Council defends proposed Croft Traveller Transit Site as parish council voice concern

FOLLOWING yesterday’s revelation by Warrington Worldwide that a property and adjoining land in Croft have been identified as the preferred location for a proposed Gypsy and Traveller transit site, Warrington Borough Council has issued a detailed response defending the scheme while acknowledging concerns raised by Croft Parish Council.

The proposal, which still requires planning permission before any development can proceed, has already generated significant debate, with opponents questioning the suitability of the rural location and the lack of public consultation before the land purchase was approved by the council’s cabinet.
However, the council insists the scheme is intended to address a long-standing legal requirement while reducing the number of unauthorised encampments across Warrington.
A Warrington Borough Council spokesperson said: “We have a long-established requirement to provide a Gypsy and Traveller transit site in Warrington. The provision of a transit site will help the council meet its legal obligations under the Housing Act 2004 in relation to accommodation needs for the travelling community whilst helping to reduce unauthorised encampments across the borough.”
The council says a permanent transit site would also strengthen enforcement powers available to police.
The spokesperson added: “A permanent transit site would bring a number of benefits for Warrington. It would strengthen the council’s ability to manage unauthorised encampments by enabling the police to use powers available under Sections 62A-62E of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 to direct travellers to an authorised site within the borough. Failure to comply, or returning within three months after being directed away, may constitute an offence.”
Pointing to examples elsewhere in Cheshire, the council argues similar facilities have already proved effective.
The spokesperson added: “Transit sites have been used successfully in neighbouring authorities to provide short-term accommodation for travelling communities and to reduce unauthorised encampments. Halton Council has operated a transit site for several years and has seen significantly fewer unauthorised encampments. Since opening a transit site in early 2025, Cheshire East has also reported a reduction in the number and frequency of encampments, while Cheshire West and Chester is progressing plans for its own facility.”
The authority also highlighted the financial burden of dealing with unauthorised encampments without a dedicated facility.
The spokesperson continued: “As the council currently has no dedicated facility, it instead has to manage encampments on a case-by-case basis. In addition to the disruption caused by unauthorised encampments, the council incurs substantial costs relating to enforcement, legal action, officer time, land security measures and site clean-up. These recurring costs place significant pressure on council resources.”
The council confirmed that £2 million had already been earmarked for the project several years ago and revealed the scale of the search undertaken before identifying the Croft site.
The spokesperson said: “A capital allocation of £2 million was approved several years ago to identify, acquire and develop a suitable site. Warrington’s search for a suitable location has been ongoing for more than a decade, covering over 100 potential sites and attracting significant public and media interest. It remains a complex and sensitive issue. In late 2025, officers identified a property and parcel of land considered suitable for development as a transit site. Cabinet approval was sought to acquire the site and progress the necessary permissions and approvals. Given the historic challenges associated with identifying a suitable location, details were kept confidential while preliminary work was undertaken.”
According to the council, the proposed facility would be used only for short-term stays and would include basic amenities.
The spokesperson explained: “The proposed site would provide short-term accommodation, including amenity facilities such as showers, toilets, washrooms and laundry facilities. Occupancy would be limited to 28 days, with users required to pay fees and charges, including utility costs, in advance of their stay.”
Addressing criticism from Croft Parish Council and residents, the authority acknowledged the concerns but maintained the site had been selected after careful assessment.
The spokesperson said: “We recognise that no location is without challenges and understand the concerns raised by the Parish Council and local residents. However, in considering the wider needs of the borough, members support the principle of delivering an appropriately managed transit site. The location identified was considered suitable due to its proximity to the strategic road network and its limited impact on neighbouring properties.”
The council stressed that the proposal is still at an early stage and that residents will have the opportunity to formally object or support the scheme through the planning process.
The spokesperson concluded: “The development cannot proceed without planning permission. Any application will be subject to the normal planning process, which will be open, transparent and available for public scrutiny and comment.”
The proposed Croft site has become one of the most contentious planning issues in the borough in recent years. While the council argues it has a statutory duty to provide a transit site and points to evidence from neighbouring authorities that such facilities reduce unauthorised encampments and associated costs, many residents remain unconvinced that Croft is the right location.
When a planning application is submitted, it is expected to attract significant public interest, with supporters likely to argue that Warrington must fulfil its legal obligations, while opponents are expected to challenge both the choice of site and its potential impact on the surrounding community.

Could history be repeating itself over traveller site in Croft?