Advocates for the community say that the increased need is because local councils have “failed miserably in gypsy provision” in the past.
Dartford council’s local plan for 2024 – 2037 has recently been declared “sound” by the government’s Planning Inspectorate following a review process and is set for approval at a council meeting on April 22.
But, as part of the housing blueprint, the authority needs to deliver an extra 56 sites for Gypsies and Travellers and one more for travelling showpeople.
The site for showpeople, and 35 of the Gypsy and Traveller sites, need to be deliverable “in the next five years”, according to the Inspector’s report.
Joseph Jones, former director of the Gypsy Council, told the Local Democracy Reporting Service (LDRS): “There’s a massive need throughout Kent and throughout the whole country.”
He welcomed the expansion plans in Dartford, but added: “Every single part of Kent has failed miserably in gypsy provision.”
The campaigner argues sites allocated by the council are crucial for Gypsies and travellers.
“We’re not trying to segregate ourselves, what we’re trying to do is to stay within the community, but we also would like to have all the other privileges that everyone else is getting – we want employment, we want education, we want healthcare,” he added.
Of Dartford council’s land, more than half (56.3%) is designated Green Belt land – where much stricter rules for development apply due to proximity to the London Borough of Bexley.
A recent report by Philip Mileham, the planning inspector tasked by the government with reviewing Dartford’s local plan, details a pressing need to meet the growing demand for gypsy and traveller sites.
According to Mr Mileham, the council’s approach relies on the “intensification and expansion of sites” already owned by Travellers which would minimise the amount of green belt land needing to be released”.
But, he adds there is “significant competition” for land in Dartford.
And despite significant efforts to identify additional sites – including calls for sites and consideration of public land – “insufficient” numbers were identified to meet the need in full.
Therefore, he says there are “exceptional circumstances” which “justify changes to the green belt boundary in this instance”.
Mr Jones, who campaigns on behalf of the community, said: “We’re used to green belt, we’re used to green fields, that’s where we’ve lived for centuries because we’re constantly being pushed out to the peripheries of society.
“Green belt is okay because at the end of the day we’re pretty green.
“What space do we take up? You’re talking about a caravan, a car or maybe a truck, maybe two or three vehicles.”
Through the local plan process, councils can alter the boundaries of the green belt so as to allow development on land which otherwise would be protected.
Dartford council could meet some of the need for new pitches by expanding and intensifying existing green belt traveller sites.
The report identifies existing opportunities for this at sites in Eagle Farm in Wilmington, Eebs Stables in Trollingdown Hill, and Salinas at Darenth Wood Road.
The report also says that given the amount of land allocated for the Ebbsfleet Garden City development, the development corporation should “fully explore” its potential to accommodate sites for gypsies and travellers.
Dartford council leader Jeremy Kite (Con) told the LDRS: “At the heart of it [local plan process] is the need to balance the needs of all the residents and businesses across the borough.
“It’s not at all uncommon for people to make a case for more attention for particular communities and we encourage those voices as part of the process.
“At the end of the day though we need to be satisfied that we have made the best possible judgements based on solid evidence.
“Our proposals on gypsy and traveller accommodation may not satisfy everyone who has made representations or provide all the sites and spaces the community feel they need but we try to base our proposals on evidence and fairness.”
Opposition Labour leader Cllr Jonathon Hawkes has welcomed the local plan and its accommodation of traveller sites.
“It’s really positive that we’ve got a local plan ready for adoption and I’m confident it will be adopted by the council formally,” the Ebbsfleet councillor said.
“If there is not a plan in place it just makes it more likely that you’re going to get development that is unwelcome or unplanned and that’s where things can start to get difficult.”
On spaces for traveller sites, he added: “There always needs to be exceptional circumstances if you are releasing or doing things on green belt land.
“But, there isn’t available non-green belt land for pitches like this. It’s not the same thing at all as housing development.
“You do need to look at the practicality of it and there are not really available brownfield sites that can accommodate gypsy and traveller accommodation [in Dartford Borough].”
Local authorities must have approved local plans allocating sites for housebuilding, sites for travellers and showpeople, and business space over long periods of time.
If local authorities don’t have such plans, they are put into a “state of presumption” in favour of sustainable development – meaning they have to look more favourably on developments in areas they would otherwise like to reject.
Under the local plan, Dartford council has a target of 790 houses being built per year until 2037.
