Council advised to tolerate illegal traveller sites, as report warns of high cost of legal action

The planning enforcement sub-committee of a local authority has been advised not to evict travellers from unauthorised plots because legal action could prove extremely expensive and there is no guarantee of success.

A report prepared for South Cambridgeshire District Council recommended that the unlawful sites at Smithy Fen near Cottenham continue to be tolerated whilst a plan is developed with residents.

It warned that further legal action “would be strongly contested”, and that eviction would create difficulties in providing continuity of education and medical support.

“The authority would be moving on people who have established local connections, and have no alternative provision to offer,” the report said.

It added that there would be a potential need to provide suitable alternative accommodation to those made homeless. “This would have to be bricks and mortar and this, for cultural reasons, should be single storey with space to accommodate a touring caravan,” the report added.

It suggested that the council would incur “significant additional cost” as a result of bringing enforcement action, including taking direct action to clear and secure the sites.

The report examined a range of alternative options. These included authorising the plots as they are, which would mean the children remain in education, continuity of medical care and meeting part of the unmet need for the travellers “removing the stress of uncertainty from the families”.

However, the report warned of a loss of confidence in the council by the settled population as a result of it not properly enforcing planning regulations. It would also risk setting a precedent that would encourage others to breach planning controls elsewhere in the district.

Other options included granting temporary consent for all or some of the plots until acceptable alternatives become available, providing a site near Cottenham that is acceptable in planning terms (although this could “engender significant local opposition”), relocating the families to vacant authorised sites at Smithy Fen, and compulsory purchasing authorised unoccupied sites at Smithy Fen.

The report, authored by South Cambridgeshire’s head of planning Gareth Roberts, called for an action plan to be drawn up. This would be based on the council discussing as a priority the various options with the family, a commitment being given by the families that their children will continue at the local schools, and the plots being tolerated until a suitable alternative is secured.

The action plan would also see the council “as a first priority and for a finite period” attempt to broker an arrangement where the families relocate to authorised sites.

The report said that if after three months there was no success, the council should attempt to bring forward a site that meets the families needs in a location acceptable to planning. The matter would in any event come back to the planning enforcement sub-committee after nine months to review progress.

The sub-committee will consider the report at a meeting on 21 June.