Rugby council urged to do better on gypsy and traveller sites

This damning statement was made by leading county Cllr Adrian Warwick (Con, Fosse) at the recent meeting of Rugby Borough Council’s planning committee when a string of applications relating to gypsy and traveller sites near Barnacle were up for discussion.

He attended the meeting to speak in support of the community, along with the vice-chair of Shilton and Barnacle Parish Council Cllr Stephen White – and made his point about the borough council’s policy failure during consideration of the first of the applications.

Barnacle is one of the far-flung villages in Rugby borough, sitting in the green belt, but as the two speakers – and the huge number of villagers who turned out for the meeting and had submitted objections – contended, it is taking the lion’s share of the borough’s current allocation of sites.

Cllr Warwick said national policy indicated green belt was an inappropriate location for the sites and was not likely to meet the needs of the people living there.

And he said the council had not fulfilled its pledge dating back to 2014 to find sites: “What is apparent is Rugby Borough Council has for the last decade abjectly failed to carry out its function to meet the needs for this community.

"I do not blame the gypsy and traveller community for their applications as they need to live somewhere.”

And in terms of the imbalance in location, he added: “One ward is doing 90 per cent of the work at this point in time.”

And he said there was no provision around Rugby: "Coton, Houlton and now the southern urban extension are all major developments, all of which by insistence with developers should have had high-quality, sustainable traveller accommodation as part of their masterplans. However that never happened.

"In 2019 the planning inspector gave notice the Local Plan was sound only if Rugby Borough Council carried out a needs assessment and allocate sites. Again this has not been done.”

He said if the first application was approved – for retention of land at Top Park, Top Road, Barnacle, for use as a residential caravan park – it should be a temporary consent to allow for further exploration of options.

His concerns over the borough council’s failure to allocate sites was echoed in the officer’s report which had recommended approval.

The report also highlighted the borough has a shortfall in the number of pitches available: “The need for new gypsy and traveller pitches between 2022 and 2037 is therefore between 56 to 79 pitches. Regardless of which definition is used, it is clear that there is significant need for new pitches in the borough.”

Committee members eventually voted 8-4 in favour of a five-year temporary permission, while stressing there needed to be a policy shift, potentially through the Local Plan review.

A similar decision was applied to the first of the next six applications seeking permission for plots on land next to the previous site.

But in a subsequent vote to defer a decision on the other five applications, there was also a request to see if the first of the six could be brought back to be considered again.