken into consideration the planning definition where it is considered appropriate to do so. 2.4 Housing and Accommodation Need Crucially, for Gypsies and Travellers, the definition of housing need is varied slightly to acknowledge the different contexts in which members of these communities live. The general definition of housing need is households who are unable to access suitable housing without some financial assistance, with housing demand defined as the quantity of housing that households are willing and able to buy or rent 11. In recognising that in many cases these definitions are inappropriate for Gypsies and Travellers, the guidance on producing Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Assessments 12 refers to distinctive requirements that necessitate moving beyond the limitations of the definition for both caravan dwellers and those in bricks and mortar housing. For caravan dwelling households, need may take the form of those 13 : who have no authorised site on which to reside; whose existing site accommodation is overcrowded or unsuitable, but who are unable to obtain larger or more suitable accommodation; and who contain suppressed households who are unable to set up separate family units and are unable to access a place on an authorised site, or obtain or afford land to develop one. In the context of bricks and mortar dwelling households, need may take the form of: those whose existing accommodation is overcrowded or unsuitable (including unsuitability by virtue of psychological aversion to bricks and mortar accommodation). The needs presented in this report reflect both the definition of Gypsies and Travellers as used in the Housing Act 2004, which gives an overall strategic level of accommodation need, and the new planning policy which indicates the proportion of site-based need for operational purposes. It should also be noted that 10 CLG (2011) Planning for Traveller sites, Consultation Paper, April, London: HMSO, online at: 11 ODPM (2006) Definition of the term 'Gypsies and Travellers' for the purposes of the Housing Act Consultation Paper, February, London: HMSO. 12 GTAA guidance has been used in developing the methodology but variations to the approach have been made to take account of local circumstances, where considered appropriate. 13 CLG (2007) Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Needs Assessments Guidance, London: HMSO. Page 20

25 Gypsy and Traveller N 2012 N steps have been taken within this report to analyse need in the context of local and historic demand. Housing need is assessed at the level of a single family unit or household (broadly a group of people who regularly live and eat together). On Gypsy and Traveller sites, this is assumed to equate to a pitch ; in housing, to a separate dwelling. 2.5 Defining a Pitch There is no set definition for what constitutes a Gypsy and Traveller residential pitch. In the same way as in the settled community, Gypsies and Travellers require various accommodation sizes, depending on the number of family members. The convention used in this report is that a pitch is the place on a Gypsy and Traveller site accommodating a single family/household. In some cases a single pitch may account for the entire site. The number of caravans that a household uses can be a single unit (trailer, touring caravan, static, chalet, etc.) or more. In order to ensure comparability across accommodation types it is important to determine a convention when translating caravan numbers into pitches/ households. The convention in the last round of GTAAs, and an approach advocated by CLG guidance, was the use of a 1.7 caravan to pitch ratio. It has been the intention within recent GTAA updates by the authors to use more locally informed ratios. However, the data from the survey about caravan ownership was unhelpful (only 19 of 92 people volunteered this information) which means the 1.7 caravan to pitch ratio is used to inform the calculation of need. 2.6 Conventions Two conventions are followed in this report: Percentages in text and tables are rounded to the nearest whole number; this means that they do not always sum to exactly 100. Quotes included from Gypsies and Travellers are distinguished by being in italic type and usually inset. Page 21

26 Gypsy and Traveller N 2012 N 3 Baseline Information on the Gypsy and Traveller Population 3.1 Introduction This chapter looks at the Count of Gypsy and Traveller Caravans in order to present what is known about Gypsies and Travellers within East Riding. The Caravan Count is a dataset collected bi-annually for all Local Authorities in England and follows a method prescribed by Central Government. It serves as a baseline for the purposes of this assessment. This chapter also presents information on the estimated size of the Gypsy and Traveller population in the Borough. 3.2 Caravan Numbers and Trends from the Caravan Count The bi-annual Caravan Count provides a snapshot of the local context in terms of the scale and distribution of caravan numbers across East Riding. The Count provides a useful starting point in assessing the current picture and recent trends. Indeed, in the absence of other datasets it is virtually the only source of information on Gypsy and Traveller caravan data. However, there are well documented issues with the robustness of the count 14. Such issues include: the snapshot nature of the data, the inclusion of caravans and not households, the exclusion of Travelling Showpeople 15, and the exclusion of Gypsies and Travellers in bricks and mortar accommodation. The analysis contained in this report, which is based on information supplied by the local authority, key stakeholders and a survey of Gypsy and Traveller households, represents a more robust assessment of the current situation with regards to the local population than the Caravan Count. Using the information from the Caravan Count, Table and Figure 3.1 provide the distribution of caravan numbers for East Riding since January These are illustrated in Figure 1.1. Together this shows the following: There have been no caravans recorded on private sites and unauthorised developments on any count since There has been a significant increase in the number of caravans recorded on unauthorised encampments since 2007, peaking in July 2007, which has seen a downward trend in numbers. The exception is another peak in numbers in July 2011 followed by a record of nil in January It can therefore be assumed that the count in January 2012 can be seen as the exception as opposed to the rule. 14 Niner, P. (2002) Review of the ODPM Caravan Count, London: ODPM. 15 The January 2011 count included a count of Travelling Showpeople caravans for the first time. However, as this is not comparable with previous years and as nil caravans were identified in East Riding in the 2011 or 2012 count this is excluded from the table. Page 22

27 The numbers of caravans on socially rented sites has been some fluctuations over this time but have remained broadly stable in recent years. Table 3.1: Caravan numbers across accommodation types within East Riding (Source: Department of Communities and Local Government) Count Authorised sites (with planning permission) Socially rented Private Temporary permission Permanent permission All private Unauthorised sites (without planning permission) Unauthorised developments Tolerated Not tolerated Unauthorised encampments Tolerated Not Tolerated Jan Jul Jan Jul Jan Jul Jan Jul Jan Jul Jan Jul Jan Total 16 Please note that data which breaks down private sites into permanent/temporary permission was not available or not required to be collected until this time. Page 23

28 Figure 3.1: Caravan numbers across accommodation types within East Riding Communities and Local Government which manages the publishing of the Caravan Count has recently begun reporting on the numbers of caravans counted on Travelling Showpeople yards. However, this shows a nil figure for caravans for Showpeople. Private and Unauthorised developments were recorded as nil at the time the caravan counts took place. 3.3 The Size of the Local Gypsy and Traveller Community For most minority ethnic communities, presenting data about the size of the community in question is usually relatively straightforward (with the exception of communities which have large numbers of irregular migrants and migrant workers, etc. amongst them). However, for Gypsies, Travellers and Travelling Showpeople, one of the most difficult issues is providing accurate information on the size of the population. As a result, we have used our survey findings, together with information provided by the local authority and key stakeholders in order to provide a best estimate as to the size of the local Gypsy and Traveller population at the time of the assessment. Table 3.2 presents the estimation of the size of the Gypsy, Traveller and Travelling Showpeople population in East Riding. Using the best information available it is estimated that there are at least 488 individuals or 132 households in East Riding. The previous GTNA (Arc4, 2008) suggested that there was a total population of between 104 and 129 Gypsy and Traveller households across the area. There appears synergy with these findings from the current assessment. Page 24

29 Table 3.2: Gypsy and Traveller population based in East Riding Type of accommodati on Socially rented sites Bricks and mortar Unauthorised developments Private authorised Unauthorised encampments which accommodate ER residents (not transient community) Travelling Showpeople Families/househo lds (based on 1 pitch/house = 1 household) Individuals Derivation Based on number of pitches currently occupied inclusive of actual number of individuals as recorded by the local authority Number of families estimated to live in the area multiplied by average household size from the survey (4) Number of families estimated to live in the area multiplied by average household size from the survey (4) 6 18 There are two sites in the area with a combined pitch capacity of 6 pitches but it is unknown how many households are accommodated on these, if any. Assume household size equals that of socially rented sites (3) 2 8 Based on information provided by Enforcement officers. The number of individuals concerned is an estimate. 1 4 Estimate Total The size of the Gypsy and Traveller bricks and mortar-based population was discussed with the Local Authority, but they did not have the information to provide with certainty a definitive figure for the size of this population. It is generally agreed that there are now more Gypsies and Travelers living in conventional housing in the UK than living on sites or unauthorised encampments. The Commission for Racial Equality s 2006 report Common Ground: Equality, good race relations and sites for Gypsies and Irish Travellers suggested that the housed population could be around three times the trailer-based population. Using a multiplier of three times the site population may be excessive in the absence of definitive evidence of the size of the population. Therefore, as a conservative estimate, we assume we have interviewed 50% of the actual bricks and mortar-based population. 18 This includes the sites at Howden and Nafferton but excludes the unoccupied site at Keyingham. Page 25

30 4 Authorised Private Sites 4.1 Introduction A certain degree of caution needs to be taken when extrapolating the characteristics, trends and needs of the Gypsy and Traveller population from the Caravan Counts and other such data alone. In order to provide more specific information on the local Gypsy and Traveller population, the remaining chapters draw upon the information provided by East Riding of Yorkshire Council on site provision in the study area, the views of stakeholders as well as information obtained through a survey of Gypsy and Traveller households. This chapter presents a narrative on the location and characteristics of the existing authorised sites in the Borough. For clarity, the information on which the narrative is based is from discussions with officers of East Riding Council and Humberside Police. The Chapter then provides details of Gypsy and Traveller Households views (provided via the survey) on the authorised sites in the Borough. 4.2 Socially Rented Sites There are three socially rented (or Council owned) sites in East Riding. Together these sites provide residential accommodation on sixty-five pitches. Each site is described below and summarised in Table Overview Woldgate (Bridlington) This site currently has a total of twenty-two residential pitches. At the time of this assessment all twenty-two were occupied. Woldgate has been redeveloped with a Gypsy and Traveller Sites Grant, with a new site being built adjacent to the original site and all pitches transferred to the new site. Old Woldgate Planning permission was granted in December 1991 for a 26 pitch site at Woldgate, Bridlington Officers at East Riding Council indicated that the original Woldgate site included both transit and permanent provision, but over time the demand for permanent pitches meant that the transit pitches were used for this purpose. However, the planning decision notice does not specify whether the pitches were for either transit or permanent provision; the permission was for the permanent provision of 26 pitches. This site now no longer exists and has been grassed over. Page 26

31 New Woldgate New Woldgate opened in April 2012 and discussions with East Riding Officers indicated that the transition from the old to the new site was working well. They did not intend to apply for further funding for the site. The site is managed in-house by a liaison officer working part time (18.5 hours per week). Licensees are permitted to be absent for a period of six weeks subject to payment of full rent/licence fee. Visitors are permitted on the site; however, this is subject to space limitations on the site with a maximum of two trailers per pitch allowed. There is a formal waiting list for the site, which currently has fifteen applicants. The Council indicated that this number had increased over the last two to three years. There is a formal policy for allocating pitches. The Council indicated that the following factors are taken into consideration when allocating a pitch: local residence/local connection; family size/composition; need for accommodation; medical/special health needs; previous known behaviour/references; previous rent arrears; time on waiting list; and whether or not they are currently doubling-up on a pitch. Of these factors, the three most important factors were (in order of importance): whether or not they were currently doubling-up; medical/special health needs; and time on waiting list. The weekly rent is 96.38, with all/almost all residents (over 90%) receiving housing benefit payments towards their rent. No damage deposit is required at the start of a licence. Information from East Riding Council indicates that there are currently 47 people living on the site: 37 adults; 3 children under the age of five; 3 children aged five to eleven; and 4 children aged twelve to sixteen. In terms of ethnic groups, the residents were reported to be English Gypsy or Traveller. The Council reported % occupancy for most of the year during A minority of residents (i.e %) had lived on the site longer term (five year or over); however, this was due to the site only opening with increased capacity in April It was not known how many pitches were vacated and re-let over the past four years. Each pitch has an amenity unit which has a shower; space for cooking; space/provision for laundry facilities; and effective heating. The site also has a site office and children s play area. There are twenty-one touring caravans and one static caravan on the site. The Council described the quality of the general surroundings and environment of the site, the site's location in relation to access to schools and shops, and the physical condition and maintenance of the site as very good. Information from the Council indicated that there had been no known instances notified to them of intimidation, vandalism and other anti-social behaviour on the site over the last year. However, it was suggested that there had been disputes between residents. In addition, Humberside Police stated that there had been incidents at the site (as only anti social behaviour related incidents are reported by the Police to the Council, other incidents are not). The Council indicated that nil households were currently doubled up on the site. Page 27

32 Eppleworth (Skidby) Planning permission was granted in July 1989 for the construction of a gypsy site at Eppleworth Quarry, Cottingham. The decision notice does not specify the number of pitches to be provided. This site currently has a total of twenty residential pitches. At the time of this assessment ten were occupied and ten were closed for refurbishment. These pitches would be in use by the end of September East Riding Council indicated that the number or nature of pitches on the site had changed over the last five years. The site had been the subject of a successful bid for a Gypsy and Traveller Sites Grant, which was being used to increase the site by ten residential pitches. They did not intend to apply for further funding for the site. The site is managed in-house by a liaison officer working part time (18.5 hours per week). Licensees are permitted to be absent for a period of six weeks subject to payment of full rent/licence fee. Visitors are permitted on the site; however, this is subject to space limitations on the site with a maximum of two trailers per pitch allowed. There is a formal waiting list for the site, which currently has eighteen applicants. The Council indicated that this number had increased over the last two to three years. There is a formal policy for allocating pitches. As above, the Council indicated that the following factors are taken into consideration when allocating a pitch: local residence/local connection; family size/composition; need for accommodation; medical/special health needs; previous known behaviour/references; previous rent arrears; time on waiting list; and whether or not they are currently doubling-up on a pitch. Of these factors, the three most important factors were (in order of importance): whether or not they were currently doubling-up; medical/special health needs; and time on waiting list. The weekly rent is for a single pitch, and for a double pitch, with all/almost all residents (over 90%) receiving housing benefit payments towards their rent. No damage deposit is required at the start of a licence. Information from East Riding Council indicates that there are currently 55 people living on the site: 34 adults; 8 children under the age of five; 9 children aged five to eleven; and 4 children aged twelve to sixteen. In terms of ethnic groups, the residents were reported to be English Gypsy or Traveller. The Council reported 100% occupancy for most of the year during 2011, with almost all residents (i.e. over 90%) having lived on the site longer term (five year or over). It was indicated that nil pitches were vacated and re-let over the past four years. Each pitch has an amenity unit which has a shower; space for cooking; space/provision for laundry facilities; and effective heating. The site also has a site office and children s play area. There are ten touring caravans, four static caravans and three chalets on the site. The Council described the quality of the general surroundings and environment of the site, the site's location in relation to access to schools and shops, and the Page 28

33 physical condition and maintenance of the site as very good. The Council also indicated that they had recently provided a footpath from the site into Cottingham. Information from the Council indicated that there had been disputes between residents and instances of intimidation and vandalism over the last year; however, no further information was provided in relation to these incidents. The Council indicated that eight households were currently doubled up on the site; however, stakeholder consultation indicated that this would be resolved when the site was finished. It was suggested that the current doubling-up had created some tensions on the site. The Council indicated that once the work was completed and the families had moved onto their individual pitches, there would potentially be two spare pitches. It was suggested that these may be offered to residents who are currently overcrowded on the Woodhill site (Cottingham). Woodhill Way (Cottingham) Planning permission was granted in March 1978 for the use of a disused quarry to the north west of Cottingham as a site for 25 caravans to be occupied by gypsies. This site currently has a total of twenty-three residential pitches, all of which were occupied at the time of the assessment. East Riding Council indicated that the number or nature of pitches on the site had not changed over the last five years. The site had been the subject of a successful bid for a Gypsy and Traveller Sites Grant, subject to contract. This funding was going to be used primarily to refurbish the site. The Council did not intend to apply for further funding for the site. Stakeholder consultation highlighted that there were currently some issues in relation to how this work would be undertaken and how existing residents would be accommodated whilst the refurbishment works were undertaken This is yet to be resolved, but options being considered include: i) working around existing residents or ii) temporarily relocating residents nearby. There were differing views from stakeholders in relation to moving residents from the site, with some service providers suggesting that instead of residents having to move twice (i.e. to temporary site and then back onto site), a new site should be identified and developed so residents just had one move. This was felt to be a better solution, particularly as there were a number of elderly residents on the site. It was highlighted that residents themselves were growing concerned about what was going to happen to the site and to them. The site is managed in-house by a liaison officer working part time (18.5 hours per week). Licensees are permitted to be absent for a period of six weeks subject to payment of full rent/licence fee. Visitors are permitted on the site; however, this is subject to space limitations on the site with a maximum of two trailers per pitch allowed. There is a formal waiting list for the site, which currently has four applicants. The Council indicated that this number had increased over the last two to three years. There is a formal policy for allocating pitches. As above, the Council indicated that the following factors are taken into consideration when allocating a pitch: local residence/local connection; family size/composition; need for accommodation; medical/special health needs; previous known Page 29

34 behaviour/references; previous rent arrears; time on waiting list; and whether or not they are currently doubling-up on a pitch. Of these factors, the three most important factors were (in order of importance): whether or not they were currently doubling-up; medical/special health needs; and time on waiting list. The weekly rent is for a single pitch, and for a double pitch, with all/almost all residents (over 90%) receiving housing benefit payments towards their rent. No damage deposit is required at the start of a licence. Information from East Riding Council indicates that there are currently 82 people living on the site: 55 adults; 10 children under the age of five; 5 children aged five to eleven; and 12 children aged twelve to sixteen. In terms of ethnic groups, the residents were reported to be English Gypsy or Traveller. The Council reported 100% occupancy for all of 2011, with almost all residents (i.e. over 90%) having lived on the site longer term (five year or over). It was indicated that nil pitches were vacated and re-let over the past four years. Each pitch has an amenity unit which has a shower; toilet with direct entrance from outside; space for cooking; space/provision for laundry facilities; and effective heating. The site also has a site office. There are twenty-four touring caravans, fourteen static caravans and one chalet on the site. The Council described the quality of the general surroundings and environment of the site as average; the site's location in relation to access to schools and shops as good; and the physical condition and maintenance of the site as poor. Information from the Council indicated that there had been no known instances of intimidation, vandalism and other anti-social behaviour on the site over the last year. However, it was suggested that there had been disputes between residents. The Council indicated that fourteen households were currently doubled up on the site. Table 4.1: Overview of socially rented sites Woldgate Eppleworth Woodhill Total number of pitches Number of occupied pitches Site population Number of children % children 21% 38% 33% Average persons per occupied pitch Doubled-up pitches Waiting list Ethnic groups among site residents Mostly English Gypsy (Romany) Mostly English Gypsy (Romany) Mostly English Gypsy (Romany) Pitch occupancy in year 100% 100% 100% % of site residents lived on site 5+ years 10-40% Over 90% Over 90% Current weekly rent (note that when for a for a Page 30

35 refurbishment is complete on all sites, the rent on all sites will be 96.38) Management Woldgate Eppleworth Woodhill East Riding of Yorkshire Council single pitch and for a double pitch East Riding of Yorkshire Council single pitch and for a double pitch East Riding of Yorkshire Council Recent Improvements to Council Owned Sites In recent months the ERYC has made a number of improvements to Council owned sites. This has included: Complete new site at Wolgate opened in April 2012 with an additional four pitches to the previous Wolgate site, Providing complete refurbishment and an additional ten pitches at Eppleworth, which is due to re-open in September Securing funding (subject to contract) for refurbishment of Woodhill which may also provide a small number of additional pitches. This must be completed by March 2015 as a condition of the funding. This additional capacity has been mainly funded by the Homes and Communities Agency. The works undertaken at both sites have sought to make improved use of existing land capacity. This has involved improving not just the quantity of the facilities available here but also the quality of these facilities. This has sought to better enable these sites to meet the needs of the existing Gypsy and Traveller population residing within the local authority and to reduce hidden overcrowding Views of Gypsy and Traveller Households on the Socially Rented Sites A total of fifty-one people were interviewed across the three Council owned sites. The residents were mostly Romany Gypsies (fifty respondents 98%); however, the sample also included one person who described himself as a New Traveller. Views on size and facilities Very few respondents volunteered information about the number of living units they owned. Seven respondents owned a single caravan; two respondents owned two caravans; and three respondents owned four caravans. Based on this limited data the average number of caravans to households was 1.9. A total of forty respondents (78%) stated that they had enough space. Of the remaining eleven respondents (22%): All stated that they wanted a larger pitch; Six also wanted a larger site; Two respondents wanted more caravans; and Three respondents wanted more living space. Page 31

36 All respondents indicated that they had an amenity block. A further four respondents indicated that they had outbuildings for animals (e.g. kennel, pigeon loft, etc.). No respondents had stables, although one of the respondents on the Woldgate site specifically stated that they required a stable in order to keep their horses. One respondent highlighted that the lack of space is resulting in people needing to double up, while another highlighted a potential need to find space for her son, who was getting married. At the time of responding she did not know whether her son would require a pitch or if he was going to live in bricks and mortar accommodation. Previous accommodation experiences When asked why they had come to live on their current site, people gave a variety of reasons (see Table 4.2 below). However, the most common reason was that there was a vacancy (43%); this was followed by, to be near family (29%). Table 4.2: Main reason for moving to the site Reason No % There was a vacancy To be near family Lack of sites 5 10 Overcrowding 3 6 Tired of being moved on 2 4 Moved with family 2 4 To be with partner 1 2 Previously on the roadside 1 2 Total One respondent from the Woldgate site stated that they did not intend to stay on their current pitch, expressing a preference for a private site owned by someone else, followed by the roadside. When asked what type of accommodation they had immediately before their current site, twelve respondents (23%) indicated that they had been living on a different local authority site. This was followed by the roadside (ten people 20%). Six respondents (12%) had moved from private accommodation. The remaining 45% did not indicate where they had previously lived. The majority of respondents indicated that they had left this previous accommodation because a vacancy had become available on their current site or they had wanted to move to their current site to be near family. Accommodating visitors on their current site Thirteen respondents (25%) reported that they have visitors to stay on their pitch with them. With the exception of a few respondents who had friends to stay, most respondents made reference to immediate family coming to visit i.e. parents, children, siblings. Length of visitor stay varied from a few days to up to six weeks. Of these respondents, five (39%) indicated that their visitors stayed with Page 32

37 them in their trailer, while seven (54%) indicated that their visitors brought a trailer, and one (8%) a camper van, with them and stayed on their pitch. The majority of respondents (73%) indicated that hosting visitors was not a problem for them. A total of thirteen people (27%) did indicate that it was a problem. Problems related to the perception that the pitches were not big enough to accommodate visitors. Length of time in the area and on the site The majority of the respondents (forty-four 86%) had lived in the area for ten years or more, with two respondents indicating they had lived in the area between five and ten years). The most important reasons for staying in East Riding were being born/raised there (45%) or having family living in the area (45%) (see Table 4.3 below). Table 4.3: Main reason for living in East Riding Reason No % Born/raised here Family living in the area Look after family in old age 2 4 Own/family members health 1 2 Availability of work 1 2 Only place available 1 2 Total Note: excludes six non responses With regards to length of time on their current site, twenty-seven respondents (60%) had lived there for ten years or more, while twenty respondents (40%) had lived there for less than six months. One respondent (2%) had lived there for one to three years, and three (6%) for between five and ten years. Two respondents reported also having a base Doncaster. One was on an unauthorised development jointly owned by the respondent s husband and his father, and the other was bricks and mortar owned by the respondent s parents. Travelling experiences Thirty-three respondents (65%) indicated that they never travelled. Of these, sixteen (47%) indicated that this was due to their age; seven respondents (21%) indicated that this was due to education needs; while eight respondents (23%) said it was due to their or family members health needs. In addition, two people indicated that they were settled or did not like to move anymore; one respondent indicated that they had too many animals to travel; and three respondents indicated that it was no longer safe to travel. One respondent, who had not travelled in the previous four years stated, We don t think it s safe anymore for Travellers these days. It s not the same (as it used to be). The last time people had travelled ranged from three months ago (when the respondents arrived on the site) to eighteen years ago. Page 33

38 With regards to the eighteen respondents (35%) who did travel, this was divided equally between those who travelled once a year and those who travelled a few times a year. All eighteen had travelled in the previous twelve months. When asked where they tended to go to, a number of respondents visited fairs (for example, Appleby, Cambridge, Lee Gap, Star Pane and Stow). People also made reference to a range of individual places, with no particular geographical area being common amongst the respondents; for example, Birmingham, Hornsea, Leicester, Manchester, Nottingham, Peterborough. Five respondents stated that they travelled with one caravan, two with two caravans, and three with four. Only four respondents travelled with any equipment. The most common reason for travel in the previous twelve months was to attend a fair (77%), which was regarded as the most important reason for travel by nine respondents (53%). Other reasons for travel were to visit relatives (29%), work (24%), and have a holiday (12%). One respondent had travelled for a family event, one for a community event and one stated that they had travelled just to travel. With regards to where peopled stayed while travelling, those who attended the fairs stayed at designated fair sites. Following fair sites, the most common place to stay was cited as the country roadside (41%). People also made reference to staying with friends/relatives on private and other council sites and staying on caravan parks. A small number (12%) stated that they stayed on transit sites. Experiences of living in bricks and mortar accommodation Five respondents (10%) interviewed on the sites indicated that they had lived in a house immediately before moving to the site, four in socially rented accommodation, and one as an owner occupier. A further six (12%) had lived in a house prior to that, totalling eleven respondents. Four indicated that this house had been within East Riding (Bridlington, Cottingham, Driffield and Goole), while seven had lived in a house outside the area (Hull, Selby, York and Doncaster). With regards to their reasons for leaving the house, three respondents indicated that they had moved out when they got married, one had left as there was a vacancy on the site, one due to the fact her husband had not liked the house, one had due to harassment from her ex-husband, one for work reasons and one stated that they wanted to be with their own communities. Two respondents stated that they wanted to travel and two said that there was no reason. The main reason given for living in the house were moving there with family (four respondents), while only one respondent said they had been born in a house. Two respondents stated that they had moved to a house due to a lack of sites, one because their daughter was having a baby and they were living on the roadside at the time, and another moved with her husband. One respondent simply stated that they moved to see if we liked it, but we didn t. Another wanted to try to live in a house, but was placed in a flat. When asked to rate their experience of living in a house, one respondent said it was very good; two stated it was good; two respondents said neither good nor poor; two respondents said it was poor; and four stated that it was very poor. Health services and issues The respondents were asked if they had access to the following health services: GP/health centre; health visitor; maternity care; A & E; and dentist. The majority Page 34

39 of respondents indicated that they had sufficient access to these services; where households said that that they did not currently have access, this was because the service was not relevant to them (for example, maternity care). One female respondent on the Woldgate site specifically stated that she did not have access to any of the health services above, however she did not state that she had specific problems with access. Just one respondent, on the Eppleworth site, stated that they had problems due to having to rely on public transport. They stated that while the GP was accessible, accessing a hospital was more difficult. Respondents were also asked to indicate if they, or anyone in their household, needed support for any of the following reasons: frail elderly; a medical condition; a physical disability; a learning disability; a mental health problem; or a sensory disability. From this list, two respondents indicated that they or someone within their household required support as they were frail elderly and three people indicated that they or someone within their household needed support for a medical condition. Two respondents stated that there was someone in their household with a physical disability and two also stated that there was someone in their household with a mental health problem, identified as depression in one of the cases. In addition to the health issues raised above, one respondent also indicated that they had a daughter with an intellectual disability. 4.3 Authorised Private Sites There are two private authorised sites in East Riding, both with permanent planning permission. One site is located in Barmby Moor and the other is located in Snaith. One site has five pitches (Snaith) while the other has just one pitch (Barmby Moor). The planning consent on both these sites was for the site owner and their resident dependents. Data was not collected from either of these sites: The five pitch site was not occupied during the fieldwork period. One caravan was present on the site but this was in disrepair and apparently not accommodated. The single pitch site could not be accessed due to restricted access at the site. Page 35

40 5 Planning and Unauthorised Sites 5.1 Introduction This chapter provides information on unauthorised sites in the Borough and the survey results of the households resident on these sites. 5.2 Planning Applications Since 2006, six planning applications have been made for private Gypsy and Traveller sites in East Riding. These applications are set out in the table below. This illustrates that all of these applications have been for relatively small sites. Through discussions with the Council it was clarified that where there was more than one pitch on a site these were for other members of the same family. Table 5.1: Planning applications for private sites since 2006 Year Broad location of application Number of Pitches Applied for Outcome 2008 Snaith 5 Refused, dismissed on appeal 2009 Barmby Moor 1 Refused, granted on appeal Nafferton 1 Refused, dismissed on appeal Snaith 5 Refused, appeal allowed 2010 Keyingham 4 Refused. Appeal allowed for 3 pitches 2011 Howden 1 Refused The table above also appears to illustrate that the number of planning applications has been split over the period since 2006, with the greatest frequency of these applications occurring in The table above also clearly indicates that all of these applications have been refused when submitted and where an application has been approved this has occurred as a result of an appeals process. The reasons for the refusal of the above applications can be seen to vary significantly and reflects the specifics of the individual applications. It should also be noted that all of the applications set out in the table above were submitted following unauthorised development being brought to the attention of the Council. Page 36

41 5.3 Unauthorised Development of Gypsy and Traveller Sites Overview East Riding Council indicated that there were currently three unauthorised developments within the study area. It was indicated that one of these sites was currently vacant, with an appeal hearing decision pending and is located in Keyingham. The remaining two sites had one pitch each and are located in Howden and Nafferton. In terms of the enforcement action that had been taken, one site had just been served notice, while no action had been taken on the other as the Council were still awaiting the submission of a retrospective planning application. Data was collected from one respondent on one of the unauthorised developments but access was not possible to the other unauthorised development Views of Residents on Unauthorised Developments A resident on one of the three unauthorised developments was interviewed and his views are outlined below. Views on size and facilities The respondent stated that he had two units on the pitch and that he had enough space. He had an amenity block and outbuildings for animals, including stables. The respondent lived alone and stated that he was not in need of any additional accommodation. Previous accommodation experiences When asked why the he had moved to the site, the respondent said that he had moved there for work reasons. He gave no other reason for moving to the area or the site. Prior to moving to the pitch he had lived on a Council site within East Riding, which he had left due to overcrowding. Accommodating visitors on their current site With regard to accommodating visitors, the respondent stated that it was a problem and that he did not have visitors stay on the pitch. Length of time in the area and on the site The respondent reported that he had lived on the pitch for more than ten years. He had no base elsewhere or intention to leave his current pitch. Travelling experiences The respondent stated that he never travelled, but did not give a reason as to why not. Page 37

42 Experiences of living in bricks and mortar accommodation The respondent stated that he had never previously lived in bricks and mortar accommodation. Health services and issues Access to all health services was not a problem for the respondent and he did not identify having any health problems. 5.4 Unauthorised Encampments Overview The presence and incidence of unauthorised encampments is often a significant issue that impacts upon local authorities, landowners, Gypsies and Travellers and the settled population. Due to the nature of unauthorised encampments (i.e. unpredictability, seasonal fluctuations, etc.), it is often very difficult to grasp a comprehensive picture of need for residential and/or transit accommodation without considering a range of interconnected issues. As seen in Chapter 3, a number of relatively large encampments have been recorded in the Caravan Count over the last five years, with those that have been recorded reported as 'not tolerated'. The Council indicated that they did not have a recent 19 written policy for managing unauthorised encampments; however, they were party to joint agreements with the Police in relation to the management of encampments. It was indicated that an officer from the Council, the Police and the Minority Ethnic and Traveller Attainment Service would normally be the first teams to contact Gypsies and Travellers on unauthorised encampments. Different Council departments collect information about unauthorised encampments, for example Public Protection log the number of complaints and the Gypsy Liaison Officer logs the number of welfare checks. However, there is no single or definitive record which combines the information of these different departments. Table 5.1 shows the engagement with households on unauthorised encampments by complaints and Welfare Checks Year Complaints Welfare Checks Neither of these pieces of information helps to provide definitive information about the nature of unauthorised encampments in the area, their size or how long they spend in the area, but it represents the best data available from the local authority. 19 Policy and Resource Council minute from 13 November 1996 describes the procedure that local authority officers follow. Page 38

43 Further analysis of the data collected during Welfare Checks indicates that: families were visited a total of 37 times with a further 13 households making individual visits families were visited a total of 36 times with a further 9 households making individual visits families were visited a total of 54 times with a further 17 households making individual visits. Based on this information it is therefore might be reasonable to assume that over recent years the level of individual encampments have been: households; households; and households. The Council indicated that there were usually more encampments in the area during the summer. It was suggested that households on unauthorised encampments were a mix between those 'local' to the area or sub-region and those in transit, with some encampments including horses. The Council stated that the number and size of encampments had remained broadly the same over the past five years; however, they expected the number of encampments to decrease over the next five years due to increased provision in the area as a result of the Woldgate site Findings Three people were interviewed on unauthorised encampments and four people stopping on showgrounds were also interviewed; all described themselves as Romany Gypsies. The encampments were staying on the roadside off the A614 at the time of the survey. Those stopping on the showgrounds were on the Driffield Showground. These are dealt with separately below as the households stopping on showgrounds were paying a nominal amount of rent for their accommodation; and potentially authorised. On the other hand, the households on unauthorised encampments appear to be more traditional roadside encampments. Views on size and facilities Of the respondents on the unauthorised encampment, two had a single caravan, and one respondent had two. One respondent on the showground had two caravans, while one respondent had four. All respondents owned their caravans. Five respondents (three on unauthorised encampments and two on showgrounds) said that they had enough space; however, those who did not have enough space did not elaborate on what they required. None of the respondents indicated that they required space on site related to their work needs, such as for storage of equipment etc. All the respondents indicated that there were no outbuildings or amenity blocks on their pitches. Page 39

44 Previous accommodation experiences When asked what type of accommodation they had immediately before moving to this encampment, two of those living on an unauthorised encampment had moved from another unauthorised encampment in Bridlington and one from a transit site in Cambridge. They stated that they had moved simply to travel or for no reason. None of those on unauthorised encampments had a base elsewhere, although one household later said, its very nice being out of the house for a bit, pulling up the roadsides. Of those staying on showgrounds, one had moved from a private site with planning permission in Nottinghamshire, while the other three had all moved from a showground in Pickering. One respondent had left their previous site due to overcrowding. Two stated that they had moved specifically for a show where they were interviewed and that they would move on when the show finished. One of these also stated that their permanent base was elsewhere. The final respondent moved to their current pitch when their previous show finished. All respondents on showground stated that they had a base elsewhere (two in Stoke-on-Trent, one in Newark and one in Leicester). Three of the respondents bases were private sites with planning permission owned by the respondents and one was a house owned by the respondent. The respondent who lived in bricks and mortar accommodation currently owned a house in Leicester and indicated that it was still their primary base and that they only travelled to go to vintage fairs. The main reason for moving into a house was because it was available to buy. They rated their experience of living in a house as very good. Length of time in the area and on the encampment All three respondents from unauthorised encampments stated that they had lived in the general area for more than ten years, with the time on their current site between two weeks and three months. While two of the respondents had been born in the area, all three stated that family was the most important reason for moving to the area. All of those on the Driffield Showground had been in the area for less than a month and on their current site for one week. Two stated that a family event was the most important reason for visiting the area and the other two that the visiting the vintage rally was the most important with one indicating that they attended every year. The respondents were asked how many weeks of the year they usually stayed in the East Riding area. All those on unauthorised encampments said that they did not know, although one stated that they travelled regularly whereas another only moved when they needed to, staying in the area to be close to family. Those on showground stated that they usually lived in the area between one and ten weeks a year. From their responses to why they travelled it was clear that they were in the area to attend the vintage show, indicating that they also travelled to other shows around the country throughout the year. Page 40

45 Travelling experiences With regards to how often the respondents travelled, two of those on unauthorised encampments stated that they travelled every week and the other every month. They identified places both within the immediate area (Bridlington, Cottingham) and outside the area (Pickering, Appleby, Suffolk, Cambridge) as destinations. The most common reasons for travel was to visit relatives (three respondents) and for work (two respondents). All three respondents stated that when travelling they stayed on the roadside, both in town and in the country. One respondent stated that they had stayed on a transit site when travelling and another on a farmer s field. All respondents had travelled in the previous twelve months. Reflecting the fact that those who were staying on a showground had more permanent bases elsewhere, three stated that they travelled a few times a year and one only once per year. Respondents travelled both within the area (Driffield) and to destinations outside the area (Appleby, Bournemouth, Suffolk). Respondents identified community events and fairs as the most important reasons for travelling. Three stated that they travelled for a holiday and one for work reasons. Two respondents stayed on caravan sites and one with family on a private site. None of the respondents stayed on the roadside or on transit sites when travelling. All respondents had travelled in the previous twelve months. Health services and issues As before, the respondents were asked if they had access to the following health services: GP/health centre; health visitor; maternity care; A & E; and dentist. None of the respondents staying on showground responded to the questions. From this list, one respondent on an unauthorised encampment stated that they did not have access to any of the services (except A & E), but they did not consider it to be a problem. They identified that they had access to health services in their hometown (Norfolk). The other two responded that they either had access or that the service was not applicable to them, neither having problems of access. The respondents also all stated that there was no one in their household with a health need. Page 41

46 6 Gypsies and Travellers in Social and Private Bricks and Mortar Accommodation 6.1 Introduction The numbers of Gypsies and Travellers currently accommodated within bricks and mortar accommodation are unknown, but potentially large. Movement to and from housing is a major concern for the strategic approach, policies and working practices of local authorities as the demand for this fundamentally shapes the overall policy approach to meeting the needs of this community. This chapter sets out the findings from both interviews with the local authority officers and stakeholders and the findings of the survey of Gypsy and Traveller households in bricks and mortar accommodation. 6.2 Estimating the Size of Gypsy and Traveller Population in Bricks and Mortar Housing None of the stakeholders that were consulted nor members of the local Gypsy and Traveller communities in the study area were able to accurately estimate the size of the Gypsy and Traveller population in bricks and mortar accommodation. However, consultation with the Minority Ethnic and Traveller Attainment Service suggested that there were a minimum of 150 people across 40 households whom they were aware of. The Commission for Racial Equality s 2006 report, Common Ground: Equality, good race relations and sites for Gypsies and Irish Travellers, suggested that the housed population was around three times the number of trailer-based populations. However, as the number of trailer-based households across the boroughs is low, this multiplier is unhelpful in this context. Consequently, a number of other sources are pursued in order to provide some indication as to the population in bricks and mortar accommodation. East Riding Council (Housing Services Department) indicated the following: Gypsies and Travellers are specifically referred to in their current housing and homelessness strategies; Gypsies and Travellers are not identified in ethnic records and monitoring of social housing applications and/or allocations; There are currently three applicants who ascribe as being a Gypsy or Traveller registered for social housing (based on information provided by Northern, Central and Western Teams two West and one Central); There were five households housed who ascribed as being a Gypsy or Traveller during 2011 (four North and one West); There were five homelessness applications from people who ascribed as being a Gypsy or Traveller over the last twelve months (three North, one West and one Central). The main reasons for presenting as homeless were: health; Page 42

47 harassment/domestic violence; family; asked to leave by family member; domestic violence; and mother selling caravan. In Central and West, it was suggested that the number of Gypsies and Travellers moving into social housing had remained broadly the same over the last five years. In North, it was indicated that the number had increased. North anticipated that the number of Gypsies and Travellers moving into social housing would increase over the next five years, West suggested that it would remain broadly the same, while Central did not know; The reasons given by Gypsies and Travellers for moving into bricks and mortar accommodation were: health; unable to find stopping places/place on a site; wanting to be near family/friends; harassment or other problems on a site. North, Central and West all estimated less than ten families were living in social housing in their area. West indicated that these families tended to be concentrated in one area (Bishop Wilton). 6.3 Survey Findings of Residents Living in Bricks and Mortar Housing A total of thirty-three people were interviewed in bricks and mortar accommodation; twenty-seven were living in socially rented accommodation, five in private rented accommodation, and one owned their house. Seven respondents indicated that they owned one caravan. The residents were mostly Romany Gypsies (thirty-one respondents 94%). One respondent was Irish and one refused to state their ethnicity. Views on size of property The majority of the respondents (24 = 75%) lived in houses with three bedrooms. Two respondents had one bedroom, five had two bedrooms, and one had four or more. None of the respondents stated that they needed more bedrooms. However, five respondents (15%) reported that they did not have enough space in their current home; all were currently renting their properties (two socially rented, three private rented). Three respondents indicated that they needed more outside space for their trailers and one a driveway for his lorry. The remaining twenty respondents were satisfied with the amount of space in their home. Twenty-four of the respondents did not have any outbuildings. Of those who did, seven had outbuildings for animals and three had sheds in their gardens. Previous accommodation experiences When asked why they came to live in a house, people gave a variety of reasons (see Table 6.1 below). The most common reasons were to be near family (30%) and a due to lack of sites (30%). Page 43

48 Table 6.1: Main reason for moving to the house Reason No % To be near family Lack of sites There was a vacancy 2 6 Own/family members health 2 6 For their children s education 2 6 Did not like how sites were run 2 6 Distance from ex-husband 2 6 To try living in a house 1 3 Made homeless from previous acc. 1 3 Evicted from last accommodation 1 3 Total One of the respondents who stated that health reasons had been the main reason for moving indicated that his wife had brittle bones and therefore could not walk very far. Table 6.2 below shows the type of accommodation they had immediately before their current house. As can be seen, the respondents had moved from a range of accommodation types, with council accommodation being most common (ten respondents 30%). A further ten respondents had also lived in East Riding prior to moving into their house (Goole, Bridlington, Cottingham, Driffield). The remaining respondents had moved from outside East Riding. With regards to where people had moved from, six of the respondents had lived on the old Woldgate site before moving into a house; six had moved from unauthorised encampments within the area (Bridlington, Cottingham, Goole). Nine of the respondents had lived in the property all their lives. Table 6.2: Previous accommodation Reason No % Council site Been here all my life 9 28 Unauthorised encampment 6 18 Another house 4 12 Transit site 2 6 Private site with permission 2 6 Total Seven respondents stated that they had moved as a result of accommodation conditions or overcrowding on their previous site, while five indicated that harassment or fear was the reason moving into their current house: Other reasons included there being a vacancy (four respondents); health reasons (two respondents); site closure (one respondent); eviction (one respondent); rent difficulties (one respondent); relationship breakdown (one respondent); and one respondent stated that is was simply because they had found the house. Page 44

49 With regard to the ten respondents who had lived on a council site prior to their current accommodation, four stated that they had moved as a result of the conditions of their previous site, with three specifically stating that it had been overcrowded. One had moved due to fear and another stated that they had moved due to trouble from other Travellers. Seven respondents had also lived in another house at some point during their life; three within East Riding and four outside the study area. Four respondents had moved into this other house to be with or near their family, while one indicated they had moved due to lack of sites (this respondent had moved within East Riding). One respondent had moved for health reasons, and another as the house had become available. Accommodating visitors on their current site Four respondents (12%) reported that visitors came to stay with them. Three stated that visitors stayed in the respondents trailers, while one said that visitors stayed on the roadside. The majority of respondents (twenty-eight 84%) indicated that hosting visitors was not a problem for them; however, five people did say that it was a problem. When asked to elaborate, these respondents made reference to not having enough space for people bringing trailers. All visitors mentioned by the respondents were family members who generally stayed for one or two weeks. Length of time in the area and in the house Twenty-eight respondents (84%) indicated that they had lived in the area for ten years or more, with 19 of them stating that they had been in the same house for more than ten years, including the one owner-occupier interviewed. Five respondents had lived in their house for between five and ten years; two respondents had lived there for between three and five years; three respondents for between one and three years; and four respondents for less than a year, one of who had moved to the house during the previous three months. The main reason for staying in East Riding was having family living in the area (39%) or being born/raised here (29%) (see Table 6.3 below). Table 6.3: Main reason for living in East Riding Reason No % Family living in the area Born/raised here 9 29 Children s education 4 12 Own/family members health 2 7 Look after family 1 3 Work available 1 3 Other reason (not stated) 2 7 Total Note: excludes two non-responses Page 45

50 With regards to how many weeks of the year they usually lived in the East Riding area, twenty-four respondents (72%) indicated that they never left; seven respondents (22%) indicated that they left the area for between one a ten weeks per year; one respondent (3%) stated they left eleven and twenty weeks per year; and one respondent (3%) indicated that they did not know how many weeks per year they lived in the area. No respondent reported having a base elsewhere. Seven respondents rated the experience in their house, with one rating it very good, two rating it good and two rating it very poor. Two respondents stated that it was neither good nor poor. One of those who rated the accommodation as very poor indicated that the wanted to move immediately, expressing preference for accommodation closer to town. Another said that they wanted to move, but that they were unable to do so at present. Travelling experiences The majority of the respondents (73%) indicated that they never travelled. With regards to the remaining nine respondents, five travelled once per year, and four a few times per year. Of those who did not travel, the most common reason was their children s education (50%), followed by health reasons (38%) and old age (20%). Two respondents stated that they did not travel due to no longer owning a trailer, one could not afford to travel and one stated the reason was because they felt settled. The last time people had travelled ranged from eighteen months ago to twenty years ago. All of the seven respondents (27%) who did travel had travelled in the previous year. When asked where they tended to go to, four respondents made reference to travelling to the fairs (for example, Appleby, Cambridge and Stow). Travelling to fairs was identified as the most important reason for travel by three respondents (43%). Two respondents stated that work was the most important reason. Three respondents travelled with one caravan, and one respondent travelled with six caravans; the remainder did not provide information on how many caravans they travelled with. One respondent indicated that they travelled with equipment. Of those who travelled, individual respondents also made reference to travelling for work (29%), for a holiday (29%) and to visit relatives (43%). One respondent had travelled to a community event and one to stay with friends. With regards to where peopled stayed while travelling, people stayed at designated fair sites. Following fair sites, people made reference to staying with family or friends, on transit sites and on the roadside. Health services and issues The respondents were asked if they had access to the following health services: GP/health centre; health visitor; maternity care; A & E; and dentist. The majority of respondents indicated that they had sufficient access to these services; with thirty-one respondents not have any problems accessing any of the services. One indicated that they had problems accessing all the services, but stated that they had just bought a car and so would be able to find a doctor for their children. Another respondent stated that they had problems accessing a dentist. Respondents were also asked to indicate if they, or anyone in their household, needed support for any of the following reasons: frail elderly; a medical condition; Page 46

51 a physical disability; a learning disability; a mental health problem; or a sensory disability. Three households indicated that they or someone within their household required support relating the issues three of the above: two required support due to being frail elderly, having a medical condition and a physical disability. The other required support for learning and sensory disabilities, and for mental health problems. One other household reported multiple needs (frail elderly and medical condition). In addition, one further household reported need to support a medical condition, and one the need to support mental health problems. Page 47

52 7 Future Accommodation, Household Formation and Accommodation Affordability 7.1 Introduction This chapter looks at a range of issues including the movement intentions of the Gypsy and Traveller household survey sample, the formation of new households and concealment of existing ones and the accommodation intentions of the Gypsy and Traveller population. These factors are key drivers in the assessment of accommodation need within East Riding. The findings from the survey are presented here and how this then translates into need is discussed in Chapter Future accommodation intentions Table 7.1 shows the movement intentions of the households interviewed in East Riding. Movement intentions Move immediately All No % Current accommodation Council site/yard No % Bricks & mortar LA/HA No % Bricks & mortar private rented No % Bricks & mortar owned No % Unauthorised encampment No % Unauthorised development No % Show-ground No % Stay No plans to move Total Page 48

53 Of those respondents who wished to move immediately the following provides more information: Of the respondents staying on a showground, three specifically stated that they would move on when the current show finished. The respondent who was currently living on an unauthorised encampment stated that they needed to move back into a house. They stated that they did not intend to stay in the area, but did not state where they wanted to move to. The respondent currently living in bricks and mortar accommodation (private rented) stated that a vacant pitch becoming available was the most important consideration. They indicated that they wished to purchase their own pitch and would move for work, travel and independence. They intended to stay in the area. Their preference was to move out of the area to be closer to family, but there was no accommodation available. The first respondent currently living in council bricks and mortar accommodation stated that they wanted to move back to a trailer on either a site of their own or a private site owned by someone else when they could afford to. They specifically stated that they did not want to live on a council site The second respondent from bricks and mortar accommodation also wanted to move back into a trailer, preferably on a private site owned by someone else, but could not currently afford one. The final respondent living in a house stated that they would prefer to move to another house nearer to the town of Flamborough. They had family in the area and also cited their children s education as a reason why they wanted to remain in the area. For the respondent on the local authority site, the most important reason for moving was travel at periods throughout the following year. They also stated that work and wanting to be near family were reasons for wanting to move. The respondent said they would prefer a private site owned by someone else, but stated that they would also move to the roadside. Their preference was to move out of the area, but was not sure to where or when they would move, or if accommodation would be available. As can be seen from Table 7.1, 10% of respondents had firm intentions to stay in their current accommodation. However, a large proportion of the sample (79%) currently had no plans to move. 7.3 Household Concealment None of the respondents across any of the types of accommodation reported concealed households (i.e. separate households currently living with them and in need of accommodation). However, twelve respondents stated that they did not know if they had someone living with them who would require independent accommodation in the next 5 years. Seven of these lived on council sites (three on Woldgate, three on Woodhill and one on Eppleworth), one in Council bricks and mortar accommodation and two in a privately rented house. However, consultation with East Riding Council suggests that there is overoccupation on pitches on two of the three sites, with a total of twenty-two households doubling up across the three sites (see Chapter 4). On the Eppleworth Page 49

54 site 8 households were doubled up and on the Woodhill site 14 households were doubled up. Many of these were doubled up at July 2012 as a result of the improvement works being undertaken on the site thus allowing access for the construction works. 7.4 Household Formation It is important to understand formation trends going forward and the source of this evidence is from interviews with the sample of Gypsy and Traveller households captured through the survey. Respondents were also asked whether there were people living with them who were likely to need their own separate accommodation in the next five years (i.e. by 2017). Three respondents (two in bricks and mortar accommodation, and one on a council site) responded positively. The accommodation need for the respondents from bricks and mortar was for the two respondents daughters. One respondent s daughter (aged 20) was getting married and was going to move into their in-laws trailer in Bolton, whereas the other (aged 15) was expected to remain in East Riding and would be given the choice of what type of accommodation they wanted. This second respondent wanted to live on a site of their own or of someone else and would not return to a council site. They wanted their daughter to live on the same site as them. The respondent on the council site reported that their son was to get married the following year and that they would need accommodation in the East Riding area (Cottingham or Bridlington), the type of which would be their son s choice. 7.5 Accommodation Affordability In order to explore issues of accommodation affordability we asked respondents if they could afford to purchase any of the following: a pitch on a private site with planning permission; pitch on a private site without planning permission; land to be developed into a site. Eleven respondents (22%) living on the socially rented sites indicated that they could afford any of these options. Six of those said the issue was not relevant to them; two of these said that they were not planning on moving or were settled in their current location, while another two respondents said they were 'too old to buy land'. One stated that they had their own land, but could not get planning permission for it and another stated that, if they buy land for their family, they wouldn t be given planning permission. The latter stated, It s nice being on a nice new site with our own sheds but I would love to have my own land in 5-6 years for when my children get married, but it s not easy getting planning permission. The Council should make it easier. A lot of Travellers would like to have land so they could bring our children up in a traditional way and they could still go to school and still learn our culture. Of the thirty-three people living in bricks and mortar accommodation, eleven respondents (33%) said they could afford to purchase land for a site or a pitch on a private site (with or without planning permission). The respondent who already owned their property indicated that the issue was not relevant to them, as did five of those in Council accommodation. Of these five, two stated that they had no Page 50

55 plans to move, one needed to stay for family reasons, one thought that they were too old, and the last did not want to return to living in a trailer. All four respondents currently residing on the showground stated that they could afford the options, but all said that it was not relevant to them as they already owned land. One respondent on an unauthorised development also stated that they would be able to afford the options, but also stated that it was not relevant, although no further explanation was given. Respondents were also asked how much they paid per month in rent or mortgage for their current accommodation (see Table 7.2). The majority of respondents - on sites and in bricks and mortar accommodation - were paying between 60 and 89 per week. Page 51

56 Table 7.2: Rent/mortgage level (weekly) Weekly rent/ mortgage All No % Current accommodation Council site/yard No % Bricks & mortar LA/HA No % Bricks & mortar private No % Bricks & mortar owned No % Unauthorised encampment No % Unauthorised development No % Show-ground No % Don t Know Refuse to say Do not pay N/A Total Note about affordability It is worth noting that a diversity of socio-economic situations is present amongst the Gypsy and Traveller communities, from the moderately wealthy to very poor families. Although obtaining empirical evidence on the economic circumstances of Gypsies and Travellers is very difficult it is well established that Gypsies and Travellers are amongst the most culturally, socially, physically and financially excluded in society. A number of families will always be able to afford to purchase or rent pitches at market rates. However, in line with the rest of society, other sections of the communities will be excluded from accommodation provided at market rates and will require additional support to access safe and secure accommodation in line with their cultural needs. The absence of a range of tenure to address this diversity of socioeconomic circumstances may lead to a perpetuation and possible increase in hidden homelessness. Page 52

57 8 Travelling Showpeople Planning policy relating to Travelling Showpeople was set out in circular 04/07 and required the accommodation needs of Travelling Showpeople to be included in the assessment of Gypsy and Traveller accommodation needs. This was superseded by the NPPF and Planning for Gypsies and Travellers (2012).Within the new planning policy it is clear that the accommodation needs of Travelling Showpeople should be included within the assessments of accommodation need for Travellers. Information provided by the Council indicates that their current development plan does include a policy towards sites for Travelling Showpeople (Boothferry Local Plan: Policy S60 and East Yorkshire Local Plan: Policy H11). There is currently one authorised Travelling Showpeople site within East Riding. This has been developed since 2006 and provides two pitches. Retrospective permission was granted for this site in The Council had not experienced any unauthorised development of Travelling Showpeople sites since 2006, nor had to take enforcement action in relation to Travelling Showpeople sites. They did not expect there to be an increase in sites for Travelling Showpeople over the next five years. Interviews with residents on this site were not possible as it was empty during the fieldwork period. As a result of the inability to consult, coupled with the findings from the GTAA conducted in 2008, we assume that there is no additional accommodation need emanating from this yard or from outside the area from Travelling Showpeople. Page 53

58 9 An Assessment of Accommodation Need 9.1 Introduction Irrespective of the change in policy (during 2012) targeted at resolving Gypsy and Traveller accommodation issues there are no signs that the growth in the Gypsy and Traveller population will slow significantly. Research from the Equalities and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) has indicated that around 6,000 additional pitches for Gypsies and Travellers are immediately required nationally to meet the current shortage of accommodation within England. 20 This chapter provides an assessment of the future need for Gypsy and Traveller accommodation in the East Riding Local Authority area to 2029 and an explanation of how the need has been derived. 9.2 A Note on the Assessment of Accommodation Need Despite all local authorities across England completing a first round of Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Needs Assessments (GTAAs) over the period the methods of assessing and calculating the accommodation needs of Gypsies and Travellers are still developing. The model drawn upon here derives from a number of sources including: The Guidance on Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Assessments. 21 Guidance for Regional Planning. 22 Knowledge and experience of assumptions featuring in other GTAAs and results of EiP tests of GTAAs. The messages arising from the CLG consultation document Planning for Travellers. In a progression from the first round of GTAAs this assessment has focussed more closely on two issues, the constituents of local and historic need and the need for site-based accommodation in line with the planning definition (see Chapter 2). In terms of addressing local and historic need this assessment has measured this by: Surveying households resident within East Riding, as opposed to extrapolating trends and findings from households resident outside the authority; and 20 See Brown, P., Henning, S. and Niner, P (2010) Assessing local housing authorities progress in meeting the accommodation needs of Gypsy and Traveller communities in England and Wales : Update 2010, Equality and Human Rights Commission. 21 CLG (2007) Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Assessments Guidance, London: HMSO. 22 CURS, SHUSU and CRESR (2007) Preparing Regional Spatial Strategy reviews on Gypsies and Travellers by regional planning bodies, London: CLG, online at: egionalspatialstrategyreviewsongypsiesandtravellersbyregionalplannings_id pdf Page 54

59 Drawing upon empirical primary research within East Riding as opposed to developing projections based upon trends within the Caravan Count. Via a process of triangulation, records are brought together with survey responses on issues such as unauthorised sites, concealed households, etc. to develop a robust assessment of need. Similarly, an empirical assessment of local likely future needs is made possible via the comprehensive survey of households. Together these factors represent the latest position on historic demand. In turn, the planning definition of Gypsies and Travellers as detailed in the new planning policy is operationalised by a refinement of accommodation need informed by the current mobility/nomadism of resident Gypsies and Travellers. In line with the sentiment of the definition of Gypsies and Travellers within the planning policy, refinement of need is made possible by assessing whether travelling was no longer undertaken due to the specific reasons of needs associated with their, or a dependents, education, health or age. This study has taken a thorough assessment of the need arising from all accommodation types present at the time of the survey. As such this assessment of need should be regarded as a reasonable and robust assessment of need upon which to base planning decisions in the future. Table 9.1 below contains the requirements for net additional pitches that should be developed to meet the measured need. Accommodation need has been considered in this assessment by carefully exploring the following factors: Current residential supply Socially rented pitches. Private authorised pitches. Residential need Temporary planning permissions, which will end over the assessment period. Concealment of households. Allowance for family growth over the assessment period. Need for authorised pitches from families on unauthorised developments. Movement over the assessment period between sites and housing. Whether the closure of any existing sites is planned. Potential need for residential pitches in the area from families on unauthorised encampments. Movement between areas. Overcrowding of sites. Additional supply The elements of supply of pitches between are potentially: Pitches currently closed but re-entering use New sites planned Page 55

60 Vacant pitches A note on vacancies arising as a result of the death of the occupier As stated in the incomplete draft of the South East Regional Spatial Strategy Report of the Panel the death of a sole occupier is the only certain source of net supply. However, the frequency of this occurring depends on personal factors, and the number of such instances is likely to be small. The Panel reported that such instances cannot be predicted in terms of their timing and location and cannot be used as an assured source of supply in any GTAA area (p.21) 23. This assessment has excluded such vacancies from its calculation. The requirements are presented in summary form in Table 9.1 below. This table details the accommodation and pitch need, derived from applying the definition as used in the Housing Act and the Planning definition. All figures relate to pitches not sites. Table 9.1: Summary of Gypsy and Traveller accommodation and pitch need ( ) Element of supply and need Accommodation Need/Supply Total (households) Current residential supply 1 Socially rented pitches 55 2 Private authorised pitches 6 3 Total authorised Gypsy and Traveller pitches (at July 2012) 61 Residential pitch need End of temporary planning permissions 0 5 Concealed households 22 6 New household formation 2 7 Unauthorised developments 3 8 Net Movement from housing to sites 2 9 Closure of sites 0 10 Unauthorised encampments 5 11 Movement between areas 0 12 Residential gross pitch need ( ) Supply ( ) Residential net pitch need ( ) Residential additional pitch need ( ) Residential additional pitch need ( ) Total Gross Residential pitch need ( ) Total Net Residential pitch need ( ) Available at Page 56

61 Note: For pragmatic reasons these figures have been rounded to the nearest whole pitch 9.3 Explanation of the Need Requirement Elements Current residential supply Row 1: The number of pitches on socially rented sites provided by local authority information. Row 2: The number of pitches on private authorised sites provided by local authority information. The local authority has records of two sites in the area with a combined pitch capacity of 6 pitches. These pitches have been factored in as an element of currently supply. However, as the fieldwork team were unable to engage with households on these sites require further investigation is required as if they are not currently occupied, they may be able to form an element of future supply in order to meet need that has been identified during this assessment. Row 3: The total number of authorised pitches within East Riding Residential pitch need Row 4: The number of pitches which have temporary planning permission due to expire within the assessment period. Row 5: The number of concealed households occupying existing accommodation who require independent accommodation within East Riding. Pitch requirement from concealed households Finding: Survey respondents did not identify any concealed households, but there may be good reasons for this. Information from East Riding Council indicated that there were twentytwo households who were currently doubled-up on the existing socially rented sites. Assumptions: Experience from undertaking GTAAs in other areas suggests that it is unlikely that there are no concealed households. Consultation with East Riding Council suggested that there was doubling up on the existing socially rented sites. This overcrowding was also apparent from our observations when carrying out the fieldwork. There are currently thirty-seven names on the site waiting lists held by East Riding, although it is not known whether this are unique names or repeated across the three sites 24. It is reasonable to assume that the records held by East Riding Council are the most reliable indicator of household concealment at this time. 24 Please not that the site waiting list has not been used. There are some issues with using site waiting lists in calculating the need for site provision. These relate to both over-counting (double registrations, out-of-date lists) and undercounting (potential applicants not being registered due to a perception of no pitch availability). It is believed that using waiting lists in their entirety would entail double counting of pitch need, as a result of the other factors included in the assessment (household formation, doubled-up households, etc). Page 57

62 Concealed households require pitch-based accommodation. Calculation: Twenty-two households are currently concealed = 22 households. Row 6: This is the number of pitches required from new household formation. Pitch requirement from new households forming Finding: Drawing upon the information contained within Chapter 7, the survey showed that there were three households who required their own separate pitch based accommodation in the next five years. Two of these households came from a household in bricks and mortar accommodation and the other came from one of the socially rented sites. Two households were expected to live within the East Riding area. Assumptions: All households are likely to form independent households; therefore, no pitch sharing adjustment has been made. This number is small compared to the sample size and considering the number of children who may reach household formation age in the next 5 years (see Appendix 2) The alleviation of the current level of doubling up may release space for households to live Three households appear a reasonable level of household formation but this should remain under review. The lack of certainty within the survey about the required pitch needs from the respondents in bricks and mortar housing about the pitch needs arising in the East Riding makes it difficult to accurately predict from household growth in housing. Calculation: Socially rented sites 1 household was identified in the survey that required independent site based accommodation which is the equivalent to 2% of the sample on socially rented sites. This is then grossed to the whole population of households on socially rented sites = 2 households Row 7: This is the level of need arising from current unauthorised developments. Pitch requirement from unauthorised developments Finding: Information from the local authority details the presence of three unauthorised developments. Information about these sites indicate that: One site is currently vacant, has an unknown pitch capacity and enforcement action is pending. Assume pitch capacity to be a single nominal pitch. Two sites have a capacity of one pitch each. Assumption: The interview with the household on one of the unauthorised developments indicated that this was a long-term resident of the area who had no base elsewhere. Assume this is reflective of all other households on the unauthorised developments. Households on unauthorised developments are in need of permanent accommodation in the study area Calculation: Number of households on unauthorised developments = 3 households. Page 58

63 Row 8: This is the estimation of the flow from sites to houses and vice versa. Movement between housing and sites Movement from sites to housing: No site-based households expressed an intention to move into bricks and mortar accommodation. Movement from housing to sites: Three respondents in bricks and mortar accommodation had firm intentions to move from their house to pitch-based accommodation (9% of the sample) Findings: All households had firm intentions to move from housing to a site. Two households were looking to move out of the East Riding area. One household (3% of the sample) wanted pitch based accommodation within East Riding preferably on a private site. This household had long-term links in the area. The survey also suggested that some of the other households currently living in bricks and mortar accommodation had moved into housing due to overcrowding and/or conditions on existing socially rented sites. This suggests there may be suppressed need from households in bricks and mortar accommodation. Calculation: 3% of the estimated bricks and mortar population = 2 households. Net movement from housing to sites = 2 households Row 9: Plans to close existing sites, which have been calculated within the supply of site accommodation, will ultimately displace a number of Gypsies and Travellers resulting in an increase in housing need. There are no sites that are due to close. Row 10: This provides an estimation of the need arising from households on unauthorised encampments. This is one of the most difficult elements to predict. Circumstances where such need may arise are where families are travelling around from one unauthorised site to another within a local area because they want to remain in the area, but cannot find an authorised base to do so. Another scenario might be families who travel to the area from further afield but who want to remain in the area due to family or employment links. The calculation of need for residential accommodation requires estimates of the number of households involved in unauthorised encampments, and of how many of these need a residential pitch in the Study Area. Families involved in unauthorised encampments Findings: The Caravan Count shows that unauthorised encampments have been a significant presence in the study area until January Survey information from the local authorities indicates that between 2009 and 2011 there is an average of 24 households staying in the area as unauthorised encampments each year. Based on the comments provided by the local authorities it is believed that this is broadly reflective of previous years. Assumptions: There is an average of 24 families on unauthorised encampments each year Data filtering from the Gypsy and Traveller Liaison Officer has excluded the possibility Page 59

64 of the double counting of visits to the area from the same family in a single calendar year. Need for residential pitches from unauthorised encampments Finding: 67% of households (2 out of the 3) on unauthorised encampments were interested in staying in the study area. It must be noted that this is based on a relatively small sample size (3 interviews) and therefore may not be reflective of the entire population who tend to feature as unauthorised encampments. Assumptions: 67% is likely to be high because of the small sample size this is drawn from, overclaiming, likelihood of interest in other areas outside of the Study Area, and from what seems reasonable. The responses to the survey, even when cross-tabulated, provide ambiguous future accommodation intentions. No household appeared to be specifically requesting a residential pitch in the area. Suggestions from stakeholders were that the majority of encampments were people passing through who would have previously been accommodated on one of the socially rented sites before the refurbishment. Assume need for residential pitches will be the equivalent to 20% (1 in every 5) of unauthorised encampments. This is treated as a single year element rather than a flow of new families each year. Other households on unauthorised encampments should be incorporated into future GTAAs. Calculation: 20% of households involved in unauthorised encampment = 20% of 24 = 5 households/pitches across the study area. Row 11: This is the level of movement of households between areas. The assessment found no substantial evidence to suggest that there is movement between areas. It is assumed that if movement does occur, in-migration will balance out-migration 25 Row 12: This is the total gross residential need for pitches arising in East Riding between 2012 and Row 13: There are 10 pitches due to open on one of the socially rented sites and 3 on a private site (allowed by appeal) within the period. Row 14: This is the total net requirement for pitches arising in East Riding between 2012 and Permanent residential accommodation need over and The current shortage of sites and pitches for Gypsies and Travellers means that it is difficult to predict trends in living arrangements until the current lack of pitch- 25 It has been common practice in undertaking GTAAs to assume this balances each other out and there is very little evidence to the contrary. Page 60

65 based accommodation has been addressed at a national level. There is no means of knowing how Gypsies and Travellers will decide to live in the next decade. However, it is necessary to plan for the long term and anticipate pitch need from Gypsy and Traveller households. In order to tackle the complexity of needs that may well occur over the next decade it is established practice in assessment of Gypsy and Traveller accommodation need to apply an assumed rate of household growth. It has been common in similar studies to employ a standard 3% per annum compound rate of household growth. This figure is then applied, minus an assumed ratio for pitch sharing of 1:0.75, to the projected number of pitches which should be available by All household growth is assumed to require a site-based solution. The supply of pitches over the period has been considered, but has been assumed to be zero. This is consistent with more recent GTAAs and implicitly compensates for not taking into account needs arising from drivers other than family growth. It is recommended that the rate of household growth is kept under review. Row 15: The total requirement for pitches in East Riding over the period Row 16: The total requirement for pitches in East Riding over the period Row 17: The total requirement for pitches in East Riding over the period In Summary Analysis of data has shown that accommodation need will arise from the following factors: Concealed households in the area; Household formation in the area; Unauthorised developments; Movement from houses to sites; and Unauthorised encampments in the area. This analysis has shown that there is a net accommodation need for 50 households over the period. These figures incorporate a household growth rate of 3% a year compound as applied to all current households in the area and all future households that should be accommodated on pitches by 2016 to estimate need in the period Page 61

66 10 Transit Accommodation 10.1 Introduction Although to a certain extent nomadism and travelling are currently restricted by a lack of sites nationally, this remains an important feature of Gypsy and Traveller identity and way of life, even if only to visit fairs or visit family. Some Gypsies and Travellers are still highly mobile without a permanent base, and others travel for significant parts of the year from a winter base. More Gypsies and Travellers might travel if it were possible to find places to stop without the threat of constant eviction. Nationally the worst living conditions are commonly experienced by Gypsies and Travellers living on unauthorised encampments who do not have easy access to water or toilet facilities and have difficulties in accessing education and health services Need for Transit Sites and Stopping Places National policy is clear that there should be provision in order for Gypsies and Travellers who choose to travel to do so without resorting to stopping illegally or inappropriately. Information provided by East Riding Council and other stakeholders (set out in Chapter 5) suggests that the study area does experience encampments each year. The presence of unauthorised encampments does indicate an unmet need for transit provision. However, if the incidences of doubling up on some residential sites is resolved then there would be a greater possibility of visitors being accommodated when temporarily visiting friends and family on residential pitches. This assessment would support the approach of creating a network of transit facilities across the wider region to accommodate short term accommodation requirements. Such an approach is discussed in a regional study on transit need produced in Should the authority decide to provide for transit need, there are a number of issues to consider: The geographic nature of the area - the provision of one transit site may not provide for need across the different areas within the East Riding. A single transit site in each area would force the mixing of differing groups (family and ethnic) and could lead to potential tensions. The needs of the travelling groups often combines a mixture of motivations (i.e. work, family and holiday). A uniform transit site may not meet the differing requirements. 26 Niner, P. (2009) South East England Regional Gypsy and Traveller Transit Study, Final Report, Birmingham: University of Birmingham, October 2009 Page 62

67 Potentially working with neighbouring authorities to ensure that any network of tolerated stopping places connects with the routes through to neighbouring authority areas. Although transit need could be met by the creation of hard purpose-made pitches/sites, it is also suggested that consideration is given to the need for the development of such hard pitches along with the possibility of soft transit pitches (i.e. designated stopping places). Such softer options would provide Gypsies and Travellers with somewhere authorised and more secure to stop whilst creating a minimal environmental impact. Such stopping places are often favoured by Gypsy and Traveller households Planning for Transit Sites and Stopping Places Recommended Approach Unauthorised encampment is undesirable and the benefits of providing an alternative should be given weight. The adverse impacts on the living conditions of those without proper provision are severe. Furthermore, unauthorised encampment is likely to be a source of conflict with the settled community. It is suggested that the most appropriate approach in the East Riding District is a network of tolerated temporary stopping places. This approach could be particularly beneficial in providing temporary stopping places associated with summer holidays or en route to events like the Seamer horse fair for East Riding. This approach has been used by the Norfolk authorities and is predicated on a rotating provision of small (for example 3 caravans) informal sites termed Temporary Tolerated Stopping Places alongside main routes, with very basic facilities (portaloo, waste disposal). In terms of managing unauthorised developments Norfolk has been considered to represent good practice in having a Protocol for Consideration of Unauthorised Encampments (see summary below). Norfolk Traveller Liaison Group (TLG) Protocol for Consideration of Unauthorised Encampments Since the 1970s there has been a policy of no needless harassment for unauthorised encampments on the highway. The Protocol was devised in 2001 to: Clarify the roles and responsibilities of the authorities (councils at parish, district and county level, health services, Police and landowners); Give greater emphasis to identifying short stay stopping places; Increase awareness of the responsibilities of the authorities and constraints on their powers; Engage parish and town councils in the process of managing unauthorised encampments; Promote greater understanding and acceptance of different lifestyles; and When action does need to be taken, to provide a framework that is fair to all parties and takes into account legal constraints. The Protocol sets out the responsibilities of each party, identifying who will take the lead in Page 63

68 each set of circumstances. It then contains a checklist that guides what action (if any) should be taken, who should be consulted. Issues covered in the checklist include: Health and Welfare; Site suitability and environmental considerations; Affect on neighbours; Any history relating to the site; Any history relating to the Travellers; Size of the encampment; Human rights of all affected persons; and Proportionality of any action proposed. The Protocol has been recognised nationally as a model of good practice Monitoring Unauthorised Encampments Section 5.4 reported that different Council departments collect information on unauthorised encampments. Public Protection log the number of complaints and the Gypsy Liaison Officer logs the number of welfare checks. Combined these data sets provides some information, but not the full picture. There would be merit in reviewing the data collected and exploring the potential (resources and duty permitting) to also record: the nature of the unauthorised encampment; the size of the encampment; how long the encampment is present; and whether the occupants of the encampment had passed through the Borough previously in the same year. Page 64

69 11 Implications for the Emerging Strategy Document 11.1 Overview The analysis in Chapter 9 indicates that there is a need for an additional 53 pitches in East Riding between 2012 and It will be important to plan to meet local needs through the development of the emerging LDF, in particular, the Core Strategy and the Site Allocations Development Plan Document (DPD). It is interesting to note that this figure is less than that set out in the original study particularly for the later plan period. For example the original 2008 GTNA identified an indicative need for 44 pitches between 2015 and 2026, whereas this updated work has identified a need for 29 pitches between 2017 and Cross Boundary Matters The needs of Gypsy and Traveller communities cannot be viewed in isolation, as need can arise from Gypsy and Travellers in other authorities seeking to move into East Riding. It is important to understand this issue, particularly in the current context of the duty to cooperate. Consequently, in order to understand the issues and pressure facing East Riding we reviewed the most recently published GTAA for those authorities with a boundary with the authority. This review made it possible to understand their overall need for additional pitches in addition to if they raised any additional need to be occurring from people in these areas wanting to move into the East Riding. The findings from this analysis are set out in the table below. This illustrates that based on the information currently available there does not appear to be a significant additional need from Gypsies currently living in surrounding authorities to move into the East Riding. This situation may change when surrounding authorities update their own evidence base studies. Consequently, it would appear that this information in this section of the report should be reviewed when updates in such surrounding authorities are published. Table 11.1: Main findings relevant to East Riding of surrounding authority GTAAs Local Authority Year study published Overall need Specific needs for East Riding highlighted Doncaster 2006 initial study, update 2012 An additional 34 pitches between 2011 and 2016 and 113 Showpeople yards. No specific reference to East Riding in the update study. The cross boundary focus of the study is on South Yorkshire. York North Yorkshire study 2008 A shortfall of 36 pitches Study looks at needs within North Yorkshire and how this varies across districts within this area. Page 65

70 Local Authority Year study published Overall need Specific needs for East Riding highlighted Selby North Yorkshire study 2008 A shortfall of 20 pitches Study looks at needs within North Yorkshire and how this varies across districts within this area. North Lincolnshire Local authority wide study 2008 An additional 46 pitches / plots are required between 2007 and survey respondents stated that they would like to move to either a long-stay residential site or a different residential site. Of these respondents only one stated that they would prefer to live in Hull or within the East Riding. Hull 2007 study (2012 update in progress) 36 pitches from 2006 to 2011 The links with East Riding are noted within the study, for example it states that in terms of future accommodation preferences most people wanted to live in and around Hull. Ryedale North Yorkshire study 2008 A shortfall of 9 pitches Study looks at needs within North Yorkshire and how this varies across districts within this area. Scarborough North Yorkshire study 2008 A shortfall of 3 pitches Study looks at needs within North Yorkshire and how this varies across districts within this area Identifying where there is demand for additional pitches The need for additional pitches The conclusions of this study highlight the need to provide additional pitches within East Riding in the future. This equates to the need to provide an additional 34 gross pitches in the next five years. Through discussions with ERYC officers it was highlighted that an additional 10 pitches are under development on council owned sites. This means that there is a net need for 24 pitches in the district Best Practice on Site Size The conclusions of this study highlight the need to provide additional pitches within East Riding in the future. Through discussions with ERYC officers it was highlighted that whilst there are plans to provide an additional three pitches at Woodhill Way, this will represent the limits of the three existing Council owned sites. Consequently, new locations and sites will need to be identified in meeting future needs across the authority. Best practice 27 on Gypsy and Traveller site design provides some information on best practice for site size, in terms of the number of pitches. Paragraph 4.7 states that: There is no one ideal size of site or number of pitches although experience of site managers and residents alike suggest that a maximum of 15 pitches is conducive 27 CLG (2008) Designing Gypsy and Traveller Sites Good Practice Guide Page 66

71 to providing a comfortable environment which is easy to manage. However, smaller sites of 3-4 pitches can also be successful, particularly where designed for one extended family. These can be advantageous in making good use of small plots of land, whilst retaining the qualities described in this guidance and expected by families on modern sites. Furthermore, paragraph 4.8 goes on to highlight that: Sites should ideally consist of up to 15 pitches in capacity unless there is clear evidence to suggest that a larger site is preferred by the local Gypsy or Traveller community. Nevertheless, where a larger site is unavoidable, or where one exists already, in a few cases smaller closes have been created within the site for extended families, thereby retaining the sense of community and creating defensible space. The Council could seek to use these guidelines in delivering the 24 pitches in the local authority over the next five years Locations of demand The current population The results of the survey illustrate the proportion of the respondents seeking to move accommodation. This highlights that 89% of those surveyed have no plans to move accommodation. This illustrates that the majority of respondents in the area are not seeking to move. Of the remaining 11% or 10 respondents that are seeking to move there appear to be a number of trends to highlight: Four of the respondents were in the area temporarily; with three of the respondents there for a show that was underway during the survey period and they will return to their home following the completion of the show. Two of the respondents stated that they would like to move back into a trailer but that they could not afford to do this at the moment. Two respondents stated that they would like to be able to travel in the future. One respondent states that they would move immediately if they could find a nice site. One respondent stated that they did not like their current location and would like to be nearer to town. Additional results from the survey highlight that of these ten respondents seeking to move only two were seeking to stay within East Riding. Of these three respondents the following can be noted in terms of their locational and site preferences: One respondent wanted to move to either their own site with planning permission or a private site owned by someone else; and One respondent wanted to move a bricks and mortar accommodation. In terms of spatial preferences within the district both respondents wanted to stay in the same broad locations they were in currently. This was the Bridlington and Page 67

72 Driffield sub areas shown on the map below. Other locational preferences outside of East Riding highlighted by respondents included: Elsewhere in Yorkshire Nottingham; Derby; and Stoke on Trent. Figure 11.1: Sub Areas within East Riding used for this study Needs of other household members As part of this survey it was also important to understand if there would be additional need for pitches within existing households. No respondents within the survey identified an immediate need for separate accommodation for another member of their household. Three respondents identified that a member of their household was likely to have a need for their own separate accommodation in the next five years. Whilst one of these respondents would be moving outside of the East Riding to the North West, two additional households would be required in East Riding. It was considered that one of these new households would be likely to be near their existing family in the Driffield sub area who are themselves currently in bricks and mortar and are seeking to move onto a privately owned site and that the other would be in either the Cottingham or Bridlington sub areas. Page 68