Newport gipsy sites plan to be looked at again

South Wales Argus: Newport gipsy sites plan to be looked at again Newport gipsy sites plan to be looked at again

GIPSY sites are set for yet another review by councillors after top Newport council members decided to send the issue back for scrutiny.

Newport cabinet members have decided to send an appraisal of 11 sites by officers back to a committee of councillors to see whether they are workable.

A working group from the community planning and development committee had previously set out their recommendations for gipsy sites, but cabinet later referred the matter back to officers for further consideration.

That work is nearing completion, and according to council documents Bob Bright suggested to cabinet members that the committee considers the matter again before it is looked at by the cabinet.

A spokeswoman for Newport Council said no further comment was available from on the issue and would not explain the term ‘deliverability’ which was cited as the reason for the review.

The working group, which reported back at the end of last year, recommended that the former road safety centre at Hartridge Farm Road be the preferred residential site, with the former Ringland allotments listed as the second preferred choice for a residential site.

A small-scale site of four pitches at Brickyard Lane was considered acceptable as a contingency for housing need.

A yard next to the A449 is recommended as the preferred transit site while land at Celtic Way, Marshfield, is recommended as a fallback position for a transit site if negotiation to secure the A449 access is not successful.

A consultation into possible gypsy sites in Newport ended on October 4 and attracted 7,000 individual responses raising 40,000 issues.

In November, the cabinet decided for proposals to go back to technical officers for a detailed assessment.

A final decision on whether to amend or replace five sites already identified in the local development plan as gipsy sites will take place when the council considers a revised local development plan in June.

Comments (12)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

1:53pm Mon 25 Feb 13

pinpong says...

I bet they take the Ringland site out and just leave in Tory areas. What a bunch of mugs this labour lot are
I bet they take the Ringland site out and just leave in Tory areas. What a bunch of mugs this labour lot are pinpong

2:56pm Mon 25 Feb 13

portforever says...

what a farce, how much is all this rubbish costing us in newport.just make a decision and get it done, no on wants them by them but someone is going to be unlucky , so just stop waisting our money, maybe have a look at caerleon or alteryn areas,,,
what a farce, how much is all this rubbish costing us in newport.just make a decision and get it done, no on wants them by them but someone is going to be unlucky , so just stop waisting our money, maybe have a look at caerleon or alteryn areas,,, portforever

3:49pm Mon 25 Feb 13

33daverave says...

Civic Centre car parks would be fine, near all amenities.
Civic Centre car parks would be fine, near all amenities. 33daverave

4:15pm Mon 25 Feb 13

Llanmartinangel says...

Even by the record of truly inglorious mismanagement by this bunch of knuckle-dragging half-wits, this really is the crowning glory. How come they can earmark homes for the elderly and disabled for closure with as little as a pen-stroke and torture themselves (and us) to death over their efforts to accommodate sites for a group of people no-one who pays them wants near the City at all.
Even by the record of truly inglorious mismanagement by this bunch of knuckle-dragging half-wits, this really is the crowning glory. How come they can earmark homes for the elderly and disabled for closure with as little as a pen-stroke and torture themselves (and us) to death over their efforts to accommodate sites for a group of people no-one who pays them wants near the City at all. Llanmartinangel

4:30pm Mon 25 Feb 13

33daverave says...

Llanmartinangel wrote:
Even by the record of truly inglorious mismanagement by this bunch of knuckle-dragging half-wits, this really is the crowning glory. How come they can earmark homes for the elderly and disabled for closure with as little as a pen-stroke and torture themselves (and us) to death over their efforts to accommodate sites for a group of people no-one who pays them wants near the City at all.
Welsh Govt will pay for the **** thieves, not the Council.
As for them being half-wits, most of this Council are not even quarter-wits.
[quote][p][bold]Llanmartinangel[/bold] wrote: Even by the record of truly inglorious mismanagement by this bunch of knuckle-dragging half-wits, this really is the crowning glory. How come they can earmark homes for the elderly and disabled for closure with as little as a pen-stroke and torture themselves (and us) to death over their efforts to accommodate sites for a group of people no-one who pays them wants near the City at all.[/p][/quote]Welsh Govt will pay for the **** thieves, not the Council. As for them being half-wits, most of this Council are not even quarter-wits. 33daverave

4:33pm Mon 25 Feb 13

Llanmartinangel says...

33daverave wrote:
Llanmartinangel wrote:
Even by the record of truly inglorious mismanagement by this bunch of knuckle-dragging half-wits, this really is the crowning glory. How come they can earmark homes for the elderly and disabled for closure with as little as a pen-stroke and torture themselves (and us) to death over their efforts to accommodate sites for a group of people no-one who pays them wants near the City at all.
Welsh Govt will pay for the **** thieves, not the Council.
As for them being half-wits, most of this Council are not even quarter-wits.
We are paying for the time the council are spending on it. And yes, your estimation of our Labour administration's IQ is probably more accurate than mine but I was giving them the benefit of the doubt.
[quote][p][bold]33daverave[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Llanmartinangel[/bold] wrote: Even by the record of truly inglorious mismanagement by this bunch of knuckle-dragging half-wits, this really is the crowning glory. How come they can earmark homes for the elderly and disabled for closure with as little as a pen-stroke and torture themselves (and us) to death over their efforts to accommodate sites for a group of people no-one who pays them wants near the City at all.[/p][/quote]Welsh Govt will pay for the **** thieves, not the Council. As for them being half-wits, most of this Council are not even quarter-wits.[/p][/quote]We are paying for the time the council are spending on it. And yes, your estimation of our Labour administration's IQ is probably more accurate than mine but I was giving them the benefit of the doubt. Llanmartinangel

4:35pm Mon 25 Feb 13

Woodgnome says...

I have seen a post on a local forum website that this reported decision hasn't been on any Council agenda. Very interesting that SWA report says "Cabinet members decided" - but can someone tell me when and where this was decided?
I have seen a post on a local forum website that this reported decision hasn't been on any Council agenda. Very interesting that SWA report says "Cabinet members decided" - but can someone tell me when and where this was decided? Woodgnome

8:54pm Mon 25 Feb 13

Robodad says...

Calm down everyone, the longer this process carries on the longer it is before we have a site in Newport. Like portforever says, no-one wants them so the longer the consultation process takes, the longer before we have to find a permanent site for them. Maybe this is a well thought out process, drag your feet,keep changing your mind and hey-presto, 10 years later, we still don't have a site in Newport that we don't want.
Calm down everyone, the longer this process carries on the longer it is before we have a site in Newport. Like portforever says, no-one wants them so the longer the consultation process takes, the longer before we have to find a permanent site for them. Maybe this is a well thought out process, drag your feet,keep changing your mind and hey-presto, 10 years later, we still don't have a site in Newport that we don't want. Robodad

11:29am Tue 26 Feb 13

blackandamber says...

Can anybody please tell me why we the poor tax payer have to find sites for people to live in whose lifestyle involves travelling. They are probably not even British citizens. Here's the answer yes we will provide you with a site provided the HMRC are allowed to assess you for income tax, vat and I dare say in some cases corporation tax oh and council tax water rates etc.
Can anybody please tell me why we the poor tax payer have to find sites for people to live in whose lifestyle involves travelling. They are probably not even British citizens. Here's the answer yes we will provide you with a site provided the HMRC are allowed to assess you for income tax, vat and I dare say in some cases corporation tax oh and council tax water rates etc. blackandamber

2:02pm Tue 26 Feb 13

Llanmartinangel says...

In case any of you were still labouring under the misapprehension that we are in a democracy, you might like to read the attached pamphlet by the ex-disastrous health minister for Wales, now clearly finding something else to be bad at. For 10 points, can anyone name the political party she represents. A clue, it begins with 'L'.

http://ec.europa.eu/
justice/discriminati
on/files/roma_uk_str
ategy_annex1_en.pdf
In case any of you were still labouring under the misapprehension that we are in a democracy, you might like to read the attached pamphlet by the ex-disastrous health minister for Wales, now clearly finding something else to be bad at. For 10 points, can anyone name the political party she represents. A clue, it begins with 'L'. http://ec.europa.eu/ justice/discriminati on/files/roma_uk_str ategy_annex1_en.pdf Llanmartinangel

5:47pm Tue 26 Feb 13

33daverave says...

"....there is no specific duty on local authorities to provide sites for Gypsys and Travellers, there is a discretionary power.......".

That's sorted then, just tell them to sod off.
"....there is no specific duty on local authorities to provide sites for Gypsys and Travellers, there is a discretionary power.......". That's sorted then, just tell them to sod off. 33daverave

8:35am Wed 27 Feb 13

Woodgnome says...

"A spokeswoman for Newport Council said no further comment was available from on the issue and would not explain the term ‘deliverability’ which was cited as the reason for the review. "
This is very transparent governance isn't it?
Is there a more dishonest Council.in Wales? .
"A spokeswoman for Newport Council said no further comment was available from on the issue and would not explain the term ‘deliverability’ which was cited as the reason for the review. " This is very transparent governance isn't it? Is there a more dishonest Council.in Wales? . Woodgnome

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree