Cost of Traveller sites

Stuart Hardwicke CARRUTHERS made this Freedom of Information request to South Norfolk District Council

The request was refused by South Norfolk District Council.

From: Stuart Hardwicke CARRUTHERS

30 October 2008

Dear Sir or Madam,

SNDC has identified to the Secretary of State that it costs about
£150,000 for the Council to provide a pitch through its application
to establish a new traveller site on an existing site through the
grant of a planning consent. SNDC will recall that it was awarded
£1,116,000 to establish the Harford Bridge site.

Please provide copies of all costings developed by the SNDC
associated with its consultation to provide sites for travellers in
the District. This information should be available - by my estimate
funds of about £8 million will be needed. It is anticipated that
this will be from a mixture of grants and direct intervention by
the Council. If it is not available it is reasonably clear that the
SNDC is merely planning for something that it has no intention of
implementing.. Please identify where the funds are to come from -
and ensure that the funds for the Harford Bridge site are
identified seperately from any other provisional costings.

Please would you also identify if the staff of the Council are
required to stand when Cllr Fuller addresses them, and make a
pledge ?

Yours faithfully,

Stuart Hardwicke CARRUTHERS

Link to this

From: Right2Know
South Norfolk District Council

31 October 2008

Dear Mr Carruthers

I refer to your request which is being considered. You may be aware that we have 20 working days in which to respond to FOI requests and you will therefore hear from me again by 27 November 2008 or earlier if possible.

For your information, the Act defines a number of exemptions, which may prevent release of the information you have requested. There will be an assessment and if any of the exemption categories apply then some or all of the information may not be released. You will be informed if this is the case, including your rights of appeal.

There may be a fee payable for ‘reasonable disbursement’ costs such as postage and photocopying. This will be considered and you will be informed if a fee is payable. In this event the fee must be paid before the information is processed and released. The 20 working day time limit for responses is suspended until receipt of the payment.

If you have any queries or concerns then please let me know. If you do contact us again concerning this request, please quote FOI 08-185.

Joanna Kitchener
Scrutiny and Information Rights Officer
South Norfolk Council
Long Stratton, Norwich
NR15 2XE
01508 533602
www.south-norfolk.gov.uk

show quoted sections

Link to this

From: Right2Know
South Norfolk District Council

18 November 2008

Dear Mr Carruthers

In response to your Freedom of Information request, I should advise you
that Broadland Housing Association will develop the site for Gypsies and
Travellers at Harford, for which planning permission and Government
funding has been awarded. The Government grant of £1.16 million was
based on costings prepared by Broadland Housing Association, and will
shortly be paid to them, subject to a service-level agreement. You can
view the scheme of 100% Government grants for acquiring and developing new
authorised Gypsy and Traveller sites on the website of the Government's
Department of Communities and Local Government:

[1]http://www.communities.gov.uk/housing/st...
(Please note that this link may not work after 1 December 2008, when
responsibility for such grants will transfer to the Homes and Community
Agency.)

There has previously been an unauthorised encampment near the site of the
Harford planning permission. You appear to be assuming that the planning
permission will simply allow the occupation to continue on the same "bare
land" basis. That is not the case - the planning permission requires
extensive site works, and the land has been vacated to allow these works
to commence, possibly in January 2009. I suggest that you examine the
approved plans on the Council's website (planning permission reference:
2008/1137), so that you can see the scale of works proposed.

The Council has not yet prepared detailed costings of site acquisition and
development for further pitches, because it is currently engaged in a
consultation process on the proposed Gypsy and Traveller Development Plan
Document, and the location of sites is not finalised. By the Gypsy and
Traveller DPD Officer's calculation, this Council will require
approximately a further £3 million in grants from the Government for the
21 further pitches which the Regional Planning Authority (EERA) requires
in South Norfolk. Currently the estimated need in the East of England
region is for about 1100 pitches, but land acquisition costs may be higher
in counties nearer to London, so the total call on the Government's grant
budget (and on you as a taxpayer) may be higher than simply scaling up the
costings from Harford. Then of course there is the potential grant to
fund pitches in other regions, on which I have no information.

The answer to your final question is no.

Joanna Kitchener
Scrutiny and Information Rights Officer
South Norfolk Council
Long Stratton, Norwich
NR15 2XE
01508 533602
www.south-norfolk.gov.uk

show quoted sections

Link to this

From: Stuart Hardwicke CARRUTHERS

10 December 2008

Dear Right2Know,

Please identify and provide copies of all documents associated with
the Service Level Agreement. The application was made by the SNDC.

The SNDC is responsible for its application.

Yours sincerely,

Stuart Hardwicke CARRUTHERS

Link to this

From: Right2Know
South Norfolk District Council

22 December 2008


Attachment Pl appn 2008 1137.pdf
58K Download View as HTML


Dear Mr Carruthers

You state below, "The application was made by the SNDC."

I have previously advised you that this is not the case and to assist, I attach a copy of the front page of the application which states that Broadland Housing Association is the applicant.

In light of this, under section 14(1), the Freedom of Information Act 2000 states that "Section 1(1) does not oblige a public authority to comply with a request for information if the request is vexatious."

Requests around this issue have been raised by you before and this request can be classed as vexatious as I believe the request could be seen as being designed to cause disruption or annoyance, lacks any serious purpose or value and also the request can fairly be seen as obsessive. In my view, this request is unreasonable and vexatious, and is therefore outside the scope of the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

I intend to follow the latest guidance (version 4) of the Information Commissioner's guidance on vexatious requests which states that,

"You will not need to issue a new refusal notice if you have already given the same person a refusal notice for a previous vexatious or repeated request and it would be unreasonable to issue another one."

As you know, several of your previous FOI requests have been classed as vexatious and one, FOI 08-103 has been appealed to the Information Commissioner. In light of that appeal, I consider that a further internal review would not be appropriate and I confirm therefore we will not be offering the opportunity of an internal panel to consider my decision.

If you wish to take this further, you will need to appeal to the Information Commissioner, and I attach the contact details below for your information:

Office of the Information Commissioner
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire SK9 5AF
Tel: 01625 545745
Email: [email address]
Website: http://www.ico.gov.uk/

Joanna Kitchener
Scrutiny and Information Rights Officer
South Norfolk Council
Long Stratton, Norwich
NR15 2XE
01508 533602
www.south-norfolk.gov.uk

show quoted sections

Link to this

From: Stuart Hardwicke CARRUTHERS

22 December 2008

Dear Right2Know,

The applicant for the Grant aid was SNDC.. The application for
planning consent was Broadland.. anyone can make an application for
planning consent.

I wish to see the Grant Application and associated documentation
with costing's etc.

Yours sincerely,

Stuart Hardwicke CARRUTHERS

Link to this

From: Right2Know
South Norfolk District Council

31 December 2008

Dear Mr Carruthers

As I have previously decided that this request is vexatious, please note I will not be corresponding any further with you on this topic. If you are still dissatisfied please refer to the Information Commissioner as detailed in my previous email.

Joanna Kitchener
Scrutiny and Information Rights Officer
South Norfolk Council
Long Stratton, Norwich
NR15 2XE
01508 533602
www.south-norfolk.gov.uk

show quoted sections

Link to this

S.J.Wiltshire left an annotation (23 April 2009)

Dear Mr.Carruthers,I too have had many vexatious answers to my F.O.I.requests regarding all types of questions around travellers and traveller sites.Please publish any accurate data.I cannot accept their reasons for witholding this type of information.I know various agencies for a number of years have collected and collated this type of information.Getting it out of them seems to be the problem as is how they are spending what money used.

Link to this

C. P. ELLIOTT left an annotation (23 April 2009)

It is understood that Department Communities and Local Government are investigating anomalous claims by the SNDC.

It would additionally appear that since about 2003 40 per cent of the Council's enforcement actions against anyone have been against travellers without taking account of Human Rights issues. The Human Rights issues are determined by the planning officer in consultation with the Council's solicitor.

Link to this

Things to do with this request

Anyone:
South Norfolk District Council only: