Gypsy household face being kicked off their land after planning battle
Gypsies surrounded by new holiday park developments face being kicked off their own land after their plea for just four pitches was thrown out.
The Sykes family are seething after their application to reside permanently on the site half a mile from the village of Sheriff Hutton, near York, was unanimously rejected by councillors.
At the same meeting, the members voted through a proposal for a 28 pitch holiday caravan park less than half a mile away.
The Sykes family are now planning to appeal against the decision and enforcement action will be delayed pending the public inquiry by the Government’s planning inspectorate.
But if the appeal fails the extended family will be forced to vacate the land they purchased outright and lived on for two years without complaint.
Oathie Sykes and his family illegally set up home in the Yorkshire countryside, pictured here, and face being kicked off after their application to reside permanently on the site was unanimously rejected by councillors
At the same meeting, the members voted through a proposal for a 28 pitch holiday caravan park less than half a mile away despite the Sykes only requesting four pitches for their land
The Sykes’ plot is half a mile from the village of Sheriff Hutton (pictured), near York
It was only when they applied for formal planning consent for change of use earlier this year that more than 70 people and the parish council objected to the idea.
The family’s Oathie Sykes argued their fields were surrounded by a number of much larger holiday caravan parks, not counting the 28 pitch one that was approved at the same meeting.
There was also a million pound modern glass mansion just over the hill which had recently been completed, having been granted planning consent on appeal.
There was also a large new industrial estate just down the road a new build development of luxury homes nodded through for consent just half a mile down the road in the village.
He said: ‘My family has worked hard all their lives. We are not asking for anything and we do not bother anyone.
‘All I want is for my close-knit family to be able to live together on the land we own which cannot be seen from the road, and will be screened by the trees we have planted from the public footpath.
‘We are only asking for four pitches. It will be a postage stamp compared with all the development in the countryside which has already been agreed with no problem.
‘No one will see it. Some of the objections come from as far away as Malton and York – where they definitely won’t see it. They just don’t want gypsies here.’
Mr Sykes said: ‘All I want is for my close-knit family to be able to live together on the land we own which cannot be seen from the road’
‘Some of the objections come from as far away as Malton and York – where they definitely won’t see it. They just don’t want gypsies here,’ he added
However, locals from the town say that ‘the planning laws should apply equally to all’ with one adding: ‘There are specialist travellers’ sites in the area. There have been numerous complaints about noise and these complaints have never been investigated’
Many locals have been stung by the claims by the gypsies that to refuse the scheme would be a breach of their human rights, the Equality Act 2010 and the Children and Families Act 2014.
Villager John Hamilton, 76, told the North Yorkshire Council planning meeting on Thursday: ‘The planning laws should apply equally to all.’
He described the planning reported recommending approval for the scheme as ‘biased and discriminatory towards the objectors’, adding:
‘Approval should only be for short term temporary occupation for a maximum of five years for children who attend the local primary school to complete their education.
‘Seventy seven members of the public have submitted written objections.
‘It demonstrates the strength of local feeling against this proposal which is unauthorised development in the open countryside and which the council should have removed.
‘There are specialist travellers’ sites in the area. There have been numerous complaints about noise and these complaints have never been investigated.’
Penny Bean, Chairman of Sheriff Hutton Parish Council, told the meeting: ‘The parish council is utterly disgusted at the way this application has been dealt with.’
Members had not been informed by the planning authority of aspects for the revised scheme ‘which had a severely detrimental effect on the community. How could this happen?’
Pictured: Tara Park, one of the area’s official travellers sites
The family blamed ‘anti social behaviour’ of ‘intolerable’ residents for not wanting to live at the alternative site
After NYC admitted the parish council had accidentally dropped off its email list for distribution of the amended scheme, she added: ‘There have been a lot of blunders.
‘I understand what the travellers have said about their human rights but we have rights as well. Surely, more than 70 public objections should be taken into consideration.’
Councillors voted unanimously to reject the scheme on the grounds the amended plans, replacing a communal building with four smaller buildings to serve four pitches, did not reduce the impact on the open countryside.
Announcing an immediate appeal, family planning consultant Trevor Mennell told the committee: ‘The consequences of refusal of my clients’ planning application would leave his family homeless and the family having to find alternative schooling and medical practices.
‘The committee should be minded of its duties under the Equality Act 2010, and the Children and Families Act 2014.’
Councillors Caroline Goodrick, who chaired the meeting, said an enforcement action report would now be drawn up but no steps would be taken to remove the family pending the appeal.
