INDEX
1986
January - December MINUTE INDEX 1986
ACCESS TO INFORMATION
Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985: 24,198,283 Local Government (Access to Information) Extension Bill: 25,135 Public Participation in Local Government: 373,400
ALLOTMENTS
Relocation of Deepdene Avenue Site: 41,46,2]1 Allotment Competition 1986: 273,447
ANGL LAN WATER AUThORITY
Restriction of Development; 33,181 Review of River Quality Objectives: 98 Ferry Road Pumping Station, Hulibridge: 99,178,580 Introduction of Water Metering: 107 Capital Programme 1986/87 — 1989/90: 179 Sewer Problems in Great Wakering: 180 Environmental Protection under a Privatised Water Industry: 308
AUDIT
Depot Services Review: 389,400 CAPITAL PROGRAMME
Capital Programme 1986/87: 15 Capital Programme 1986/87 — Public Conveniences: 62,147 Capital Programme 1985/86 — Rupert Jarvis Court, Buckingham Road, Hockley: 200 Hockley Woods — Car Park and Information Centre: 274 Mainframe Computer Replacement; 386 Computer Services Directorate — Accommodation: 387
CARAVAN SITES
Unauthorised Caravan — Land at Crouchman's Court, Poynters Lane, Shoeburyness: 168 Riverside Trailer Park, Wallasea Island, Rochford: 377
CAR PARKING
Hullbridge Playing Field: 80 Mill Hall Car Park — Access to Regal Cinema Site, Rayleigh: 106 Car Parking Charges: 124,147 District of Rochford (0ff—Street Parking Places) (Amendment) Order: 124,606 Golden Cross Parade Car Park: 189 Back Lana Car Park — Resurfacing: 344 Unauthorised Use of Hockley Car Park; 381 Grove Playing Field Car Park: 525 Back Lane Car Park: 605 Gateway Food Market, 12—24 Eastwood Road, Rayleigh: 620 Hockley Car Park — Site for Old People's flay Centre 363(A)(2)
CEXETERIE S
Provision of Cemetery for Rayleigh: 321,400 Joint Crematorium Study: 361(F),369,400,519
CHARGES
Review of Charges — Health & Housing Services Committee: 51,147 Review of Charges — Leisure Services Committee: 75,126(u) Car Parking Charges: 124,147 Review of Charges — Policy & Resources Committee: 126(i) Charges for Acupuncturists: 240
Contd/.. CLEMENTS HALL LEISURE CENTRE
Clements Hall Second Access — Accommodation Works: 20 Supervision of Swimming Pools: 78 Water Flume: 83,147,576 Haltern Suite — Conversion into Snooker Centre: 157,218,266,475 Clements Hall Swimming Pool — Use by Disabled: 263 Weights Room and Creche: 264 Storage: 265 Relocation of Leisure Offices and Parks Operation: 275,524 Business Exhibition: 365 Clements Hall — Spencers Nursery: 472,525 "Children in Need" Broadcast: 476,564,625 Meeting: Southend Cancer Treatment Centre: 521 Locker System for Swimming Pool Changing Rooms:
COAST PROTECTION
Seawall Construction: 205 Hullbridge Foreshore — Erosion: 581
COMMITTEES — FANKLS OF
Staffing Sub—Committee: 12(A) ,122(A) ,122(D) ,197(B) ,361(B)(C) Economic Development Panel: 12(B) ,46,197(A), 361(D) Smoking at Panel Meetings: 68 Rochford Show Working Party — Charitable Status: 77 Water Flume Working Party: 83,122(B) Chairman's Panel: 197 (C) ,361 (F) Audit Panel: 122(B), 122(C),122(F),281,361(E),361(H) Rate Consultation Panel: 12 2(E) Hackney Carriage Panel: 193,261 ,582 Appointment of Panels of Committees: 234 Twinning Panel: 361(A) Emergency Panel: 361(G) Widdicoinbe Panel: 423,527 District Plan WorkingParty: 51)5 ,583
COMMITTEES AND REPORTS OF
Finance Report: 13,123,19Q Local Government Bill: 26 Health & Housing — Information Report: 55 Planning Services — Deferred Planning Applications: 151 Cycle of Meetings 1986/87: 198(B) information/Statistical Reports: 198(C) Appointment of Standing Committees 1986/87: 233 Southend Health Authority Matters — Report to Policy and Resources: 310 Engineering Works 1986/87: 349 Planning Services 24/7/86 — Outstanding Business: 397 Development Services Committee — Provision of Pedestrian Crossings: 400 Pupils of St. Thomas More High School — Visit to Development Services Committee: 495 Committee Agenda, Reports and Minutes — Binders: 599
Contd/ ...... COMMITTEE STRUCTURE
Appointment of Standing Committees 1986/87: 233 Appointment of Panels, Sub-Committees etc. 1986/87: 234 Meetings Timetable 1986/87: 235,600
COMMUNITY CENTRES
Rayleigh Grange Community Centre — Future Management: 276,305
COMPULSORY PURCHASE ORDERS
Hulibridge Foreshore: 581
COMPUTERS
Housing Benefits — Computer System: 129 Leisure Directorate Computer System: 141 Mainframe Computer Replacement: 386 C—View Sponsorship: SF3
CONCESSIONARY SCHEMES Transport Act 1985 — Effect upon Schemes: 23,138
CONFERENCES
National Playing Fields Association Conference 1986: 210 C.I.P.F.A. Conference 1986: 375(A) A.B.C. Conference: 375(B)
CONSERVATION GRANTS
Financial Assistance towards Repairs to Historic Buildings: 603
CONTRACTS
Contract 1155 — Replacement of Windows, Flats, Rochford: 34 Contract 1156 — Electrical Rewiring — Various Dwellings: 34 Contract 1054 — Spa Court Lift Installation: 59 Contract 1010 — Britton Court Extension, Rayleigh: 60 Contract 1095 — Development at Lodge Close, Rayleigh: 61 Contract 1176 — Annual Supply of Building Materials: 71 Contract Progress Reports: 82,203,269,320,477,552 Contract 1149 — Land Drainage, Tiedgehope Avenue, Rayleigh: 100,204 Contract 968 — 17, South Street, Rochford: 131 Contract 1016 — Buckingham Road A.P. Scheme: 169 Contract 1135 — Golden Cross Parade Car Park: 189 Contract for the Purchase of Refuse vehicles: 213 Contract 1153 — External Painting and Repairs — Ct. Wakering: 245 Contract 1128 — Cleaning of Elderly Persons Schemes: 296,532 Contract 1198 — Works in Void Properties: 323(a) Contract 1152 — External Repairs and Decoration to Council Dwellings: 323(b) Contract 1195 — Re—roofing, New Road, Ct. Wakering: 323(c) Contract 1196 — Replacement of Windows — Canewdon/Gt.Wakering: 323(d) Contract 1217 — Window Replacement, Rochford and Stambridge: 384 Contract 1227 — Replacement of Various Bedford Vehicles: 436 Contract 1197 — Cleaning of Sports Centres: 482 Contract 1186 — New Coffee Lounge, Mill Hall: 483 Contract 1199 — Cleaning of Council offices: 531 COUNCILLORS
R.A. Pearson: 28 Miss D.M. Stow: 47,110,118 J.A. Gibson: 86,223,227,306,401 R.D. Foster: 117 Para.29 Mrs. L.A. Holdich: 117 Para.30,220 Para.7, 559 Para.l9, 632 Para.17 Royal Garden Parties: 137 D.R. nelson: 147, 408 Para.S37, 628 B. Taylor: 162 ,225 B.A. Crick: 165,319,366,417,448,449 ,453(c),626 L.K. Cope: 172,224,225 A.J. Harvey: 210,229,400 C.J. Gardner: 220 Para. 7 K.E. Banks: 225 Mrs. t.M.A. Campbefl—ta1ey: 225 M.J. Jones: 225 J.E. Nokes: 225 W.H. Budge: 228 Appointment of Chairman, Vice—Chairman and Leader of Council 227 ,228,229 Appointment of Chairman's Chaplain: 230 Record of Councillors' Attendances: 232 Members with Special Responsibility for Disabled: 237 J.A. Sheaf: 296 S.H. Silva: 306,343,366 ,40l ,416,503,538 D.F. Flack: 306,521 ,538 I R.H. Boyd: 319 , 401,449 , 453 (c) , 626 C.R. Morgan: 366 D.A. Weir: 400,443 Para.23 Miss B.G.J. Lovett: 400 Mrs. P.E. Hawke: 443 Para. 14, 559 Para. 17 Mrs. M.A. Weir: 443 Para. 23 Mrs. E.M. Heath: 446 T.L. Dean: 490 Para.24, 628 M.J. Handford: 514 Mrs. S.J. Lemon: 514,626 Mrs. E.M. Hart: 521 Mrs. M. Hunnable: 521 C.JB. Faherty: 562 Mrs. L. Walker: 569
COUNCIL PROPERTY AND PREMISES
Smoking in Council Buildings: 68,79 Huilbridge Playing Field — Car Parking: 80 Access to Regal Cinema Site, Bellingham Lane, Rayleigh: 106 17, South Street, Rochford: 131 Council Depot — Disposal of land and provision of Industrial Units: 142,287,413,434 Picture Display, Mill Hall, Rayleigh: 146 King George's Playing Field, Rayleigh — Festival of Sport: 160 Relocation of Leisure Services Offices: 197 ,275 Maintenance of Council Dwellings and Civic Buildings: 244 Grove Road Field — Changing Accommodation: 271 Hockley Woods — Management: 274 Civic Suite — Refreshment Are-a: 289
Contd/ ...... COUNCIL PROPERTY AND PREMISES (COMm!...)
Depot Services — Review: 389,400 Civic Suite, Rayleigh — Use for Rochford Magistrates Court: 401(a),416 Cleaning of Sports Centres: 482 Location of Computer Centre: 510 Servicing and Repair of Domestic Gas Appliances: 549 Hulibridge Foreshore — Erosion: 581
COUNCIL RECOGNITION
Mr & Mrs H. Odd — Help to OAP Day Centre: 45 Mr. F. Ford — Aid to the Elderly and Handicapped: 45 Mr. C. Wallace: — Rochford OAP Welfare Committee: 45 dive Donaghue — Scouts Award: 45 Mr. P. James — Courageous Rescue: 146 Timothy Saunders — Accident Recovery: 146 Tributes to Mr. George Young and Hr. William wright: 399 visitors from Watauga, Texas: 399 Remembrance Day Service: 534
CROUCH HARBOUR.
Council Contributions to Crouch Harbour Authority: 19 DEEMED PLANNING CONSENTS
Siting of Demountable, Hockley School: 76,362(A) Car Parking Spaces — New Crested Court, Rochford: 170 Sanctuary Housing Association — Group Home, Victoria Avenue, London Road, Rayleigh: 175,197(c) Sites for Residential Development, Rayleigh: 175,191,378 Relocation of Deepdene Allotment Site: 211 Clements Hall Leisure Centre — Storage: 265,414(C) Park Sports Centre — Storage: 265 Relocation of Leisure Directorate: 275 Relocation of Demountable, 57 South Street, Rochford 287, 414(a) SEETEC — Siting of Portakabin Extension: 288,362(C) Rochford Reservoir — Miniature Railway: 293 Wardens Garages/Electricity Sub—Station, Buekingham Road, Hockley: 311 Mill Hall Coffee Lounge: 329,362(B) Safestore Buildings — Community Programme: 362(A) Extension to Car Park, Back Lane, Rochford: 414(B) Pembroke House, Rochford: 457 Spa Court, Hockley: 457 New Computer Centre, r/o Finance Department, Rochford: 510,530,555,598 Changing Room Unit, Grove Road Open Space, Rayleigh: 555,566 Brooklands Public Open Space, Rayleigh: 565
DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY
Delegated Powers — Director of Development: 38,206 Smoking in Leisure Buildings — Director of Leisure: 79 Director of Health and Housing — Housing Act 1985: 167(i) Secretary to the Council — Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960: 167(u) Secretary to the Council — Goods Vehicles Operators' Licences 419 Director of Health and Housing — Came Dealers Licensing: 517
DISABLED PERSONS
Difficulties in Rayleigh: 89 CEDAR Centre — Employment Centre for the Disabled: 132 Member with Special Responsibility for the Disabled: 237 Disabled Persons and Access to Information: 198,283
DOG FOULING
Dog Fouling at Rayleigh Mount: 479 Dog Fouling in public places: 628
DOMESDAY ANNIVERSARY
Chairman's Theme: 227
DRUG ABUSE
Smelly Stickers: 69,147 ELECTIONS
Review of Electoral Arrangements: 27,46,429 District Council Elections: 225
EMPLO'YMENT AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVES
Shuttlewoods Boatyard, Pagleaham: 12(Z) Industrial Promotions Budget: 197(A)(1) Rate Relief on Industrial Property: 197(A) (2) Hockley Foundry: 197(A)(3)(4) Essex Industry and Business Exhibition: 221 Chairman's Theme: 226 Pilot Employment Initiative Schemes: 361(D) In Search of Economic Initiatives: I 365,515 Youth Enterprise Centre at Basildon: 515,614 Unit 11, Rawreth Industrial Estate: 515 Warehouse Use — Dollymans Farm, London Road, Rayleigh: 515 Rochford Young Entrepreneur of the Year Award: 614
ESSEX COUNTY COUNCIL
Structure Plan Review — Employment Land Uses: 191 County Policy on Signs: 350 Consultations on County Hatter Planning Applications: 394 County Land rio Erookiands, Rayleigh: 433,448 Meeting re Highway Maintenance Policy: 500 Provision of Horse Riding Facilities: 509 Essex Bill: 609 Rochford Library — Hours of Opening: 611
B STIMATES
Revenue Budget 1986/87: 14 Subscriptions 1986/87: 18 Supplementary Estimate — Clements Hall Second Access: 20 Supplementary Estimates — Britton Court and Lodge Close: 127 1985/86 Revised Estimates — Virements: 128 Supplementary Estimate — Buckingham Road A.P Scheme: 169 Contrib-utions Towards "Essex Coast and Countryside' leaflet: 572 FOOTPAThS
Diversion of Footpath 23 Hawkwell: 97 Provision of Footway in Ashingdon Road, Roehford2 257 Walkable Verge — Stambridge: 257 Tynedale House Footpath to Ferry Road: 339,400
FUNERAL ARRM4GEMENTF S
Mrs. J.F. Chivers (Deceased): 372 GRANTS AND LOANS
Grant Aid to Outside Bodies 1986/87: 17,119 Contributions to Crouch Harbour Authority: 19 Homers Corner, Rochford: 39,404 Southend Enterprise Agency Ltd: 202 Transfer Allowance for Older Tenants; 317 Police Convalescence & Rehabilitation Trust: 420 C—View Sponsorship; 515 !!l P1' i I'I9f" ! ! !N1! '•i U!?I!I ' P'PiiiiJ'J 'H'Jf qI
BACKNEY CARRIAGES
Hackney Carriage Licence Applications: 193 Minutes of Hackney Carriage Panel; 261,582 Licensing of Private Hire Vehicles — Mini Buses: 592
HEALTh AND SAFETY
Storage of Crates — Nagees Nurseries, Hockley: 65 Public Safety Information Bill: 67 Supervision at Swimming Pools: 78
HIGHWAYS
Rayleigh Orange Village Development: 32 Installation of Wheelchair Ramps — Rayleigh: 89 Rayleigh Weir Underpass Scheme: 89,257 Hockley Road — Overtaking Restrictions: 90 Clements Hall Way — Traffic Management: 90 Proposed Pedestrian Crossing — Main Road, Havkwell; 91 B1013 Access to Southend: 92,147,498,588 Traffic Signs for Tourist Attractions: 93 Paglesham Primary School — Change of Use — Highway Implications; 94 Petition re Bramerton Road, Bockley: 186 Stopping Up Order — Crested Court, Rochford: 187 Bus Lay-Bye — Rayleigh: 257 Maintenance Work: 257 Motion Regarding Provision of Pedestrian Crossings; 306 Alfreda Avenue, Hullbridge — Unmade Road: 338 The Drive/The Walk, Hullkbridge — Unadopted Streets: 339,400,586 Provision of Pedestrian Crossings — Eastwood Road, Rayleigh: 343,400 Pedestrianisation of Rayleigh and Rocliford Town Centres: 361(P),515 Provision of Pedestrian Crossings — Ashingdon Road, Rochford: 400 Provision of Pedestrian Crossings — Bull Lane, Rayleigh: 401(b) Omnibus Shelter, Eastwood Road, Rayleigh: 426,504 Al2 Chelasford By—Pass: 498 Problems at Greensward Lane, Rockley: 498 Indiscriminate Parking — Rayleigh: 498 Highway Maintenance Policy: 500,591 Provision of Pedestrian Crossings: 503,535,579 Inplementation of Part XI of the Highways Act 1980: 386,626 By—Way No. 2 — Gusted Hall Lane to Flemmings Farm Road: 587
HOUSE PURCHASE LOANS
R.P.L. Arrears: 53 Local Authority Mortgage Interest Rates: 165,417
ROUS INC (See also Improvement Grants Unfit Rouses Municipal Housing Housing Benefits House Purchase Loans Housing Act 1980 — Right to Buy)
ContdJ.. HOUSING (CONTD/..)
National Mobility Scheme: 56 Spa Court Lift Installation: 59 Britton Court Extension, Rayleigh: 60 Development at Lodge Close, Rayleigh: 61 Council House Repairs: 242,305 Maintenance of Council Dwellings and Civic Buildings: 244 Transfer Allowance for Older Tenants: 317 Council Housing Stock — Provision of Central Heating: 319,400,460 Housing Act 1985 — False Statement by Applicant: 3R5 King George's Close, Rayleigh: 458 Homelessness: 45Q Programme of Pre—Painting Repairs and Decoration 1987/88: 462 Servicing of Domestic Gas Appliances: 549
HOUSING BENEFITS
Changes in Housing Benefit Scheme: 122(C) Reform of Housing Benefits: 129
HOUSING INVESTMENT PROGRAMME (HIPS)
}I.I.P.S. 1986/87 — House Renovation Grants: 54 H.I.P.S. Bid 1987/88: 282,318 H.I.P.S. 1986/87 — Amendments re Spa Court and Pembroke House: 318,424 IMPROVEMENT GRANTS
House Renovation Grants: 54 LAND
Land West Side of Wadham Park Avenue, Hockley: 43 Land rio Bull Public House, Hockley: 81 Grove Road Open Space: 84 Disposal of Land Adjacent to 187 Rochford Garden Way: 105 Council Depot — Disposal of Land: 142 Rulibridge Foreshore 158,272,328,526 Land in Rayleigh — Housing Association — Care in the Community Project: 175 Sites for Residential Development: 175,197,329,378 Land Adjacent to 21, London Hill, Rayleigh: 216 Land at Wellington Avenue, Hulibridge: 217 Land Adjacent to Crown Bingo Hall, Crown Bill, Rayleigh: 249 Land at North Street, Ct. Wakeririg: 252 I Land at Hambro Hill, Rayleigh; 294,301,307,346,379,425,518 Land at Romney Marsh, Rochford: 318(2),356,437 Land North of the Gattens, Rayleigh (Dekkers Wood): 353 MAFF Land at Rayleigh West; 354 Playspace 2000 — King George V Playing Field: 363,446,523,537 Land at Locks Hill Area, Rochford: 388 Land at Brooklyn Drive and Downhall Road, Rayleigh: 428 County Land rio Brooklands, Rayleigh: 433 Land rio South Street, Rochford: 474 Sale of MAFF Land: 623
LEISURE - GENERAL
Rochford Leisure Bus: 31,622 Smoking in Leisure Buildings: 68,79 Supervision of Swimming Pools: 78 Signposting of Tourist Attractions: 93,350 Children's Play Equipment: 147,525 Children's Playgrounds — Replacement of Equipment: 159,471 Sports Council — Festival of Sport; 160 Youth Facilities: 161 Rochford Leisure Membership Scheme: 267,430,573 Sport Aid — The Race Against Time: 268 Grove Road Playing Field — Changing Accommodation: 271,305,469,514,555,566 Hockley Woods — Management: 274,305 Rochford Regatta: 304 King George V Playing Field — Playspace 2000: 363,446,523,537 Training Facilities for Essex Games: 376 Rayleigh Town Cycle Race: 399 Arts Development in Essex — Some Ways Forward: 468 Play Area, Fyfield Path, Rayleigh 470 Action Sport Scheme: 478,514 The Ernie Adcock Trophy: 567,625 Ashingdon Playing Field — Putting Green: 568 Youth Facilities, Ashingdon Playing Field Pavilion; 569 King George V Playing Field — Bowling Green: 570 Horse Riding Facilities: 593
Contdi.. LICENCES AND LEASES
Lease of Cedar Centre, Rayleigh: 182 Grant Easement, Former Regal Cinema Site, Rayleigh: 106,215 Hay Croppin,g Licence — Little Wheatleys Farm, Rayleigh: 347 Rochford Old Peoplets Day Centre: 370,432,604 Caravan Site Licence — Riverside Trailer Park: 377 Goods Vehicle Operators Licences: 419 Easement — Land rio Council Offices, Rochford: 506 Game Dealers Licensing: 517 King George V Playing Field Bowling Green: 570 Car Parking Licence to Simpson, Robertson & Edgingtcn: 606
LISTED BUILDINGS (HISTORIC)
I Homers Corner, Rochford: 39,404 Historic Boundary Walls rio Council Offices, Rochford: 435
LOCAL AUTHORI2! MORTGAGES
Local Authority Mortgage Interest Rates: 165,417 MANPOWER SERVICES COMMISSION
Community Programme: 76,615 Community Programme — British Rail: 136 MSC Ditch Survey: 182 Action Sport Scheme: 478,514
MEALS ON WHEELS
Daily Charge: 126(u) Rayleigh Meals on Wheels: 201
MEETINGS WITH LOCAL ORGANISATIONS
Rockley Community Association/Rochford Sports Council: 29 Grange Village Public Meeting: 36 Rochford Sports Council: 74,376 British Rail Unreliability: 103,147,535 Southend Cancer Treatment Service: 520
MILL HALL
New Coffee Lounge, including Delft Tile Collection: 156,27O,277,329,362(B),382,48O,483 Role as a Community Resource: 361(C)
MUNICIPAL HOUSING - DEVELOPMENT
Britton Court Extension, Rayleigh: 60,127 Development at Lodge Close, Rayleigh: 61,127 Rupert Jarvis Court, Buckingham Road, Hockley: 169,200 New Crested Court, rio Council Offices, Rochford: 170 Lift Installation — Pembroke House: 171 Extension to Spa Court, Hockley: 424 Extension to Pembroke House, Rochford: 424
MUNICIPAL HOUSI — GENERAL
Housing Stock — Provision of Central Heating 460 NATIONAL REPOSITORY FOR NUCLEAR WASTE
Bradwell Proposals: 139,141 Shallow Burial Opposition: 538,607 Essex Against DumpIng: 538,607 OFFICE ACCOMMODATION
Leisure Directorate: 275,524 Computer Services Directorate: 387 Cleaning of Council Offices: 531
OFFICE EQUIPMENT
Telephone Dictation Recording Equipment: 21 Disposal of Print Room Equipment: 383 Improving Telephone Performance: 515 Replacement of Shredders and Review of Photocopying and Reprographic Services: 618,626
OUTSIDE EPODLES I
Grant Aid to Outside Bodies 1986/87: 17 Subscriptions 1986/87: 18 Essex South War Pensions Commitee: 28 Hockley Community Association/Rochford Sports Council: 29 Appointment of Representatives to Outside Bodies & Organisations 1986/87: 236 School Governing Bodies: 285 Southend Airport Consultative Committee: 608 PARK SPORTS CENTRE Storage: 265 1Iardsurface Between School and Sports Centre; 364
PUBLIC CONVENIENCES
Crown Hill, Rayleigh: 62 Old Ship Lane, Rochford: 62 Safeguards Against Vandalism: 147
PTJBLIC/KNVIRONMENTAL REALTh
Noise Nuisance — Gee Vee Fitments, 49 Brook Road, Rayleigh: 64 Odour Nuisance — Magees Nurseries, Hockley: 65 Chemical Spillage — Ever Ready Batteries, Hockley: 66 Ferry Road Pumping Station, Hullbridge: 99 Control of Acupuncturists: 240,312 Meat (Sterilisation and Staining) Regulations 1982: 313 Smoke Nuisance — Former Wyle Cop, Hockley Road, Rayleigh: 371
PTJBLICIfl
Rochford — The Public Image: 290 Rochford News: 291.
PUBLIC OPEN SPAGES
Grove Road Open Space: 84 Horse Riding Routes Across Public Open Space: 473 Rayleigh Mount — Dog Fouling: 479 RATE RELIEF Rayleigh Town Sports and Social Club: 368 Canewdon Community Association: 516
RATES GENERAL
On—Line Rating System: 122(C)(ii) District Race 1986/87: 125,143,147 Green Paper "Paying for Local Government": 130,422 General Rate 1985/86 — Irrecoverable Items: 367 Making the Rate 1981/88: 601
RAYLEIGH PARISH STATUS Review of Electoral Arrangements: 27,46J29 Motion Regarding Parish Statue for Rayleigh: 306,366,400
RAYLEIGH (DNSERVATION AREAS
Mulberry Tree at Barringtons, }Iockley Road: 30
REFUSE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL
Wheeled Bin Scheme — Capital Allocation: 15,546 Supply of Household Refuse Sacks 1986/87: 22 Wheeled Bin Cleansing Service: 63 Purchase of Refuse Vehicles: 213 Bottle Bank Service: 281,305,548 Save—a—Can Scheme: 281 Refuse Collection — Change in Collection Days: 314 Refuse Tipping at South Fambridge: 542 Litter: 547,602 Laird "Rotopress" Refuse Freighter: 621
RENTS
Housing Rents 1986/87: 16 Rent Collection and Arrears: 52 Housing Rent Arrears — Irrecoverable Debt: 174
ROACH VALLEY CONSERVATION ZONE
Minutes of the Group of Representatives: 101,183,341 "Woods of South East Essex" Publication: 102,342,536
ROCHFORD LOCAL DISTRICT PLAN
Revisions to Draft Plan: 107,260,505 Fambridge Works Site, South Fambridge 190 Deposit for Public Inspection 707 Local Plan Inquiry: 583,610 S.E.E..T.E.C.
Siting of Portakabin Extension: 288
SELECTIVE TENDERING Waiving of Standing Order 4.4 — Selective Tendering Procedures, Back Lane Car Park Re—Surfacing: 344
SEWERS
Hedgehope Avenue, Rayleigh: 7 Ferry Road Pumping Station, ilulibridge: 99,178 Sewer Surcharges, Ct. Wakering: 180 Private Sewer Blockages — Revision of Contract: 357,511 Foul Sewerage System — South Fambridge 508
SMOKING
"The Big Kill' — Smoking Epidemic in England: 68
SOUTREND AIRPORT
Petition on Noise Nuisance — Southend Airport: 454,541,626
SOUTHEND HEALTh AUTHORITY
Relocation of Cancer Treatment Centre: 50,224,360,449(b).,452,521 Griffiths Reorganisation of Health Service: SO Operational Plan 1986/87: 50 Charter for a Democratic health Service: 133,284 Reprovision of Services for the Elderly and the Closure of Shoehury Hospital: 453(a) Operational Plan 1987/90: 453(B),626 Review of Primary Health Care Services: 453(C) Dental Treatment Services: 449(a)(C),453(C) Essex Ambulance Service Operation Plan 1987—1990: 543 Nursing Shortages: 551
SPORT
See: Leisure General
STAFF — A.P.T. & C.
Principal Assistant (Audit): 8 Fixed Term Contracts: l2(A),529 Mr. D. Deejcs — Chief Accountant: 118 Hiss G. Ward — Memento of Service: 197(B)(2) Catering Manager — Interviews: l97(B)(5) Staff Authorisations — Control of Acupuncturists: 240 Authorisation of Prosecuting Officers: 286,418 Mr. I.M. Edwards, Director of Development: 408 Para.S39,509 Para.29 Chief Executive — Fees to MENCAP: 597(C) STAFF - GENERAL
Relocation Expenses: 197(B) (3) Revised Scheme for Staff Handbook: 191(E)(4) Relocation of Leisure Directorate: 275 Superannuation Regulations: 361(C) Medical Examinations: 597(C) Car Leasing Scheme: 597(C) Staff Appraisal: 597(C)
STAFF — MANUAL
Community Programme Employees: 76 Loss of Tool Kit — Ex—gratia Payment: 361(B) Environmental Maintenance — Parks Section: 571,626
STANDING ORDERS
Amendments to Financial Standing Regulations: 122(c),515 Waiving of Standing Order 4.4 — Selective Tendering Procedures: 344,530,622 STREET LIGHTING
Street Lighting — Rochford District: 95,185,258,305,498 Footpath — Nursery Close, Daws Heath Road, Rayleigh: 499
STREET NAMING
Development at East! Street, !Rochford: 104(i) Development at Curtis Way, Rayleigh: 104(u) Development at Seaview Drive, Great Wakering: 188 Naming and Numbering of Rawreth Lane, Rayleigh: 351 Development of Site at Regal Cinema, Rayleigh: 352,507 Development at Kent Cottage, White Hart Lane, Hawkwell: 589 Development off Little Wheatley Chase, Rayleigh: 612
SUNDAY TRADING
Texas Homecare Ltd., Purdeys Industrial Estate, Rochford: 315,619 Essex Plan Ltd., Rayleigh Lanes Market, High Street, Rayleigh: 315,619 Queensway Discount Warehouse, Purdeys Industrial Estate, Rochford: 455
SURFAGE WATER (See Also: Sewers)
Surface Water Drainage, Hedgehope Avenue, Rayleigh: 7,100 Surface Water and Land Drainage — AWA Provision: 179 Problems at Beichamps Way, Hawkwell: 179 Surface Water Land Drainage — Lower Road, Hullbridge: 348 TEACH-INS AND SEMINARS
Departmental Teach—Ins: 12 2(A) ,134 Seminar — "Out from the Shadows": 133,241 Repository tar Nuclear Waste — Eradwell: 139,147,374 Radio Essex — Teach—In: 209,415 Essex Industry and Business Exhibition: 221,415 Flood Prevention and Coastal Protection: 374 Findings of the Widdicombe Report: 400 Provision of Members Teach—Ins: 515 Planning Function Teach—In: 613
TOURISM
Traffic Signs for Tourist Attractions: 93,35p Tourism — Essx Coast and Countryside Leaflet: 572
TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING Grange Village, Rayleigh: 36,37 Homers Corner, Rochford: 39 Access to Regal Cinema Site, Bellingham Lane, Rayleigh: 106,215 Fambridge Works, South Fambridge: 109,190 Identification of Horse Riding Routes: 184 Structure Plan Review — Employment Land Uses: 191 The 1987/88 Transport Policies and Programmes and Public Transport Plan: 192,208 Proposed Doctors Surgery — Roch±ord Town Centre: 214,520 Use of Former Ayres Coal Yard, Hawkwell: 250 Land at Rawreth Industrial Estate, Rawreth: 251 Provision of Bus Shelters: 259 Use of Structural Engineering Consultants: 292 Rochford Reservoir — Miniature Railway: 293,335 Land at Hambro Hill, Rayleigh: 294,301,307,346,379 Baltic Wharf, Wallasea Island, Rochford: 334 Alfreda Avenue, Hulibridge - Unmade Road: 338 Consultations on County Matter Applications: 394 Building Control — Muniguard Scheme: 421 Temporary Grant of Access — Development at Briar Close, Hawkwell: 427 Park Drive Nursery, Windsor Gardens, Hawkwell: 441 Relaxation of Building Regulations — "Tow—a—Home", Aviation Way, Rochford: 486 Glebe Farm, Barling Road, Great Wakering: 493 Antiques Warehouse, 41—67 Lower Lambricks, Rayleigh: 554 Overhead Power Line, Pudsey Hall Lane, Canewdon: 558 131—133, Ferry Road, Hulibridge: 633 TOWN AND (DUNTRY PLANNING — CONTRAVENTIONS
287, Pluaberow Avenue, Hockley: 2 Car Repairs — Harrogate Drive, ilockley: 6 Works — West Side, Wadham Park Avenue, Hockley: 43 Rectory Farm, West Side, Fambridge Road, Ashingdon: 113 Caravans — Land adj. 3 Hydewood Cottages, Canewdon: 114 2 & 3, Boarded Row, East End, Paglesh.am: 115 Review of Planning Functions: 206 Helmsley Garden Centre, London Road, Rawreth — Unauthorised Change of Use: 248,487 Land adjacent to Crown Bingo Hall, Crown Hill, Rayleigh: 249 Land at Rawreth Industrial Estate, Rawreth: 251,299 Land at North Street, Great Wakering: 252 Unauthorised Development — Land adjoining 181 Greenswad Lane, Hockley: 326 Unauthorised Use — 1 Florence Villas, Barling Road, Barling: 327 Construction of Jetty at Foreshore, River Crouch, Hullbridge: 328 Unauthorised Use — Lynwood Nurseries, Arterial Road, Rayleigh: 392 Unauthorised Use of 105, High Street, Rayleigh: 393 Illuminated Forecourt Sign, Ashingdon Service Station: 405 Unauthorised Advertisements, Rayleigh Lanes, 89 High Street, Rayleigh 406,556 Unauthorised Development — Rosebud Cottage, The Chase, Ashingdon: 407 Rawreth Garage, Chelmsford Road, Rawreth: 440 Sub—Division of Land — Malyons Farm, Hullbridge: 442 Unauthorised Car Repairs, "Highfield", off Greensward Lane, kshingdon. Newhall Nursery and Garden Centre, Lower Road, Rockley: 489 The Grange, Ironwell Lane, Iiawkwell: 557
TRAFFIC REGULATION ORDERS
Rayleigh May Day Fair — Closure of Street: 96 Clarence Road/Grove Road, Rayleigh — Revision of Waiting Restrictions 345 Queen Elizabeth Chase and Leicester Avenue, Rochford — Revision of Waiting Restrictions: 501 Updating of Weight Limit — Great Wakering High Street: 502 ElOl3/Folly Lane Junction, }Iockley — Prohibition of Waiting: 584 Rectory Road, Hawkwell — 40mph Speed Restriction: 590
TREE S
Mulberry Tree — Barrington4s, Hockley Road, Rauleigh: 30 TI.P.0. 3/86 — Land at North Street, Great Wakering: 252 Hockley Woods — Management: 274,305 T.P.0. 30/83 — Land adjacent to 67 Woodlands Road, }lockley: 332,439 T.P.0. 46/83 — Lime Tree at 85 Grove Road, Rayleigh: 494 The Woods of South East Essex: 102,342,536
TWINNING
Weekend Visit to Haltern: 400,446 Donation of Painting — Twinning Exhibition: 534 UNFIT HOUSES
141, High Street, Great Wakering: 57 29, London Hill, Rayleigh: 58,456 61, Hawkwell Park Drive, Uawkwell: 166 "Hidhurst, The Drive, Rayleigh: 316,463 VEHICLES AND PLANT
Replacement of Various Bedford Vehicles; 436 Laird "RotopreBs" Refuse Freighter: 621 Rochford Leisure Bus: 31,622
VIREMENTS
Crown Hill Public Conveniences — £6,000: 62 1985/86 Revi8ed Estimates — Virements: 128 Local Authority Building Control £750: 421 ChildrenTs Play Areas — £5,500: 525 Grove Playing Field Car Park — £2,000: 525 WIDOICORBE REPORT
Establishment of Panel Members: 423 ADC Statement on Local Government Structure, Functions and Finance: 616 ROCHFORD DISTRICT COUNCIL MINUTES
1986
October (Part 2) ROCHFORD DISTRICT COUNCIL
Minutes of the Development Services Committee
At a Meeting held on 21st October1986. Present: Councillors D.C. Wood (Chairman), C.I. Black, Mrs. ft. Brown, W.1J. Budge, T.H. Burt, Mrs. J. Pawell, T. Fawell, JA. Gibson, Mrs. M. T-Iunnable, Mrs. Jo Jones, Mrs. 3.3. Lemon, Miss 8.0.3. Lovett, 0.11. Morgan, R.A. Pearson, S.H. Silva, S.A. Skinner, C. Stephenson, J.P. Taylor, Mrs. L. Walker and Mrs. M.A. Weir.
9logies: Councillors P.A. Beckers and A.J. Harvey.
Visiting: Councillors B.A. Crick, J.A. Sheaf and D.A. Weir.
495. PUPILS OF ST. THOMAS MORE HIGH SCHOOL FOR BOYS
The Chairman of the Committee welcomed pupils of St. Thomas More nigh School for Boys who were attending a Council Meeting as part of their studies of the British Constitution.
496. MINUTES
Resolved that the Minutes of the Meeting of 15th July 1986 be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.
497. MONITORING OF PERFORMANCE — MEETINGS OF 20TH FEBRUARY AND 27TH MAY 1986
The Committee were satisfied that all necessary action had been taken. Minute 631/85 (SEC) was carried forward.
498. COUNTY RIGHI4AYS MATTERS
Mr. A. Cook, the County Highways representative, advised the Meeting that the kL2 Chelmsford By—Pass would be opened to traffic around the end of November, provision had been made for the kerb along the New Road, Great Wakering to be raised to a more satisfactory level, further studies were to take place regarding the B1O13 route options with particular reference to the potential for -an eastern route and finally, provision had been made within the future programme for the improvement of Sutton Road.
Referring then to the problem of defective Street lighting, Mr. Cook said that every endeavour was being made to improve communications with the Southend Borough Council and the Eastern Electricity Board so as to overcome the back log of remedial work which currently existed.
Members drew attention to the delays which had been created through road works in Greensward Lane and to the fact that surface water still gave rise to problems in that area. Reference was also made to the difficulties which existed in Weir Gardens, Roach Avenue and St. Martin's Close, Rayleigh due to parking in connection with the Brook Road Industrial Eatate and the point was noted for attention. With regard to the Tender arrangements for local bus services under the new deregulation legislation, a Member advised that details did not appear to be available through the public libraries. A Ward Member expressed appreciation of the improvements which had recently been effected to the siipway into the River Crouch at Hullbridge.
001206 Development Services
499. STREET LIGHTING - FOOTPATH: NURSERY CLOSE/flAWS BEATH ROAD, RAYLEIGH
The Committee considered the joint report of the Director of Development and the Secretary to the Council on a request for the District Council to provide street lighting, in particular to the above publicly adopted and maintained footpath. The County policy on street lighting precluded the provision of new lighting by that Authority but, Members noted that whilst the District Council had no delegated highway function, it could provide selected street lighting under the Public Health Act 1875, and the Committee were fully in support of such a scheme. In order to meet the installation costs of £200 per lighting column plus the Electricity Board's main cable supply and quarterly energy costs, it was suggested that provision of £2,000 be made within the 1987/88 draft estimates.
P. RECOMMENDED (1) That the Policy and Resources Committee be requested to make provision of £2,000 for the installation and maintenance of selected street lighting in the 1987/88 draft estimates.
(2) That Members of the Council be requested to supply to the Director of Development the location of other such areas for consideration, subject to the necessary financial provision being approved. (966) (DD)
500. HIGHWAY MAINTENANCE POLICY
The Committee noted that all District Counèils had been invited to he represented at a meeting at County Hall on Monday, 17th November 1986, to discuss highway maintenance policies and other related aspects of the highways function.
RECOMMENDED That the Chairman and Vice—Chairman of the Committee, Chairman of the Planning Services Committee, Director of Development and Chief Assistant (Engineering) or their nominees be authorised to attend the above meeting. (4680) (DD)
501. PROPOSED WAITING RESTRICTIONS — QUEEN ELIZABETh CU&SE AND LEICESTER AVENUE JUNCTIONS WITH Bl013 SOUTHEN1D ROAJ ROCHFOJUD • The Committee noted receipt of a letter from the Essex County Council setting out the proposed waiting restrictions at the above locations.
RECOMMENDED That the Essex County Council's proposals for waiting restrictions be supported. (933) (DD)
502. UPDATING OF WEIGHT LIMIT — GREAT WARERING HIGH STREET, ROGHFORD DISTRICT
The Director of Development reported receipt of a 1etter from the Essex County Council setting out a proposal to update th weight limit to 7.5 tonnes in Great Wakering High Street in conjunction with a scheme to improve traffic signs generally in the Great Wakering area.
RECOMMENDED That the proposed updating of the imperial weight limit to the new metric standard of 7.5 tonnes by Essex County Council in Great Wakering High Street be noted. (933) (DD) S 001207 Development Services
503. NOTICE OF MOTION PURSUANT TO STANDING ORDER 5 — PROVISION OF PEDESTRIAN CROSSING IN BULL LANE, RAYLEIGH (Minute 4O1IBJJ?6)
Councillor 9.11. Silva spoke to the motion as set out in the Agenda with particular emphasis on the increased pedestrian traffic which would he generated by the recent opening of Playspace 2000 in King George's Playing Field. A survey was currently being undertaken by County and he was hopeful that the location would meet the criteria for the provision of a social crossing.
The Chairman reminded Members that other areas within the District vied for attention, and suggested that it was in the best interests of the District, given the very limited numbet of social crossings made available each year, for the Committee to determine priorities for the future provision of pedestrian crossings within the District and that a list of sites for consideraion should be referred to the next Meeting of the Committee.
RECOMMENDED That consideration be given at the Meeting on the 27th November to all of the suggested sites for the provision of pedestrian crossings to determine the order of priority. (45) (rID)
504. BUS SHELTER OUTSIDE NO. 118 EASTW000 ROAD, RAYLEIGH
The Committee had before them the report of the Director of Development regarding the demolition of the bus shelter at the above site in consequence of the construction of a half width lay—by by the Essex County Council. During the dismantling operation the shelter was damaged beyond reasonable repair. A request had been received fr°m the adjoining resident not to replace the shelter and there had T,een no complaints regarding its loss. Members noted that the restriction of the footway at that point militated against replacement, which would involve a cost of £1,700 and agreed that the matter should be reconsidered when the 1987/ag budget was being compiled.
RECOMMENDED That the replacement of the bus shelter be considered when compilinj€he 19g7/8g budget, taking account of the weight of public opinion received by that time. (985) (DD)
505. DISTRICT PLAN WORKING PARTY
The Committee received the appended Minutes of the District Plan Working Party held on 14th July and 2nd October 1986 and received clarification as to the location of the proposed new school in R'leigh West.
RECOMMENDED (1) That the County Council's land requ'rements in respect of the Downhall and Park Schools be accepted and that he Local Plan be subject to the necessary minor modification in that respect.
(2) That the County Council be advised that their longer term land requirements in Rayleigh West for educational purposes are acceptable in principle. (Minute 18 — ECC Requirements in Rayleigh West)
(3) That the Policy and Resources Committee be advised that the use of the provisionally identified site would be acceptable and did not conflict with the Green Belt Notation. (Minute 19 — Proposed Crematorium) 001208 Development Services
(4) That in consequence of certain objections received the Rochford District Local Plan be amended as follows:—
(1) by the deletion of the words rilisted above" from policy H5 and the substitution of the words
"AS FOLLOWS:—
(i) RAWRETH LANE, RAYLEIGH (ii) RECTORY ROAD/SWEYNE AVENUE, FIAWKWELL (iii) SOUTH FAI4BRIDGE (iv) CANEWDON (v) GREAT STAMBRIDGE (vi) NEW ROAD, GREAT WAKERING (vii) SEA.VIEW DRIVE, GREAT WAICERING"
together with an appropriate revision to paragraph 2.6.5.
(ii) by the deletion of the words "see Chapter 6, Policy LT7" from policy GB1.
(iii) by the deletion of the word "industrial" from pqlicy EB3 sub- paragraph (ii).
(iv) by the modification of Section 4.5.0 and policy BBS to read as follows:—
4.5.0 Landscaping
4.5.1 The encouragement of development for employment purposes must be balanced against the needs of protecting and enhancing the physical environment. It is therefore intended that land to be used for Industrial purposes should be adequately screened to prevent nuisances to nearby occupiers (see paragraph 4.3.6 above. Opportunities will be sought to improve the environment within industrial and commercial areas wherever possible principally through the development control process.
POLICY EB5 THE DISTRICT PLANNING AUTHORITY WILL REQUIRE ALL INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT TO BE ADEQUATELY LANDSCAPED. PROVISION OF SUITABLE PLANTED BARRIER STRIPS SHALL BE MADE TO PREVENT NUISANCE TO SURROUNDING PROPERTIES.
(v) by the insertion of a new paragraph and policy after Paragraph 5.3.1 to read as follows:—
Para. 5.3.lA
It is considered that opportunities do exist however to increase the traffic capacity and reduce delays on the existing B1OI3 by means of traffic management measures, especially by the construction of bus lay— bys, and in view of the delay in implementing the major solution such measures should be investigated and implemented without delay.
POLICY Ti? lA IN ORDER TO ALLEVIATE TRAFFIC CONGESTION \\ AND DELAYS ON THE BlOl3, THE COUNCIL WILL 001209 PRESS THE HIGHWAY AUTHORITY FOR A PROGRAMME OF TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT MEASURES Development Services
AND IMPROVEMENTS TO INCREASE THE ROAD'S CAPACITY.
(vi) by the deletion of the phrase "20 and 10 per cent" and its substitution by the phrase "29 and 46 per cent' in paragraph 5.7.1
(vii) by the deletion of the final sentence from paragraph 5.7.2
(viii) by the deletion of the words "on the Proposals Maps" from Policy LT2
(ix) by the addition to Policy LT1O subparagraph (F) of the following words: —
"by the making of Directions under Article 4 of the Town and Country Planning General Development Order l977l98l"
(x) by the deletion of the fourth paragraph of Policy LTII and its substitution by the following:—
IN APPROPRIATE CASES THE LOCAL PLANNING AUTHORITY MAY SEEK THE ESTABLISHNENT OF A LEGAL AGREEMENT RESTRICTING THE USE OF THE JETTIES TO PRIVATE USE ONLY, SUCH AN AGREEMENT TO PASS OW TO SUCCESSORS IN TITLE OF DWELLINGS AS DEFINED IN i) AND fl) ABOVE.
(xi) by the inclusion within Chapter 8 of reference to the fact that the Council will encourage the creation of local Nature Reserves within the District in consultation with the Nature Conservancy Council and the Essex Naturalist Trust
(xii) by the deletion from Policy RC2 of the words "National Nature Reserves or"
(xiii) by the expansion of Policy RC3 to include reference also to Proposals Map B
(xiv) by the deletion of the word "expected" and its substitution by the word "encouraged" in Paragraph 9.6.5
(xv) by the deletion of Paragraph 9.7.4 and the insertion of a new paragraph to read as follows:—
9.7.4 A number of former residential properties in Bellingham Lane and the northern end of the High Street have been converted to office uses, and further changes of use will in principle be acceptable within this area. Additionally, there are a number of industrial buildings in Websters Way near the junction with Bull Lane which are out of character in the Conservation Area. In any proposals for development within this area, the District Council will prefer to see office buildings of a high standard of design more in keeping with the Conservation Area.
The Town Centre Inset Map C indicates areas within which the shopping/commercial office and residential uses will be the principal land uses. It should be noted thai the boundaries of these areas differ from those shown on the Approved Review Development Town Map and take into account the present day land use patterns and outstanding proposals. 001210 Develqpment Services
(xvi) by the Inclusion within Paragraph 9.7.5 (3—5 London Hill) of reference to the fact that consideration may be given to other uses appropriate to this town centre location
(xvii) by the insertion of the words "and Websters Way/Bull Lane" after the words "Bellingham Lane/London Hillt' in Policy SAT15.
(xviii) by the deletion of sub—paragraph 9.9.8(iv) and Policy SAT2O and the renumbering of former sub—paragraph 9.9.8(v) and Policy SAT21 as new sub—paragraph 9.9.8(iv) and Policy SAT2O respectively
— (xix) by the amendment of Proposals Map A (a) to remove from Public Open Space notation the area of the car park at the western end of Lower Wyburns Farm and the area of the kennels at the eastern end thereof
(b) to renotate as an Area Primarily for Industrial Use the triangle of land at the eastern end of the Area Primarily for Open Storage on Purdeys Industrial Estate
(c) to mark points A and B as referred to in Policy LTI3 sub—paragraph (i) and points C and D as referred to in sub—paragraph (ii) of tknt Policy (and to remove Figure 2 from the Plan)
(d) to delineate the historic cores of Rayleigh and Rochford referred to in Policy UC1O.
(xx) by the deletion from the Key to Inset Map C of reference to Policy SAT14 against Areas Primarily for Office Use
(xxi) by the inclusion within the Inset Maps C, D and E of cross reference to Policy SAT1 against Shopping Areas
(xxii) by the amendment of Proposals Map IS — (i) to show the appropriate area of the Council Depot as being primarily for light industrial use in accordance with Policy SAT2O as renumbered.
(ii) to remove the symbols for Proposed Road Access to New Residential Areas and Proposed Pedestrian links.
(xxiii) by the inclusion within the Keys to the Proposals Maps and Inset Naps of references to any other relevant policies within the Plan.
(5) That the various objections lodged regarding the provision of horse riding facilities and associated matters be noted pending the outcome of the County CouncilTs consideration of this matter.
(6) That further consideration be given in due course to the basis upon which the Proposals Maps have been drawn.
(7) That the Rochford District Local Plan remain otherwise unaltered. \ (8) That the objectors be advised as appropriate of the above decisions. 001211 Development Services
(9) That the County Council be advised of this Councilts concern at the lack of response to the informal submission covering the post 1990 period. (2081) (DO)
506. LAND TO THE REAR_OF COUNCIL OFFICES, SOUTH STREET, ROCRFORD (Minute 434/86)
The Secretary to the Council reported on a request from the Essex Water Company for an easement to extend their existing mains water supply from South Street, Rochford, along the Councilis private access road at the Depot, in order to serve the proposed twelve new industrial units and the Millview site to the rear of the Councilts Offices.
RECOMMENDED That the Sec±etary to the Council complete an easement with Essex Water Company for the purpose of extending the mains water supply along the Council's private access road at the Depot, South Street, Rochford, on such terms and conditions as the Secretary to the Council thinks fit. (831) (SEC)
507. DEVELOPTyIENT AT EELLINGDAN LANE, RAXLEIGH (Minute 352/86D
The Committee received the report of the Secretary to the Council, that the developers of this site had now suggested the name "Home—Regal Rouse" for the block of retirement homes now in the course of erection.
RECOMMENDED That the name "Home—Regal House" be adopted for the development under construction on the site of the Regal Cinema, Bellingham Lane, Rayleigh. (923) (SEC)
508. WATER ACT 1973 — SECTION 16 REQUISITION
The Committee noted the report of the Director of Development on progress on this matter, namely that there was a lack of support from local residents for the provision of a foul sewerage system at South Fambridge and that as a next stage, the residents of the Ashingdon Park area were to he consulted. (4657) (DO)
• 509. PROVISION OP HORSE RIDING FACILITIES
The Secretary to the Council reported that the County Council had agreed in principle on the need for the creation of additional bridleways in Essex. The Council had been invited to be represented at a meeting of interested parties at County Hall on 27th November 1986, to discuss the provision of horse riding facilities and the contribution each party could make.
RECOMMENDED That the Chairman of the Horse Riding Working Party, together with the Director of Development and the Secretary to the Council or their nominees, be authorised to attend the meeting at County Hail on 27th November 1986 to discuss the provision of horse riding facilities. (23652) (SEC & DD)
510. LOCATION OF COMPUTER CENTRE
The Chief Executive reported as a matter of urgency and pursuant to Standing Order 26.2 that at their meeting on 4th November 1986, the Policy and Resources Committee were to consider a report of the Management Team
001212 Development Services
regarding the relocation of the Computer Centre to a new building at the rear of the Finance Department, the site of which was at present occupied by the Printing Section. The existing building, although not listed, felt within the designated conservation area and Listed Building Consent would be necessary for its demolition and replacement.
RECOMMENDED (1) That application be made to the Secretary of State for the Environment for Listed Building Consent to demolish the building used as a print room at the rear of the Finance Department and to erect a new Computer Centre.
(2) That in accordance with Regulation 4 (v) of the Town and Country Planning (General) Regulations 1976, permission be sought for the erection of a new Computer Centre at the rear of the Finance Department. (1652) (DD)
Note: The Chief Executive exercised his authority under Standing Order 18 to enable planning applications to be prepared to meet the required timescale.
511. PRIVATE DOMESTIC DRAIN BLOCKAGE CONTRACT (Minute 357/86)
The Committee considered, pursuant to Standing Order 26.2, the exempt report of the Director of Development on the unsatisfactory performance of the present contractor and the desirability to release him from the contract and to relet the same without delay. Members noted that the original tender process had taken place so recently that it had been practicable to approach the second lowest tenderer, who was prepared to enter into a new contract at his tender submission figure of £7 plus V.A.T. per call with effect from noon on Wednesday, 22nd October 1986.
RECOMMENDED (1) That the existing operator be released from the above contract.
(2) That Al Arvon be appointed as the Councilts nominated private domestic drain blockage contractor for the remaining period of the 1986/87 Contract at £7 plus V.A.T. per call and that this decision be implemented immediately. (4481) (DD)
Note: The Chief Executive exercised his authority under Standing Order 15 in order to give immediate effect to the above Recommendations.
. 001213 AGENDA ITEM 12(A)
ROCHFORD DISTRICT COUNCIL
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES COMMITTEE — 21ST OCTOBER 1986
DISTRICT PLAN WORKING PARTY
Minutes of a Meeting held on Monday, 14th Jujy 1986
Present: Councillors D.C. Wood (Chairman), P.A. Beckers, A.J. Harvey, Mrs. P.E. Hawke, Mrs. L.A. Holdich, Miss B.G.J. Lovett, C.R. Morgan, R.A. Pearson, J.A. Sheaf and J.P. Taylor.
15. APPOINTMENT OF CHAIRMAN
Resolved that Councillor D.C. Wood be appointed Chairman for the remainder of the municipal year.
16. MINUTES
The Minutes of the Meeting of 18th February 1986 were agreed as a correct record.
In response to a query from a Member, advice was given that the request of the Managing Director of Southend Airport for a meeting with the District Plan Working Party had subsequently been withdrawn.
17. EXCLUSION OF ThE PUBLIC
Resolved that under Section lOO(A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the Meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraph 9 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act.
18. ECC REQUIREMENTS IN RAflEIGH WEST
The Chief Executive and Director of Development reported with the aid of viewfoils on the County land requirements in Rayleigh West for educational purposes, with particular regard to the Downhall and Park Schools, which would require a minor modification to the Local Plan. The effect upon the MAFF transaction had already been fully set out in a confidential letter to all Members, and was to be the subject of a report to Development Services Committee the following evening.
Longer term education options for the area under consideration by County were described in respect of the Glebe Schools and for a new primary school, and Members noted that they were not likely to take place until after the plan period.
RECOMMENDED (1) That the Development Services Committee be advised that the County Council's laud requirements in respect of the Downhall and Park Schools are acceptable and that the Local Plan be subject to the necessary minor modification in that respect.
(2) That the County Council be advised that their longer term land requirements in Rayleigh West for educational purposes are acceptable in principle.
001214 19. PROPOSED CREMATORIUM
The Director of Development reported with the aid of viewfoils, on the site which had been provisionally identified in connection with the joint crematorium project, the report of which was to be discussed by the Policy and Resources Committee on 22nd July 1986. Members noted that there was no private residence within the statutory distance of the site, that its location had been selected with the proximity of the two neighbouring Authorities in mind and considered that the use would be acceptable and did not conflict with the Green Belt notation. RECOM2NDED That the Policy and Resources Committee be advised accordingly. (13889) (DF)
.
S
S 001215 AGENDA ITEM 12(B)
ROCBFORD DISTRICT COUNCIL
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES COMMITTEE —_2]ST OCTOBER1986
DISTRICT PLAN WORKING PARTY
Minutes of a Meeting held on Thursday, 2nd October 1986
Present: Councillors D.C. Wood (Chairman), P.A. Beckers, T. Fawell, Mrs. P. Hawke, Mrs. L.A. Holdich, Miss B.G.J. Lovett, C.R. Morgan, R.A. Pearson and J.A. Sheaf.
APOLOGIES: Councillor J.P. Taylor.
20. MINUTES
The Minutes of the Meeting held on 14th July 1986 were agreed as a correct record.
21. OBJECTIONS TO THE ROCHFORD DISTRIQT LOCAL PLAN
The Panel had before them the appended report of the Director of Development scheduling the objections to the Rochford District Local Plan which had been received following its formal deposit, together with maps indicating all the locations involved. The Panel were in broad agreement with the suggested response to those objections, particular items being discussed as follows:—
(i) Shangri—La West Caravan Park
The Panel were mindful of the historic reasons which had given rise to personal permissions on this site. That was the background against which Policy 117 had been drafted and there were no grounds to support the desired amendment to include the caravan park within the area of Kingsmans Farm Road residential settlement as defined in Policy 117. (oB.O29).
Sii) }lambro Bill, Rayleigh
The Director of Development reminded Members with the aid of viewfoils of the proposals which had been formulated in respect of the Woods site and access to the Council's Public Open Space land at the rear. The argument that traffic would be generated by residential development had to be balanced by the fact that the probable alternative would be a continuing non—conforming industrial use. The Panel were of the view that Policy H8 should remain unaltered. (O1LO31)
(iiiLAvailabil4y of Land for Lopg_rm Housing Requirements
The Director of Development said that he would be producing a detailed analyis of the availability of housing land which would demonstrate that there were sufficient sites within the District to meet the required criteria. The former section of the Plan dealing with the post—1990 period had been submitted to County on an informal basis in accordance with their wishes, but there had not been any response thereto. The Panel agreed that the Director of Development should write expressing concern on that point and seeking the County's comments on the submission. 001218 (iv)jollies Co1ard, Great Stambridge
The Director of Development advised the Panel with the aid of viewfoils of the potential which existed for residential development on this site and in the immediate vicinity. This could involve the closure of the existing access from the Stambridge Road but might also depend to a degree on a minor revision of the existing Green Belt boundary. Members indicated that the principle of residential development within the existing settlement area was acceptable and should be pursued but that the additional development sought represented an unacceptable intrusion into the Green Belt. (OB.047)
(v) Southend Airport
The Panel considered the objections which had been received from Southend— on—Sea Borough Council and British Airports International to the Green Belt boundary as it affected the long term development of the airport site, together with a letter which had subsequently been received from Southend. Members recalled that there had been long and careful discussion regarding the Green Belt boundary in that particularly sensitive location. It was the policy of the Council to support the operation of the airport commensurate with maintaining a satisfactory environment. Those factors had been borne very much in mind in arriving at the decision as to how the boundary should be drawn. Having examined with the aid of a viewf oil the boundary sought compared with that existing the Panel agreed that there should be no variation to the Green Belt boundary. They reiterated their willingness to discuss matters with the neighbouring authority and British Airports International if so desired.
(vi) Proposals Mgps
The Director of Development said that Southend had objected to the method used to depict policy areas on the Proposals Maps. They were of the view that all areas) both existing and proposed, to which policies in the Written Statement would apply should be depicted on the Proposals Maps. Advice had been sought from the Department of the Environment and they had indicated that the Proposals Maps were acceptable. The Panel noted that it was however the intention to review the format of the Proposals Nave once the Public Inquiry stage had been passed.
(y4) Provision of Horse Riding Pacilities
In connection with the various objections that had been raised regarding the provision of horse riding facilities and associated matters, the Panel noted that the Horse Riding Working Party had been set up as a direct result of representations made during the period of informal consultation on the Draft District Plan. A considerable amount of time had been spent in discussion to reconcile the conflicting aims and interests of the various groups represented thereon. Members were pleased to note first that permissive horse riding routes would in consequence be provided and secondly that County had reviewed its policy and decided to consider the introduction of new bridleways. A Meeting was to be held with all District Councils to determine priorities. It was therefore accepted that this Council should await the outcome of those deliberations. S 001217 (yii4) Site at Rectory Road/Ashingdon Road
The Director of Development reminded the Panel with the aid of a viewf oil of the location and history of this site which had long been recognised as having potential for development to meet the need for additional local shopping and car parking facilities. Furthermore provision was being made within the Plan for Public Open Space nearby, The Panel accordingly agreed that the notation of the site should remain unaltered. (OB.O26tOB.032)
Lix)_ Hall Road, Rochford
The Panel considered the suggestion by the Director of DeveLopment that the residential development along the southern frontage of 1-tall. Road and to the west of the golf course should be classified as a Rural Settlement Area, thereby allowing policy GB2 on extensions to be applied. Members considered however that there was no case for Green Belt notation to be augmented by the provisions of Policy GB2. fx) Informal Comments made by the Department of the Environment
The Panel noted a number of informal comments which had been made by the Department of the Environment and agreed that the Plan should in consequence be modified in certain respects,
RECONMENDED (1) That in consequence of certain objections received the ROEIifidMetrict Local Plan be amended as fqllows:—
(i) by the deletion of the words "listed above" from policy 115 and the substitution of the words
"AS FOLLOWS:—
(i) RAWRETR MNE, RAYLEiGH (ii) RECTORY ROAD/SWEYWE AVENUE, HAWKWTLL (iii) SOUTH FAMBRIDGE (iv) CANEWDON (v) GREAT STAMBRIDGE (vi) NEW ROAD, GREAT WAKERING (vii) SEAVIEW DRIVE) GREAT WAKERING"
together with an appropriate revision to paragraph 2.6.5.
(ii) by the deletion of the words "see Chapter 6, Policy LT7" from policy GEl.
(iii) by the deletion of the word "industrial" from policy RB3 sub- paragraph (ii). 1 (iv) by the modification of Section 4.5.0 and policy EB5 to road as follows :—
4.5.0 Landscapg
4.5.1 The encouragement of development for employment purposes must be balanced against the needs of protecting and enhancing the physical environment. It is theretora intended that land to be used for industrial purposes should he adequately screened to prevent nuisances to nearby occupiers (see paragraph 4.3.6 above. Opportunities will be sought to improve the environment within industrial arid commercial areas wherever possible principally through the development ,control process. 00121 POLICY EB5 THE DISTRICT PLANNING AUTHORITY WILL REQUIRE ALL INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT TO BE ADEQUATELY LANDSCAPED. PROVISION OF SUITABLE PLANTED BARRIER STRIPS SHALL BE MADE TO PREVENT NUISANCE TO SURROUNDING PROPERTIES.
(v) by the insertion of a new paragraph and policy after Paragraph 5.3.1 to read as follows:—
Para. 5.3.1A
It is considered that opportunities do exist however to increase the traffic capacity and reduce delays on the existing B10l3 by means of traffic management measures, especially by the construction of bus lay— bye, and in view of the delay in implementing the major solution such measures should be investigated and implemented without delay.
POLICY TP lA IN ORDER TO ALLEVIATE TRAFFIC CONGESTION AND DELAYS ON THE B1O13, THE COUNCIL WILL PRESS THE HIGHWAY AUTHORITY FOR A PROGRAMME OF TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT MEASURES AND IMPROVEMENTS TO INCREASE THE ROAD'S CAPACITY.
(vi) by the deletion of the phrase "20 and 10 per cent" and its substitution by the phrase "29 and 46 per cent" in paragraph 5.7.1
(vii) by the deletion of the final sentence from paragraph t7.2
(viii) by the deletion of the words "on the Proposals Maps" from Policy LT2
(ix) by the addition to Policy LT1O subparagraph ('F) of the following words:—
"by the making of Directions under Article 4 of the Town and Country Planning General Development Order 1977—1981"
(x) by the deletion of the fourth paragraph of Policy LT13 and its substitution by the following:—
IN APPROPRIATE CASES THE LOCAL PLANNING AUTHORITY MAY SEEK THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A LEGAL AGREEMENT RESTRICTING THE USE OF THE JETTIES TO PRIVATE USE ONLY, SUCH AN AGREEMENT TO PASS ON TO SUCCESSORS IN TITLE OF DWELLINGS AS DEFINED IN i) AND ii) ABOVE.
(xi) by the inclusion within Chapter 8 of reference to the fact that the Council will encourage the creation of local Nature Reserves within the District in consultation with the Nature Conservancy Council and the Essex Naturalist Trust
(xii) by the deletion from Policy RC2 of the words "National Nature Reserves or"
(xiii) by the expansion of Policy RC3 to include reference also to Proposals Map E
001219 II!
(xiv) by the deletion of the word "expected" and its substitution by the word "encouraged" in Paragraph 9.6. 5
(xv) by the deletion of Paragraph 9.7.4 and the insertion of a new paragraph to read as follows:—
9.7.4 A. number of former residential properties in Beliingham Lane and the northern end of the High Street have been converted to office uses, and further changes of use will in principle be acceptable within this area. Additionally, there are a number of industrial buildings in Websters Way near the junction with Bull Lane which are out of character in the Conservation Area. In any proposals for development within this area, the District Council will prefer to see office buildings of a high standard of design more in keeping with the Conservation Area.
The Town Centre Inset Map C indicates areas within which the shopping/commercial office and residential uses will be the principal land uses. It should be noted that the boundaries of these areas differ from those shown on the Approved Review Development Town Map and take into account the present day land use patterns and outstanding proposals.
(xvi) by the inclusion within Paragraph 9.7.5 (3—5 London Hill) of reference to the fact that consideration may he given to other uses appropriate to this town centre location
(xvii) by the insertion of the words "and Websters Way/Bull Lane" after the words "Bellingham Lane/London Hill" in Policy SAT1S.
(xviii) by the deletion of sub—paragraph 9.9.B(iv) and Policy SAT2) and the renumbering of Loner sub—paragraph 9.9.8(v) and Policy SAT2l as new sub—paragraph 9.9.8(iv) and Policy SAT2O respectively
(xix) by the amendment of Proposals Map A — (a) to remove from Public Open Space notation the area of the car park at the western end of Lower Wyburns Farm and the area of the kennels at the eastern end thereof
(b) to renotate as an Area Primarily for Industrial Use the triangle of land at the eastern end of the Area Primarily for Open Storage on Purdeys Industrial Estate
(c) to mark points A and B as referred to in Policy LT13 sub—paragraph (i) and points C and 0 as referred to in sub—paragraph (ii) of that Policy (and to remove Figure 2 from the Plan)
(d) to delineate the historic cores of Rayleigh and Rochford referred to in Policy UCIO.
(xx) by the deletion from the Key to Inset Map C of reference to Policy SATI4 against Areas Primarily for Office Use
(xxi) by the inclusion within the Inset Naps C, 1) and B of cross reference to Policy SAT1 against Shopping Areas (xxii) by the amendment of Proposals Map B — flf2fl (i) tO show the appropriate area of the Council Depot as being primarily for light industrial use in accordance with Policy SAT2O as renunibe red.
(ii) to remove the symbols for Proposed Road Access to New Residential Areas and Proposed Pedestrian links.
(xxiii) by the inclusion within the Keys to the Proposals Maps and Inset Maps of references to any other relevant policies within the Plan.
(2) That the various objections lodged regarding the provision of horse riding facilities and associated matters be noted pending the outcome of the County Council's consideration of this matter.
(3) That further consideration be given in due course to the basis upon which the Proposals Maps have been drawn.
(4) That the Rochford District Local Plan remain otherwise unaltered.
(5) That the objectors be advised as appropriate of the above decisions.
(6) That the County Council be advised of this Council's concern at the lack of response to the informal submiss ion covering the post 1990 period. (2081) (DID)
22. COUNTY STRUCTURE PLAN REVIEW
The Chairman said he wished to introduce as a matter of urgency the need to respond to the above mentioned document, copies of which were being obtained and would be circulated to Members of the Working Party as soon as possible. It was agreed that a further Meeting should he arranged for that purposed. (DID & SEC)
23. EXCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC
Resolved that under Section lOOA(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the Meeting for the following item of business on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraph 8 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act.
24. SCHOOLS—RAYLEIGH WEST
The Director of Development reminded the Panel of the discussion on this subject at the previous Meeting and of the effect of the County's requirements upon the MAFF transaction. Copies of the particulars for sale which had been produced by Messrs. Carter Jonas were distributed for Members' information.
Members were advised with the aid of viewf oils of the requirement for a site to provide a new primary school in the Rayleigh West area with particular reference to the suitability of the Council owned site the zoning of the land and the need to ensure that its future use accorded with the expressed intention.
RECOMMENDED That further discussions take place with the County Council. (CE) (1111221 ROCHFORD DISTRICT COUNCIL
SCFIEDULE OF OBJECTIONS
TO THE ROCHFORD DISTRICT LOCAL PLAN.
REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT TO THE
DISTRICT PLAN WORKING PARTY — 2nd OCTOBER, 1086.
ODlazz CONTENTS
SECTION 1 SCHEDULE OF OBJECTIONS TO TUE
LOCAL PLAN.
SECTION 2 RESPONSE TO THE INFORMAL COMMENTS
RECEIVED FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT.
0t11223; SECTION 1
SCIIEDULE OF OBJECTIONS TO THE
ROCHFORD DISTRICT LOCAL PLAN.
001224 OBJECTIONS TO CHAPTER TWO.
tMtfl2i POLICY 117 CHAPTER TWO 1CINOSMAN FARM ROAD
OBOO4 Mr. Wynn, 5A Kingsmans Farm Road
Policy 57 concerns the riverside settlement known as Kingsinans Farm Road and identifies a maximum of 28 individual building plots within the settlement. Mr. Wynn contends that his plot is sufficiently large to allow for the construction of a further dwelling.
Comments
The policy seeks to prevent the construction of dwellings on the road frontage. Any further dwelling constructed on Hr. Wyn&s land would be unacceptable and would not respect the character of the permanent housing already existing.
Recommendation
No alteration to policy H7
I
P.1; Yes
-1- 1 0012 CHAPTER TWO — POLiCY 112 ROYERS NURSERIES
0B007 EIallett, 19 Sweyne Avenue, Hawkwell
Objection to the inclusion of land at Royers Nurseries as residential land. This would cause overlooking and privacy problems to residents in Sweyne Avenue.
Comments
Matters of overlooking and privacy would be adequately considered at the planning application stage.
Recommendation
No alteration to policy HZ
P.1: Yes Ref: OB044
—2--
001227 CHAPTER TWO — POLICY H8 . OBOOB Wimpey Barnes Holdings
Sites will prove difficult to assemble and expensive to develop and are not itt areas where house purchasers would wish to live. The sites are also poorly located In relation to the built up areas. Land at the end of Southview Close, Rayleigh, should be excluded from the Green Belt and included as an area of special restraint.
Comments
Land at Southview Close is within a particularly sensitive section of the Green Belt separating the built up areas of Rayleigh and Southend and as such it should not be considered as an appropriate site for housing development in the long term (or short term — see 0B009). This is the section of Green Belt successfully defended at the Lower Wyburns Farm lnqulry.
Recommendation No variation to Green Belt boundary.
I
P.1: Yes Ref; 0B009
—3— aw CHAPTER TWO - POLICY 112
0B009 Wimpey Homes Holdings
Some of the sites included in H2 would be difficult to assemble and expensive to develop. Land at Southview Close, Rayleigh, should be included as an alternative.
Comments
No details of individual sites are provided and it is not therefore possible to respond in detail (a schedule of all short term development land will, in any case, be prepared providing full details of constraints).
Southview Close is in a particularly sensitive section of Green Belt separating the built up area of Rayleigh and Southend; Green Belt that was successfully defended at the Lower Wyburns Farm Inquiry. It is not suitable for housing development and should remain in the Green Belt.
Recommendation
No variation to Green Belt boundary.
P.1: Yes Ref: OBOOS
—A—
001229 CHAPTER TWO — POLICY fl8 NELSON ROAD/CANEWDON VIEW ROAD
OBO12 Mrs. Lonergan, 103 Golden Cross Road, Ashingdon
Development of the site at Nelson Road/Canewdon View Road should be delayed until after the construction of the proposed new access between Rochford and Southend and improvements are made to Ashingdon Road in the interests of safer traffic and pedestrian movements.
Comments
This site is to be utilised for long term development and it is to be hoped that road improvements will be implemented within the five years programme. Policy TP3 should be urgently pursued in relation to Ashingdon Road.
Recommendation
No alteration to policy 118.
.
P.1: Yes Ref: 0B033
'-5— S giilZfl CHAPTER TWO — POLICY Hi DOCGETTS CLOSE
0BO18 A.W. Squier Ltd.
Land at Doggetts Close should not be used for residential purposes but should remain as Public Open Space.
Comments
A.W. Squier still maintain their support for the covenant to ensure the land's future use as Public Open Space. The site has now been included in the Council's HIPS programme and design work will commence in 1987188 on the first phase of family housing. Negotiations will, therefore, continue to ensure that the land can be utilised for housing purposes.
Recommendation
No change to policy.
P.1: Yes Ref: 013017
—6—
U01Z31 CHAPTER TWO — POLICY 118 CHEAPSIDE WEST, RAYLEIGH
08021 Abbotts (East Anglia) Ltd.
Land fronting Cheapside West within the restraint area should he brought forward for immediate development. The development of this frontage would make no material differences to the availability estimates in Chapter 2 and Anglian Water would permit development to proceed.
Comments
Anglian Water would make no exceptions to their embargo. The current land availability estimates show an over provision of land and the County Council certified the plan on the basis that this overprovision would be kept to a reasonable level. There is, therefore, no justification to bring restraint land forward for early development.
Recommendation
No variation to Green Belt boundary.
.
P.1; Yes
—7- S fl1fl232 GREEN BELT BOUNDARY HODIFICATION — SEE ALSO POLICY 117 SliAtIGRI-LA WEST CARAVAN PARK
OBO2Y J.N. Crudglngton, 379 London Road, Benfleet
The caravan site known as Shangri—la West, Hulibridge, should be excluded from the Green Belt and included within a modified policy 117 (Chapter 2) as a riverside settlement area.
Comments
There is no overriding reason for allowing this caravan park to be removed from the Green Belt. To do so would allow further consolidation of development along the Crouch frontage between the Kingsman Farm Road settlement area and the built up area of Hullbridge. Recommendation
No variation to policies.
P.1: No
-8—
6O123 CHAPTER TWO — POLICY RB HAMBRO HILL, HOCKLEY
0B031 Abbotts (East Anglia) Ltd.
Development of the land at Hambro Hill, Hockley would create unacceptable traffic problems on Hambro Hill.
Comments
The Highway Authority is not expected to comment adversely on the development of this site.
Recommendation
No alteration to policy 118.
.
S
P.1: Yes Ref: OB079
—9— S eo1234 CHAPTER TWO —POLICY 118 NELSON ROAD/CANEWDON VIEW ROAD
011033 Mrs. O'Brien, 103 Golden Cross Road, Ashingdon
Development of the site at Nelson Road/Canewdon View Road should be delayed until after the construction of the proposed new route between Rochford and Southend.
Comments
The site is now allocated for long term development to allow for improvements to be carried out to the road network.
Recommendation
No alteration to policy 118.
P.1: Yes Ref: 0B012
— 10 — II. P111111 Il' Ill PI r
CHAPTER TWO - POLICY 112 ROYERS NURSERY, HAWK%IELL
0E044 Mr. M.J. Guest, 21 Sweyne Avenue, Hawkwell
Land at Royers Nursery, llawkwell, should not be ucilised for residential development. To do so would cause overlooking and privacy problems for the residents of Sweyne Avenue.
Comments
Matters of overlooking and privacy would be dealt with at the planning application stage.
Recommendation
No variation to policy HZ. .
P.1: Yes Ref: onOO7
— 11 — S ttD!23G 3U lip','!:
CHAPTER TWO — POLICY H15
0B048 w.J. & J.P. Caton, Halcyon Caravan Park
Halcyon Caravan Park should be designated as a "residential caravan park" because there is residential development to the east and a residential caravan park and the main village settlement to the west. it will cater for the demand for cheap rented accommodation whilst having no effect on the built or natural environment.
Comments
The residential development to the east is of a special character and the designation restricts it to one dwelling per plot. To the west the residential areas and residential caravan park is separated from the Halcyon Caravan Park by Public Open Space. The removal of Green Belt notation from this site would seriously undermine the value of this section of Green Belt and could create a precedent for the alteration of holiday caravan park notations in other parts of the District.
Recommendation
No variation to Green Belt boundary or to the holiday caravan park notation.
P.I No
— 12 -
001237 'uII I IIP !'
CHAPTER TWO —POLICY H8 ALEXANDRA ROAD, GREAT WAKERINC
OBOSÔ Southend Borough Council
Land south of Alexandra Road, Great Wakering, should not be allocated as an area of restraint but should remain generally undeveloped and possibly utilised for recreation and leisure purposes.
Comments
An ppropriate alternative use for this site is for residential purposes. In view of the present state of the site and its previous uses a residential notation will allow improvements to be made.
Recommendation
No alteration to policy 118.
.
P.1: Yes
— 13 —
001238 CHAPTER TWO — PARAGRAPH 2.14.3 GYPSY CARAVAN SITE
OB057 Southend Borough Council
Gypsy caravan site — objection to the mention of Eastwoodbury Lane, which is wholly within Southend Borough Council's administrative area. It would not be possible to site a permanent gypsy caravan site in this location.
Comments
Paragraph 2.14.3 is factually correct.
Recommendation
No alteration to paragraph 2.14.3
P.1; Yes
— 14 —
091239 CHAPTER TWO SAFEGUARDING OP BRIDLEWAYS IN NEW DEVELOPMENT
0B076 Essex Bridleways Association
Seek the inclusion of a policy to the effect that new development will not be carried out in such a way as to destroy existing rights of way for ridden horses or to convert them to metalled estate road and that the opportunity will be taken to improve the definitive bridleways network.
Comments
Permission for new development cannot be conditional upon creating new bridleways; such a condition would be unreasonable and not supported on appeal. Where public rights of way cross development sites, the local planning authority does take into account Circular 1/83, paragraphs 12—14, and indeed the bridlepath leading from Aviation Way has been protected in the new industrial development permitted adjacent to it. Plotland roads and byeways are open to all traffic and therefore no special provision would be made for horseriders at the expense of other users of such highways. No definitive bridleways are affected by the new development sites. in conaddering planning applications the existing rights of horseriders will be taken into account.
Recommendation
It is not reasonable to include this proposed modification in the Plan.
S
P.1: Yes Ret: OB024, OB037, OBOS1, 0B076-OBO7ÔF, OBO9I—OB096
— 15 — S G0124tP CHAPTER TWO — POLICY 118
0B079 Abbotts (East Anglia) Ltd.
Insufficient land has been indentif led to satisfy long term housing requirements (e.g. 2,600 units).
Hambro Hill is unsuitable for development. Aviation \4ay site is for all practical purposes within Southend.
Comments
The Council is satisfied that the identified areas of restraint will satisfy Long term. housing requirements. It is not clear why Hambro Hill is unsuitable for development and Aviation Way is clearly within the Rochford District and as such will go to satisfy long term needs.
Recommendation
No alteration to policy USa
P.1: Yes Ref: 013031
- 16 -
&111241 CHAPTER TWO — POLICY US LAND AT ETHELDORE AVENUE/WOOl) AVENUE, HOCKLEY
OBOB1 French Kier Homes Ltd.
Land at Etheldore Avenue/Wood Avenue, Hockley, should be brought forward for development in the short tern. The level of housing land proposed to be released within the Plan period has been reduced to a level where it is likely to be inadequate to meet the Structure Plan provision to 1991.
Comments
A comprehensive land availability statement will be prepared to show that the structure plan provisions will be satisfied to 1990.
Recommendation No alteration to policy 1-lB. .
P.1: Yes
— 17 — rI l!11 —
CHAPTER TWO — POLICY 116 SOUTH FAMBRIDGE
0B085 Fambridge Engineering Limited
The effect of Policy 116 is to entirely negate the residential potential created by Policy 115 which removes South Fambridge from the Green Belt.
Comments
Negotiations are underway with the A.W.A. and Fambridge Engineering.
Recommendation
No alteration to policy 115 and 116 pending the outcom of negotiations.
P.1: Yes
— 18 -
00124J iii r.uE iiIpp irru p1T ! tfl
CHAPTER TWO - POLiCY 118 ETIIELDORE AVENE/W000 AVENUE, BUCKLEY
03100 Mr. & Mrs. T. Millard, 37 Bracksome Avenue, Hockley
This long term site should not be utilised for development but should be retained within the Green Belt. Its release would also create traffic problems on Plumberow Avenue and spoil views to the east from Hockley Mount.
Comments
The inclusion of this site as long term development land is a logical extension to the existing residential area to the south. It is accepted that any development must have some impact on the surrounding countryside but in this case the boundaries have been drawn in order to minimise that impact and to ensure that further incursions into the Green Belt are guarded against.
Recoinmenda t ion
No alteration to policy 118.
P.1: Yes
-19- U1244 CHAPTER TWO — POLICY 58 LAND AT CANEWDON VIEW ROAD/NELSON ROAD
OB1O2 Mr. J.P. Vidler, 65 Canewdon View Road, Ashingdon.
This land should be developed immediately in order that Canewdon View Road can be made—up.
Comments
Sufficient land has been allocated to satisfy the Structure Plan housing allocation.
Recommendation
No change to policy 58.
P.1: Yes
- 20 -
091245 CHAPTER TWO — HOUSING DEVELOPMENT
0B104 Anglian Water
A.W.A. will object to the development of housing sites served by Rayleigh West and Rayleigh East Sewage Treatment Works. The Authority reserves the right to object to specific applications.
Comments
Objections to specific planning applications will be dealt with as appropriate. Financial contributions may be sought from developers to overcome objections.
Recommendation
Ho alterations to policy.
S
— — 21 S 001246 CIIAPThR TWO — POLICY [12
OBIO5 Lovell Homes Eastern Ltd.
Insufficient land is identified for residential development in the Plan period.
Comments
The current land availability estimate shown an over provision of land for housing within the Plan period. The County Council certified the plan on the basis that this overprovision would be kept to a reasonable level.
Recocnmei-tcjation
No alteration to policy H2.
Ref: 0BO84
— 22 —
001247 I
OBJECTIONS TO CHAPTER THREE. .
S n124g GREEN BELT BOUNDARY MODIFICATION TO RESIDENTIAL WOODSIJDE ROAD, 1-IOCKLEY
OBOO1 Mrs. V. L. Scott, S Annalee Gardens, South Ockendon
Alteration of Green Belt boundary to include Plots 62—67 Woodside Road, Ilockley, as residential land
Comments
This area has been carefully investigated in the past and it is considered that to allocate the land for residential development would lead to an extension of development into the Green Belt and make it difficult to resist development of open land to the east which is sandwiched between Aldermans Hill and Hockley Woods. No new circumstances have come to light to give any justification to the alteration of the notation.
Recoinmenda don
No variation to Green Belt boundary.
P.1: Yes Ref: OBOO2, OBO2O
— 23 —
091249 GREEN BELT BOUNDARY MODIFICATION— TO RESIDENTIAL \4000SIDE ROAD, HOCKLEY
OBOO2 Mrs. 3. Bowsam, 328 Faistones, Basildon
Alteration of Green Belt boundary to include Plots 62—67 \4oodside Road, Hockley, as residential land
Comments
This area has been carefully investigated in the past and it is considered that to allocate the land for residential development would lead to an extension of development into the Green Belt and make it difficult to resist development of open land to the east which is sandwiched between Aldermans 13111 and ilockley 'Woods. No new circumstances have come to light to give any justification to the alteration of the notation.
Recommendation
No variation to Green Belt boundary.
.
P.1: Yes Ref: OBO2O
24 — S GREEN BELT BOUNDARY MODIFICATION TO RESIDENTIAL
OBOO3 Crowstone Properties Ltd.
Alterations of the Green Belt boundary to include the northern section of the Public Open Space west of Lascelles Gardens, Ashingdon and adjoining land to the north as long term development land specifically for housing.
Gotaments
This land performs a valuable Green Belt function in preventing the coalescence of the settlements of Hockley and Ashingdon and any proposal to erode this green wedge should be resisted.
Recommendation
No variation to Green Belt boundary.
P.1: Yes Ref: OBO5S
— 25 —
001Z51 '! 'ii I 7II'!I!U' ni nir 1 F iI I!
GREEN BELT BOUNDARY MODIFICATION TO INDUSTRIAL WAY
OBOOS Rochehall Ltd
Land west of Purdeys Way Industrial Estate should be removed from the Green Belt and utilised for industrial development.
Comments
No additional industrial land is required either in the short or long term and therefore it is considered that the land should remain as Green Belt.
Recommendation
No variation to Green Belt boundary. .
P.1: Yes Ref: OBOO6
— 26 — . ie122 GREEN BELT BOUNDARY MODIFICATION TO STORAGE PURDEYS WAY
OBOO6 Rochehall Ltd.
Land west of Purdeys Industrial Estate storage area should be removed from the Green Belt and zoned as an area of special restraint until required as art extension to the open storate area.
Comments
The proposed site is within a sensitive area of Green Belt. Development of this site would lead to the coalescence of the industrial estate with Rochford and put additional pressure ott adjacent Green Belt land to the west.
Recoinmendat ion
No variation to Green Belt boundary.
P.1: Yes Ref: OBOO5, OBO13
— 27 —
001 253 .IIp!I I, • ! iprr ifl !• fl!'!''!! II
GREEN BELT BOUNDARY MODIFICATION TO RESIDENTIAL SOUTH OF BRAYS LANE
OBO1'7 LA. Squier, D.W. Squier & W.H.R. Squier
Land south of Brays Lane adjacent to the built up area should be removed from the Green Belt and designated residential. Reference is made to the additional provision allocated by the Structure Plan.
Comments
This area of land was previously notated as Public Open Space. The Open Space notation has now been moved to cover land north of Brays Lane. The notation of the land for residential purposes may be tied to the belief on the part of A.W. Squier that land at Doggetts Close should remain as Public Open Space (see 011018). It should be noted that there are several other objections which if allowed would extend virtually the entire boundary around Ashingdon further into the Green Belt. The release of this site could create a precedent for the release of other land east of Ashingdon. It is not clear whether the objectors would wish this land to be released in the short or long term.
Recommendation
No variation to Green Belt boundary.
P.!: Yes Ref: 0B022, OBO1S
- 28 - . fll2M GREEN BELT BOUNDARY MODIFICATION TO RESIDENTIAL HULLMtIDGE GARDENS ESTATE
OBO19 MR. Aldington, 29 Mount Pleasant, Barnet, Harts.
The Green Belt boundary should be redrawn around the Bulibridge Gardens Estate which should then be included in chapter 2 as a settlement area.
Comments
The area consists primarily of bungalows with a low density and good natural screening which prevents it from having an adverse visual impact on the Green Belt in the way that the selected settlement areas have. Release of this plotland as a housing site would represent an unacceptable southward extension of Hullbridge into the Green Belt between Hulibridge and Rayleigh.
Recommendation
No variation to Green Belt boundary.
P.1: Yes Ref: 0B027, OBO3O
- 29 -
OO12s5 GREEN BELT BOUNDARY MODIFICATION TO RESIDENTIAL \400DS1DE ROAD, IIOCKLEY
0B020 Abbotrs (East Anglia) Ltd.
The Green Belt boundary should be adjusted to include the small area of plotland comprising Woodside Road, Crown Road and Bullwood Approach within the residential area. Comments
This area has been carefully considered in the past. There are no changes in circumstances to warrant its inclusion within the residential area and accordingly the Green Belt boundary should remain unaltered.
Recommendation
No variation to Green Belt boundary. .
.
P.1: Yes Ref: OBOOl, OBOOZ
- 30 - S oo125& GREEN BELT BOUNDARY MODIFICATION TO RESIDENTIAL NORTH OF CANEWDON VIEW ROAD
OBO22 Mrs. Judge, Ingulfs, Paglesham Land north of the restraint area of Nelson Road/Canewdon View Road should also be removed from the Green Belt and allocated as an area of special restraint. Comments
The inner Green Belt boundaries have been drawn with a view to accommodating long term development and additional areas of land would not, therefore, be required. The release of this land could create a precedent and make it very difficult to resist the release of other land east of Ashingdon.
Recommendation
No variation to Green Belt boundary.
P.1: No Ref: OBO17, oBO78
— 31 —
flO127 GREEN BELT BOUNDARY MODIFICATION TO RESIDENTIAL BETWEEN OXFORD ROAD AND ROCHFORD GARDEN ESTATE
OB023 Aber Ltd, do Norman Green
Land between Oxford Road and Rochford Garden Estate should be taken out of the Green Belt arid designated for housing. The site is surrounded on three sides by existing housing development and would form, a natural inf ill of that development.
Comments
The land is classified by the Ministry of Agriculture as being of Grade 2 value. The site contributes significantly to the Green Belt and, as it is of high class agricultural quality, should be retained in agricultural use. Furthermore, being such a large site it cannot be regarded as 'infilling" in the true sense of the word.
Recommendation
No variation to Green Belt boundary.
S
P.1: 'fes
-32-
O4i2S GREEN BELT BOUNDARY MODIFICATION TO RESIDENTIAL HIGHCLIFF CRESCENT, ASHINGDON
0B025 M.B.C (Estates Ashingdon) Ltd.
Land at the northern end of Higheliff Crescent, Ashingdon, should be removed from the Green Belt and allocated for residential development.
Comments
The Green Belt boundary was previously amended to exclude 700 square metres of land at the northern end of Iligheliff Crescent. M.B.C.'s request to exclude further land is, therefore, unreasonable. A logical defensible boundary has now been established.
Recommendation
No variation to Green Belt boundary.
P.1: Yes
— 33 —
9012 19 ! •uipI.r,Prl I
GREEN BELT BOUNDARY MODIFICATION TO RESIDENTIAL HULLBRIDGE GARDENS ESTATE
0B027 Mr. Bosworth, Australia
Land in the 1-Iullbridge Gardens Estate should be allocated for residential purposes.
Comments
The area consists primarily of bungalows with a low density and good natural screening which prevents it from having an adverse visual Impact on the Green Belt in the way that the selected settlement areas have. Release of this plotland as a housing site would represent an unacceptable southward extension of Uullbridge into the Green Belt between fiulibridge and Rayleigh.
Recommendation No variation to Green Belt boundary. .
P.1: Yes Ref: See OBl9, OBO3O
— 34 — . OOIZfl I'll F t1rr q rr •r-i-
GREEN BELT BOUNDARY MODIP1CAT1ON—— TO RESIDENTiAL • 1-23. TIlE WESTERINGS 0B028 Ilecray Company Ltd
The Green Belt boundary should be modified to include an additional area of land south of l—21 The Westerings, Hawkwell% as housing land. The current boundary of the Green Belt is not realistic and could be improved by including this triangular section of land as residential.
Comments
A planning application was submitted for development of the site as a whole, including the Green Belt area. This was refused and the appeal was subsequently withdrawn by the applicant.
Recommendation
No variation to Green Belt boundary.
I
P.1: Yes
I - —35— G912G1 P'!!'!I!' ''!'' FI"'!
GREEN BELT BOUNDARY MODIFiCATION TO RESIDENTIAL WEST OF HULLBRIDGE GARDENS ESTATE
0B030 S. Welsh T.FI.R. Welsh and P.C. Welsh
Land south of Lower Road and west of the Rullbridge Gardets Estate to be utilised for residential development and particularly for an elderly persons development. Land to the east of the Hullbrxdge Gardens Estate could be an alternative location for old persons accommodation.
Comments
This is an area of open Green Belt separating the built up areas of Hullbridge and Rayleigh. To allow development on this land would have a significant adverse effect on the Green Belt and make it impossible to resist residential development within the Hullbridge Gardens Estate. The combined effect would be a significant unacceptable southward extension of the Green Belt boundary.
Recommendation
No variation to Green Belt boundary.
.
P.1: Yes Ref: OBOl9, 0B027
— 36 — . 001262 GREEN BELT AND COASTAL PROTECTION BOUNDARY MODIFICATION BRANDYHOLE YACHT STATION JIULLBRIDGE
03045 APS.W. Cullis, Brandyhole Yacht Station, Hulibridge
The existing property is a commercial undertaking including the club premises holiday chalets and caravans, boat repair workshops and boat storage. The site should be excluded from the Green Belt and Coastal Protection Belt.
Comments
This property was shown in the Green Belt on the Approved Review Development Plan and there is no reason why this notation should be altered. The existing uses are recognised by their exclusion from the Coastal Protection Belt. The intention is not to restrict current uses of the site but to stop those uses expanding eastwards and northwards onto the saltings.
Re commendation
No variation to the Green Belt or Coastal Protection Belt boundaries.
P.1: Yes
— 37 -
UtJ12G3 1!iUi Ifl!' IPf IPIIL •i IPIUI' III! •' !
GREEN BELT BOUNDARY MODIFICATION TO RESIDENTIAL SUTTON FORD , SUTTON ROAD, ROCUFORD
0B046 Mr. Curtis, 'Sutton Ford", Sutton Road, Rochford
Land between Sutton Road and FleetI-iall Creek to be removed from the Green Belt and allocated as residential land.
Comments
Fleethail Creek Is considered to be the most appropriate long— term Green Belt boundary.
Recommendst ion
No variation to Green Belt boundary.
.
.
P.1: Yes
— 38 - . GREEN BELT BOUNDARY MODIFICATION TO RESIDENTIAL HOLLIES COAL YARD, GREAT STAMBRIDGE
OBO47 Mr. Ewes, 6 Middlemead, Rochford
A secton of Hollies Coal Yard, Great Stambridge, is currently within the Green Belt and this should be re—allocated as residential.
Comments
The proposed alteration would create an unacceptable intrusion into the Green Belt.
Recommendation
No variation to Green Belt boundary.
P.1: No
- 39 —
OO12Gi GREEN BELT BOUNDARY MODIFICATION TO RESIDENTIAL WINDERHERE AVENUE, HULLBRIDGE
OB049 Mrs. Beckworth, do Abbotas (East Anglia) Ltd.
Land south of Windermare Avenue, Hullbridge, to be removed from the Green Belt and utilised for residential development.
Comments
This site was the subject of an appeal in 1981. The site fulfils a visual amenity by creating an open aspect to the countryside from the village edge. If further housing sites are required then this land could become particularly vulnerable.
Recommendation
No variation to Green Belt boundary. S
S
P.1; Yes
— 'JO — S 001266 W!! "r'1' Ih -
CHAPTER THREE - GREEN BELT DEVONSHIRE HOUSE, BARLINC ROAD
OBOSO Mr. Belcham, Thorpe Farm7 Southend Road, Great Wakering
mulling should be allowed on land between Devonshire Rouse and Whitelands, Earling Road.
Comments
Green Belt policy applies. This section of housing is identified in Appendix 3 to the Plan as a Rural Settlement.
Recommendation
No change to policies.
.
.
P.1: Yes
—41—
IF iii •uu,pip" •Ip!'v"! R' '
GREEN BELT BOUNDARY MODIFICATION TO RESIDENTIAL CANEWDON VIEW ROAD, ASRIN000N
011052 Mrs. Brewer, 24 Curtis Road, Alton, }Iants.
Land at the eastern end of Canewdon View Road should be included within toe residential area.
Comments
The Draft Plan did allocate the eastern end of Canewdon View Road as residential land but in response to comments received from Ashingdon Parish Council this finger of proposed development was deleted f ron the Plan. The proposal to reinstate this land would result in an unnecessary intensification of linear development deep into the Green Belt.
Recommendation No variation to Green Belt boundary. .
.
P.1: Yes
- 42 - . (101268 GREEN BELT BOUNDARY MODIFICATION TO RESIDENTIAL LITTLE MALYONS FARM, RULLERIDGE
0B053 Mr. Reckwith, Little Malyons, Malyons Lane, Rullbridge
Part of the land allocated as Public Open Space at Little Malyons Farm, Hullbridge, should be removed from the Green Belt and utilised for residential purposes. Development on this site would not materially alter the appearance of the Green Belt. Furthermore, the settlement would be better served by areas of Public Open Space south of Windermere Avenue, between Pooles Lane and Keswick Avenue and adjacent Long Lane.
Comments
To allow development as proposed would cause an unacceptable intrusion into the Green Belt to the west of Hulibridge.
Recommendation
No variation to Green Belt boundary.
P.!; Yes Ref: OBO49
— 43 —
&01269 GREEN BELT BOUNDARY MODIFICATION TO RESIDENTIAL SPRING GARDENS, RAYLEIGH
OBOS4 Trustees of B. Kingston do Abbotts (East Anglia) Ltd.
Land off Spring Gardens, Rayleigh, to be removed from the Green Belt and allocated for residential purposes.
Comments
To allow residential development at this location would create an illogical extension into the Green Belt ignoring the existing defensible boundaries.
Recommendation
No variation to Green Belt boundary. S
S
P.1; No
— L114 — S OO127$ GREEN BELT BOUNDARY MODIFICATION TO RESIDENTIAL durham road/LINCOLN ROAD, ROCFIFORD
OBO5S Mrs. Clynn, The Laurels, Lincoln Road, Rochford
Land between Durham Road and Lincoln Road (about 50 acres), Rochiord, should be removed from the Green Belt and allocated for residential purposes.
Comments
This plotland area of low density is situated in a particularly sensitive section of Green Belt separating the built up areas of Ashingdon and Flockley. Any proposal to erode this section of Green Belt should be resisted.
Recommendation
No variation to Green Belt boundary.
Yes Ref: 0B003
— 45 —
001271 GREEN BELT BOUNDARY MODIFICATION SOUTHEND AIRPORT
OBOS8 Southend Borough Council
Southend Airport — Green Belt boundary allows no scope for expansion of the buildings complex of the airport.
Comments
Any movement of the Green Belt boundary northwards would make the eventual coalescence of Rochford and Southend become a reality.
Recommend at ion
Further discussions required. .
.
Ref: 0B068
- 46 — S 001272 GREEN BELT BOUNDARY MODIFICATION
0B068 0BO69 OBO7O British Airports International
Green Belt boundary should be drawn with a view to accommodating long term development — the airport should be removed from the Green Belt. Comments
County CouncilTs Draft Green Belt Subject Plan included the airport within the Green Belt boundary.
Recommendat ion
Further discu8sions required.
Ref: OBOSB
— 147 —
001273 SOJJTHEND AIRPORT — MODIFICATION TO INDUSTRIAL LAND ALLOCATED IN THE APPROVED REViEW DEVELOPMENT PLAN
OEO71 British Airports International
Paragraph 4.3.4 and Proposals Map A indicates that a strip of land alongside the south east boundary of Aviation \4ay Industrial Estate has been re—allocated from industrial to Creen Belt. It is land on or adjacent to the Airport which is most likely to be taken up.
Comments
This land is not served from Aviation Way Industrial Estate and therefore is in planning terms linked to the future of the Airport which is in Green lielt at this point. Any future development of the Airport is likely to be in the vicinity of the existing Airport building.
Recommenda t ion
No variation to Green Belt boundary.
P.1: Yes
— 48 — . tMU274 GREEN BELT BOUNDARY MODIFICATION SANDHILL ROAD, RAYLEIGH
0B074 Mr. Smith, 441 Daws Heath Road, Benfleet
It would appear that this land in Sandhill Road, Rayleigh, is just outside the boundary of the restraint area. The objection, however, refers to the land being Included in the Roach Valley Conservation Zone.
Comments
The site is currently within an area of Green Belt on which successive development proposals have been refused and appeals dismissed.
Recommendation
No variation to Green Belt boundary or the Roach Valley Conservation Zone boundary.
P.1: Yes
— 49 —
&G1275 GREEN BELT BOUNDARY MODIFICATION TO RESIDENTIAL LAND SOUTH OF RAVENSWOOD CHASE, ROCHFORD
0BO75 B. & R. Marshall, 10 Ravenswood Chase
Land south of Ravenswood Chase should be removed from the Green Belt and allocated for residential purposes.
Comments
The site was the subject of a planning application in 1981 (ref. R0C1364181) which was refused on Green Belt grounds. The appeal was withdrawn in order to permit consideration being given to the development of the site at the Local Plan Stage.
The site contributes markedly to the green wedge separating Rochford and Southend. The site is bounded to the south by Public Open Space within the boundaries of Southend Borough,, to the west by existing housing and to the east by Grade 1 agricultural land. In view of the importance of this land it should remain as Green belt.
Recommendation
No variation to Green Belt boundary.
P.1: Yes
- SO -
001276 CHAPTER THREE — POLICY GEl
OBO7GA Essex Bridleways Association
Object to the inclusion of the words "See Chapter Six Policy LT7" in policy Gill because it appears to restrict small scale facilities for outdoor participatory sport and recreation to golf only.
Comments
The inclusion of these words could allcM for an ambiguous interpretation of policy GB1.
Rec oinmendat ion
The reference "See Chapter Six policy LT7" should be deleted fran policy OB1.
P.1: Yes Ret: 0B024, 0B037, OBO51, 0B076—0B076F, 0B091—OBO96
- 51 —
00127? GREEN BELT BOUNDARY MODIFICATiON TO RESIDENTiAL LAND BETWEEN WESTERN ROAD AND WEIR FARN ROAD, RAYLEIGH
0B077 C. Pyle, Pendower, Western Road
Land between Western Road and Weir Farm Road including laud owned by the District Council should be removed from the Green Belt and utilised as residential land to ensure that the additional provision identified in the Structure Plan is satisfied, This land would provide a logical rounding of £ in this area.
Comments
Structure Plan provision will be exceeded by at least 200 units. The reduction in the additional provision is to ensure that this overprovision is limited. There is, therefore, no justification on this basis for allocating additional land In the short tens.
Furthermore, this land is situated in a particularly sensitive section of Green Belt. If development was allowed to take place there would be no gap between the built up area of Thundersley to the south and Rayleigh.
Recommendation
No variation to Green Belt boundary.
S
P.1: Yes
— 52 — S gflZ7S GREEN BELT BOUNDARY MODIFICATION TO RESIDENTIAL LAND OFF MOONS CLOSE, ASHINGIJON
OBO7B F.M. Wall, c/n Abbotts (East Anglia) Ltd.
Land off Moons Close should be removed from the Green Belt and allocated as residential land (short or long term).
Comine n t s
The inner Green Belt boundary has been drawn with a view to accommodating long term development and additional areas of land should not, therefore, be required. There is no justification for the release of this land in preference to other land, the subject of objections east of Ashingdon. To allow the release of any of this land would set a precedent making it difficult to resist a major intrusion into the Green Belt.
Recommendation
No variation to Green Belt boundary.
P.1: Yes Ref: 03022
- 53 —
G111279 GREEN BELT BOUNDARY MODIFICATION TO RESIDENTIAL LAND OFF THORPE ROAD, RAWKWELL
OBOBO M.B.C. (Estates AshingcIon) Ltd.
Land off Thorpe Road, Hawkwell, should be removed from the Green Belt and allocated for residential development (short or long term). The land makes no contribution to the Green Belt.
Comments
The revised Local Plan has designated the settlement area centred on Sweyne Avenue as a residential area. To allow Green Belt land to be released for residential purposes in this location would cause the joining—up of the built up area of Hawkwell to the settlement area. Clearly this is unreasonable and Green Belt should remain as shown on the proposals map.
Recommendation
No variation to Green Belt boundary.
.
P.1: Yes Ref: OBO9O
- 514 . o012 8ff GREEN BELT BOUNDARY MODIFICATION TO RESIDENTIAL LAND AT WELLINGTON ROAD, RAYLEIGH
0BO82 French Kier Homes Ltd.
Land at Wellington Road, Rayleigh, is immediately available for development in the short term to fulfil Structure Plan allocations.
Comments
A statement will be produce to show that Structure Plan allocations will be met to 1990.
Recommendation
No alteration to policy 118.
P.1: Yes
- 55 —
ft912&t GREEN BELT BOUNDARY — CHAPTER THREE CHAPTER TWO — HOUSING ALLOCATIONS
0B084 R.BF.
insufficient land has been identified to satisfy Structure Plan allocations. Green belt boundaries are defined with insufficient regard to long term development pressures.
Comments
A statement will be produce to show that Structure Plan allocations will be met and to show that sufficient long term land has been identified to accommodate 2,600 units to the turn of the century.
Recommenda t ion
No variation to Green Belt boundary. .
P.1: Yes
- 56 — . 001282 CHAPTER THREE INCLUSION OF LAND AT BROOK ROAD, RAYL1EGH IN THE NETROPOLITAN GREEN BELT OD089 Thorn EMI
Land used for car parking with the benefit of planning permission although divorced fran the industrial site with which it was formerly connected, is still used for parking. It is now surplus to requirements and forms a logical part of the adjoining industrial estate. Its inclusion within the Green Belt and adjoining proposed Open Space is inappropriate. Coents
This site is currently within the Green Belt and no change of status is proposed. The Public Open Space notation is not, however, appropriate.
Recamnendat ion
No variation to Green Belt boundary. Public Open Space notation to be deleted.
P.1: Yes
— 57 —
901283 GREEN BELT BOUNDARY MODIFICATION TO RESIDENTIAL NORTh OF THE RECTORY ROAD/SWEYNE AVENUE SETTLEMENT AREA
0B090
Mr. D. Keddie
Land to the north of the settlement area and to the east of Clements Hall Sports Complex should be taken out of the Green Belt and utilised as residential land.
Comments
The revised Local Plan has designated the settlement area centred on Sweyne Avenue as a residential area. To allow Green Belt land to be released around the settlement area would cause the joining—up of the built—up area of Hawkwell to the settlement area. Clearly this is unreasonable and the Green Belt boundary should remain as shown on the Proposals Nap.
Recommendation
No variation to Green Belt boundary.
.
P.1: Yes Ref: OBOBO
- 58 - aS
901284 GREEN BELT BOUNDARY MODIFICATION TO RESIDENTiAL LAND AT KLONDYKE AVENE1 RAYLEIGH
CR099 North Thames Gas
N.TG. land at Klondyke Avenue is suitable for housing development and should not therefore be included within the Green Belt. All services are available and the site would form a logical extension to future housing development in the north.
N.T.G. also consider that more land should be allocated for development in the 1990ts.
Comments
Sufficient land has ben allocated to satisfy post 1990 housing requirements.
Recommendation
No variation to Green Belt boundary.
P.1: Yes
— 59 —
001285 '
GREEN BELT BOUNDARY MODIFICATION —POLICY GB 2 LAND FRONTING POOLE S LANE WEST OF HALCYON CARAVAN PARK
OBIO1 Mr. B. Christian, "Autumntide", Pooles Lane, Rulibridge
This snail housing area was included in the Approved Review Development Plan as a residential area. The local Plan proposes to include the land in the Green Belt which would remove the rights of the residents to rebuild their properties.
Comments
This housing area is included in the Draft Plan as a Rural Settleiuent Area. It is given a residential notation on the Approved Review Development Plan.
Recommendation
No variation to Green Belt boundary or to policy GB2. .
S
P.1: Yes
- 60 — S 001286 CHAPTER THREE — POLICY 0111
011103 C.E.G.B.
Would like the following addition made to policy 031:—
"Without prejudice to other planning considerations, proposals for development within the Green Belt to be carried out by a Public Service Authority or a Statutory Undertaker will be allowed where it can be shown that they are essential to:—
(a) the maintainance of an existing service or undertaking; or
(b) an existing source of employment; or
(c) the provision of a new service or undertaking.
Cominen t s
This proposed addition would undermine the ability of the District Council to control development in the Green Belt.
Recommendation
No alteration to policy GB1.
— 61 —
e01287 - III!"
OBJECTIoNS TO CHAPTER FOUR.
.
S 001288 CHAPTER FOUR CONNERCIAL USE OF RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY
OBOO1O Mrs. P. Lonergan, 103 Golden Cross, Ashingdon
No provision is made in Chapter Four for future control of combined residential/commercial use in dwellings in residential areas.
Comments
Where commercial use of residential property is such that planning permission is required, policies 1113 and Hl4 will be applied.
Recommendation
Advise the objector that subject matter appears to be a matter for normal development control policies (e.g. change of use).
P.I Yes Ref: 0B034
— 62 —
001289 CHAPTER FOUR POLICY EBS
011013 Rochehall Ltd.
Inclusion of a triangle of land at eastern end of the Area Primarily for Open Storage on Proposals Map A. It was included in an area primarily for industrial use on the Approved Reveiw Development Plan Town Map and is the subject of an existing planning permission for industry and warehousing. Accordingly this land should be excluded from the area primarily for open storage on the Proposal8 Map.
Comments
it is reasonable for the notation to be altered in this case.
Recommendation
Proposals Map A should be altered to take account of this objection.
.
P.1: Yes Ref; OBOOS, 011006
- 63 - . 001290 CHAPTER FOUR COMMERCIAL USE OF RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY
0B034 Elizabeth O'Brien, 103 Golden Gross Road, Ashingdon
No provision has been made for the future control of combined residential/commercial use in dwellings in residential areas.
Comments
Where commercial use of residential property is such that planning permission is required, policies 1113 and 1114 will be applied.
Recommenda t ion
Advise objector that the subject niatter appears to be a matter for normal development control policies, e.g. change of use.
P.1: Yes Ref: OBOlO
- 6L4
901291 CHAPTER FOUR — POLICY EM . OBOS9 Southend Borough Council
Objects to the presumtion of allowing non—industrial uses1 in particular non—food retail, on industrial land (because of (1) the limited land availabile for future industrial development in the Southend—Rochford area, and (2) retail uses would compete directly with established shopping areas. Any permissions exceptionally granted should be restricted to "bulky" non—food goods only which cannot easily or economically be sold and displayed in traditional shopping centres. Retail uses are contrary to Structure Plan and Southend Borough Council policies and therefore, Policy EB4 contains a fundamental contradiction in trying to avoid conflict with other Structure and Local Plan policies and objectives.
Policies EM and SAT1 could lead to almost uncontrolled development of non—food retail and other non—industrial uses on industrial areas throughout the District. The implications of these policies on long—term development land on the west side of Aviation Way concerns Southend Borough Council.)
Policies EB4 'and SAIl should be reinforced to give a general presumption against all types of non—industrial use unless there are clear benefits to the area in terms of amenities provided and jobs created, sufficient industrial land is safeguarded, there is no conflict with other Structure or Local Plan policies and the proposals do not compete with established shopping areas. If retails uses are exceptionally allowed they should be restricted to particulary types of "bulky" goods for which shopping centre operations are not suitable.
Policy SAl refers to the imposition of conditions and/or legal agreement only on industrial estates depicted on the Proposals Maps, i.e. not to existing industrial areas, and this is unsatisfactory.
Comments
Adequate provision has been made for industrial development in Rochford District. Although policy EB1 may appear to contradict existing County Council policies, the Plan has of course been certified by the County Council, whose proposed alterations to Structure Plan policy 5116 allows retail warehouse development outside town centres in certain circumstances. That policies EM hnd SAT1 will not lead to uncontrolled non—food retail development on industrial estates may be evidenced by recent planning decisions on Purdeys Industrial Estate. The wording of policy SAIl would require amendment if existing industrial estates are not shown on the adopted Proposal Maps. Policies are suitable for this District because of the lack of suitable town centre/edge or town sites and the need to prevent retail facilities being lost to the District.
Recommendation
No alteration to policy EB4. OO129 Yes — 65 — SOUTHEND AiRPORT — WAREHOUSING
0B072 British Airports International
Paragraph 4.4.1 is incorrect in stating that there is limited demand for warehousing in Rochford because it ignores the attractiveness of proximity to a growing regional airport. This paragraph does not recognise the potential for warehouse development on and off, the Airport.
Comments
Whilst it could be argued that paragraph 4.4.1 could be worded differently, the Plan does not make special provision for warehousing for the reasons stated in that paragraph.
Recommendation
No variation to Green Belt boundary.
PT: Yes
- 66 -
001293 CHAPTER FOUR - POLICY EB1
OBO]6B Essex Bridleways Association
Seeks an amendment to policy EB1 to encourage riding establishments and rural industries related to horse keeping.
Comments
The District Council does not wish to encourage industrial development In the Green Belt as this would be contrary to Structure Plan policy s9 and District Local Plan policy OB1. Riding establishments may be permitted under policy LT1O.
Recommenda t ion
No alteration to policy EB1.
.
P.1: Yes Ref: 0B024, 0B037, 0B051, 0B076—0B076F, 0B091—0B096
- 67 — . 0111294 r
OBJECTIONS TO CHAPTER FIVE.
001295 II U 'P u!''' 1111111
CHAPTER FIVE ROADS
0B014 Mr. M.D. Astor, 8 Banyard Way, Rochford
There has ben a contraction in the road network through the loss of Cherry Orchard Lane and Gusted Hall Road through the Scrubs and the construction, of the B1OI3—A127 link has been postponed to beyond the Plan period. House building should cease until a proper road network is provided.
Comments
The cessation of housebuilding until such tine as the road network is improved is impractical and would not be in accordance with the Structure Plan or to the benefit of housebuilders and populace alike. The District Plan clearly states in policies TPl to TPÔ that the District Council will press for highway improvements.
Recommendation
No alteration to policies.
.
P.1: 'Lea
- 68 - . O&I29 CHAPTER FIVE — B10l3
0B038 Hockley Parish Council
Objections to there being no reference to the installation of bus laybys to improve the capacity of the E1013, and suggests that one is located outside the public library in Southend Road, Hockley when the surgery is built.
C omme n t s
Policy TP9 states the "The Council will continue to support the alleviation of traffic congestion on bus routes."
Reconetidat ion
This objection is supported and a new paragraph and policy should be inserted after paragraph 5.3.1 in the Plan.
P.1: Yes
- 69 —
8012 WI SOIJTIIEND AIRPORT — STRATEGY
OBO6I British Airports International
The wording of paragraph 5.2.1.(viii) should not be quantified by the word "acceptable" because new controls on jet aircraft and toe use of quieter jets and turbo—prop aircraft by charter operators will improve the environmental acceptability of the airport operation.
Comments
To delete reference to acceptability might encourage changes in the operation or development of the airport which could be environmentally damaging and not acceptable to Members notwithstanding their general support for the airport. The introduction of quieter aircraft will enable the airport to realise a greater potential which is of course part of the transport strategy.
Recommendation S
No alteration to paragraph 5.2.l(viii).
P.1: Yes Ref: OBO6S
- 70 — . n128 SOUTREND AIRPORT — AIRCRAFT MOVEMENTS
0B062 British Airports International
The decline of passenger and freight traffic is only 29% and 46% respectively of the level in the late SLxties and not to 20% and 10% as stated in paragraph 5.7.1.
Comments
BAI's figures are accepted and paragraph 5.7.1. will be amended accordingly.
Recommendation
Paragraph 5.7.1 should be amended accordingly.
P.1; Yes
- 71 —
eot29I SOUTHEND AIRPORT — PRIVATISATION
0B063 British Airports International
The question of ownership is not material to the policies of the Plan and the final sentence of paragraph 5.7.2. that the Government has plans for the privatisatlon of local authority owned airports should be deleted.
Comments
This objection is accepted and the paragraph will be amended accordingly.
Recommendat ion
Delete final sentence from pargraph 5.7.2.
P.1: Yes
— 72 — S 11ff 3011 SOIJTHEND AIRPORT — AIRCRAFT MOVEMENTS
0B064 British Airports International
In paragraph 5.7.3 the words "due to the limitations of the runway" should be added to the end of the first sentence.
Comments
The first sentence of the paragraph is factually correct. The limitations of the runway may be one of several factors fecting holiday traffic.
Re c ommen dat ion
No alteration to paragraph 5.7.3.
P.1: Yes
— 73 —
001301 SOUTHEND AIRPORT — POLICY TP1O
0B065 British Airports International
Objects to the reference to maintaining a satisfactory environment in policy TPIO.
Comments
The current wording of policy TP1O is to ensure that any increase in the traffic will not be to the detriment of the environment, particularly as far as nearby residents are concerned. BAI clearly wish us to support their attempts to realise the full potential of the airport in whatever form that may take, and not consider the environmental impact of its development. If, as BA1 claim, aircraft noise will not be a constraint because of modern technology, they will not be disadvantaged by the existing wording. The objection cannot therefore be supported.
Re c omme n dat ion
No alteration to policy TP1O.
.
P.11 Yes Ref: 0B061
74 — S SOUTHEND AIRPORT — NOISE
0B066 British Airports International
Objects to the qualification 'possibly" in paragraph 5.7.5 and considers that after the words "take place" there should be inserted " for the period of this Plan.
Comments
The introduction of the wording is unnecessary because of the Plan period which ceases at the end of December 1990.
Recommendation
No alteration to policy 5.7.5.
P.1: Yes
— 75 —
001303 SOUTREND AIRPORT — CLOSURE a w 0B067 British Airports International
Considers that paragraph 5.7.7 referring to the possibilites of closure of the airport, are out of date and not helpful in a statutory plan. The airport is now trading profitably and closure is unlikely. Paragraph 5.7.7 should therefore be deleted.
Coniments
The postulation of paragraph 5.7.7 in the context of the Plan Is reasonable.
Recommendation
No alteration to paragraph 5.7.7. S
.
P.1; Yes
— 76 —
001304 CHAPTER FIVE — PROVISION OF GRASS VERGES
0B07€C Essex Bridleways Association
Seek a policy to improve the bridleway network and to ensure that adequate grass verges are provided under the Highways Act 1980 Section 71 for the safety of horses.
Comments
The District Council will await the outcome of the County Councilts consideration of bridleway provision.
P.1: Yes Ref: 013024, 0E037, OBOS1, 0B076—0B076F, 013091—013096
— 77 —
00 13 Mi CHAPTER FIVE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGY
0B093 Open Spaces Society
Paragraph 5.2.1. states that there will be an improvement to the existing highway networks yet the Plan does not seek to improve the bridleway network by the creation of new bridleways.
Comments
Bridleways are not regarded as highways in the context of Chapter 5.
Recommendation
No change to the strategy in Chapter 5.
With regard to the creation of new bridleways, the District Council will await the outcome of the County Council's consideration of this matter.
.
P.1: Yes Ref: 0B024, 08037, 03051, 03076—OBO7GF, OBO9l—0B096
- 78 - I 001306 I — —, — i• P 1 'aui'wuiirpi —
OBJECTIONS TO CHAPTER SIX
INCLUDING THOSE RE LATED TO
HORSE RIDING_FiLITIES AND
THE CREATION OF EBIDLEWAYS.
.
I 001307 CHAPTER SIX COMMUNITY FACILITIES
OBO11 Mrs. P. Lonergan, 103 Golden Cross Road, Ashingdon
No future provision is made, except in Great Wakering, for community facilities for non—sporting activities.
Comments
The District Council has pursued a policy of providing community centres where a need has been identified. The area to the north of Brays Lane is already served by the Ashingdon and East Hawkwell Memorial Hall at King George's Field.
Examples of provision by the District Council are:—
1) The Grange, Rayleigh ii) 1-lockley Community Centre iii) Freight House, Rochford iv) Hullbridge Community Centre
Recommendation
Discuss the existing provision of these facilities with objector and try to establish a detailed objection.
P.1: Yes Ref 0B035
— 79 — . 001308 CHAPTER SIX LEISURE
OBO1S Mr. M.D. Astor, B Banyard Way, Rochford
The Plan makes no reference to "having some areas of untouched land where children can climb tees, build dens or even light fires without anyone trying to organise them or interfering."
Comments
The Plan provides for substantial additional areas of Informal Public Open Space.
Recommendation
1o action seems possible.
P.1: Yes
- 80 -
001309 CHAPTER SIX - POLICY LTIO BRIDLEWAY AND HORSE RIDING FACILITIES
0B024 Mr. R. Lawrence, Essex County, Chairman, British Horse Riding Society
Paragraph 6.10.5 and 6.10.7 do not deal specifically with horse riding facilities. Paragraph 6.10.12 refers only to the creation of permissive routes and not to the creation of dedicated bridleways. Policy LT1O(A)(i) is unreasonable because it fails to recognise the rights of horse riders to use the road system. Policy LT1O(A)(iii) is unnecessary because grazing is an agricultural use of land and environmental aspects of buildings in general should be dealt with in a like manner. Policy LT1O(A)(iv) is unreasonable because it fails to recognise the rights of horse riders to use the highway. Policy LTIO(A)(v) should only be implemented on advise from the British Horse Society. Policy LT1O(A)(vi) is unreasonable because it should not be assumed that horse riders use footpaths other then where a disputed status exists and horse riders are entitled to use highway verges according the Highways Act. Policy LT1O(B)(iii) is inequitable because people in one area may need more land than those in another; also horses can be kept permanently stabled and exercised on specialised or indoor areas. Therefore, this Clause should have greater flexibility. Policy LT1O(D) should provide for living accommodation to be permitted on existing premises without living accommodation.
Comments
See comments to 0B076F,
Recommendation
No alteration to policy LT1O .
P.1. Yes
- 81 - S 0111310 CHAPTER SIX COMIJMMUNITY FACILITIES
0B035 E. O'Brien, 103 Golden Cross Road, Ashingdon
No future provision is made) except in Great Wakering for community facilities for non—sporting activities.
Comments
The District Council has pursued a policy of providing community centres where a need has been identified. The area to the north of Brays Lane is already served by the Ashingdon and East Hawkwell Memorial Hall at King George's Field.
Recommendation
Discuss the existing provision of these facilities with the objector to try and establish a detailed objection.
P.1: Yes Ref: OBOll
- 82 -
001311 CHAPTER SIX HORSE RIDING FACILITIES
0BO37 Rockley Parish Council
In paragraph 6.11.1 the need for more bridleways has not been stated although planning permissions are granted for the erection of stables.
Comments
This objection appears to be that the Parish Council is requesting that the Council makes a more positive cominitmeat to seeking the provision of new bridleways.
See 0B016 — 0B076F
Re cosine nda t ion To be discussed at District Plan Working Party. I
P.1: Yes Ref: 0b024, OBOSI, 0B0760B076P, 0E091—0B096
83 — S 001312 CHAPTER SIX POLICY LT2
0B039 Hockley Parish Council
Objects to the loss of sites allocated for open space on the argument of "overriding need" and says that replaced land has In the past been in the wrong location e.g. ilockley Community Centre.
Comments
The wording of policy LT2 provides for contingencies and does not suggest that any of the areas identified for public open space purposes will necessarily be lost.
Recommendation
No alteration to policy LTZ.
P.1: Yes
- 8i -
0191313 CHAPTER SIX POLICY LT1
OBO4O Bockley Parish Council
Objects to the description of land south of Plumberow Mount and land adjoining Plumberow Avenue as Public Open Space and asks that it is annotated as "Green Belt with public access".
Comments
Both of these Public Open Space sites are within the Green Belt. The alternative notation is not necessary and does not imply any alternative use of land.
Recommendation
No alteration to the description. S
P.1: Yes
- 85 — S 001314 HORSE RIDING FACILITIES — POLICIES LT1O
€18051 Horse Owners arid Riders of South Essex.
Object to the Plan as a whole and Policy Lt1O in particular. Policy LTIO is unduly and unnecessarily restrictive. It should be amended to make it clear that each application for private stables should be judged on its merits and not by standards that the individual cannot hope to achieve.
The new requirement that horse riding tracks must be provided in open spaces of 25 acres or more is not mentioned in Chapter Six. The Plan should indicate where these are to be sited.
The Plan should propose the following bridleways;—
(1) Mount Bovers Lane — alongside Main Road, Hawkwell — Gusted Hall Lane — Flemmings Farm Road.
(ii) Woodlands Road — Kilnwood Avenue Hockley Rise — White Hart Lane — Clements Hall Lane — Ironwell Lane; White Hart Lane — Albert Road or Wedgwood Way, Ashingdon; White Hart Lane — Greensward Lane.
(iii) Pooles Lane
(iv) Murrells Lane
(v) Replacement bridleway on Purdeys Industrial Estate
(vi) Alongside proposed B1013—Al27 link.
Comments Policy LTIO is designed to steer the estricted ntimber of stable buildings in the Green Belt to the most appropriate locations. Some neighbouring authorities do not normally allow stables to be erected in the Green Belt.
There is no statutory requirement to provide horse riding tracks on Public Open Space
Recommendation
No alteration to policy LT1O.
P.1: Yes Ref: OB024, OB037, OB076—OBO7bF, OBO91—OB096
— 86 -
OO131 CHAPTER SIX PUBLIC OPEN SPACE
OBO6O Southend Borough Council
Paragraph 6.3.3. refers to the safeguarding of all existing areas of Public Open Space, but the following Policy LTZ refers only to new allocated areas shown on the Proposals Maps. The Borough Council submits that 6.3.3. should become a specific policy or that existing Public Open Spaces should be defined on the Proposals Maps.
Comments
The wording of Policy LT2 would require amendment if existing Public Open Spaces are not shown on the adopted Proposals Maps. This objection is accepted.
Recommendation
Delete "on the Proposals Map" from policy LTZ.
P.1: Yes
- 87 - S CHAPTER SIX — POLICY LT9
0B0760 Essex Bridleways Association
LT9 should include a statement that the Council will seek to have definitive bridleways created within the Roach Valley Conservation Zone.
Comments
The District Council will await the outcome of the County Council's consideration of bridleway provision.
P.1: Yes Ref: 0B024, 0B037, 0B051, 0B076—OBO76P, 0B091—0B096
- 88 -
0G13i7 CHAPTER SIX — CREATION OF BRIDLEWAYS
0B076E Essex Bridleways Association
Would like to see in Chapter 6 (Leisure arid Tourism) a policy that the Council will seek to have definitive bridieways created.
Comments
The District Council will await the outcome of the County Council's consideration of bridleway provision.
S
P.1: Yes Ref; 013024, 0B037, OBOSl, 0B076—0B076F, 01309l—0B096
- 89 - . 001318 CI-IAPThR SIX — POLICY LT1O
0B076F Essex Bridleways Association
Objects to policy LT1O in its entirety because it disregards the needs of horse riders, is contrary to Green Belt Circulars, inhibits good management of horses, restricts freedom of areas to control their grazing requirements, evades the requirement of the Highways Act 1980, places outmoded emphasis on the importance of agricultural purposes, interferes with horse riders national rights, goes far beyond normal planning procedure and places insupportable financial burden on them.
Comments
Policy LT1O is intended to be a restrictive policy insofar as it relates to land use pressures on the Green Belt. The objection cannot be supported because—
(i) Green Belt Circulate and Structure Plan policy refers to sport and participatory recreation, not individual leisure pursuits.
(ii) The grazing requirement is designed to maintain a 1w density of stable buildings and open land between separate stable buildings, it does not control horse grazing per se. (iii) It does not restrict riders freedom to use the highway, but suggests that stables are better placed where riding can take place off the highway and avoids accesses which will give rise to a traffic hazard.
(iv) Agriculture is of high national priority and the District Council gives it support by discouraging the loss of land in agricultural use.
The restrictive nature of policy LT1O is somewhat pardoxical since it does allw for stables to be built in the Green Belt. The absence of the policy will mean that normal Green Belt controls will apply, and whilst participatory sport and recreation is acceptable under Green Belt policies, the erection of buildings for individual leisure pursuits is not. Therefore, the deletion of policy LT1O would mean that most applications for stables in the Green Belt would be refused on Green Belt grounds.
Reconimendat ion
No alteration to policy LT1O.
P.1: Yes kef: 0BO24, OBO37, OBOS1, 0BO-76fbBO76F, 0B091—0B096
tffl1319 CHAPTER SIX OPEN SPACES —MANAGEMENTPRIMARILY FOR WILDLIFE
OBOS6A Essex Naturalists' Trust Ltd.
Would like to see the following policy applied to Public Open Spaces of nature conservation interest:—
"The following areas of Public Open Space are of great nature conservation interest and should be managed primarily for wildlife. The District Planning Authority will not permit any development which would adversely and materially affect these sites a
I Hockley Wood Site of Special Scientific Interest — an outstanding ancient woodlands.
II Betts Wood, Hockley, a semi—rural broadleaved wood of ancient origin.
III Great Wakering Common — a mixed habitat site with old grassland
IV Edward Hall, Rochford — old grassland and hedgerows V Hawkwell Brick Pits — grassland, scrub and ponds."
Comments
The Development of Public Open Spaces will not normally be permitted (Policy LT2). The Plan is not intended to indicate management objectives for each Public Open Space, although the areas quoted by the Essex Naturalist Trust are not to be laid out as formal playing fields. Great Wakering Common is owned and managed by the Parish Council, Edwards Hall by Southend Borough Council and Hawkwell Brick Pits have not yet been acquired.
Recommendation
No alteration to provision of Public Open Space.
P.1: Yes
— qi — 1' S 001320 CHAPTER SIX OPEN SPACES — MANAGEMENT PRTNARILY FOR 1?ILDLIFE 0B086B Essex Naturalists' Trust Ltd. The following policy should be included in support of local nature reserves:—
'The District Council will seek the establishment of Local Nature Reserves in the District in consultation with the Nature Conservancy Council and the Essex Naturalists Trust and will encourage other breeders to manage suitable sites as nature reserves. Comments No particular sites have been identified by the Trust. Informal discussions have taken place in the past with a view to establishing a local nature reserve and further discussions will take place whenever the opportunity arises. The Trust has recently established a nature reserve at Lion Creek, Canewdon. Recommendation
No specific policy should be included in the Local Plan, but reference will be made to the fact that the Council will encourage the creation of local Nature Reserves within the District in consultation with the Nature Conservancy Council and the Essex Naturalists Trust.
P.1; Yes
92 -
9ff 13 21 !!I! rii 1111 pun hr I!r'' P 9II1 'I'I '
OBJECTIVES OF THE PLAN p w 011091 Open Space Society
Objectives of improving the quality of life of the inhabitants of the District (pararaph 1.3.1(i) and providing for transportation improvements (paragraph 1.3.1(v) will not be met as far as horse riders are concerned because of inadequate policies.
Comments
This is not an objection to the wording of the Objectives. Horse riding is not regarded as transportation in this context, but is considered a leisure pursuit.
Recommendation
No change to the objectives.
S
P.1: Yes Ref: OB024, OB037, 011051, 011076—OBO76F, OBO91—011096
— 93 — S UeRI3ZZ CHAPTER SIX — POLICY LT1O (HORSE RIDING FACILITIES
0B092 Open Spaces Society
Policy LT1O does not conform to the current British Horse Society policy on horse management. The policy is unduly restrictive because there are almost no bridleways, few people can afford to own/rent sufficient land upon which to carry out their horse riding activities and the minimum grazing land requirement is not necessary. Refers to the need to find alternative uses for agricultural land to reduce subsidies/food mountains.
Comments
Policy LT1O is primarily concerned with the location of stables and the need to avoid a proliferation of stables in the Green Belt. The minimum grazing requirement is a density control and not a control over the manner in which horses are kept. The management of horses is not a planning matter, although the management of stables is by virtue of policy LT1O(E). The advice of relevant consultees, one of which is the British Horse Society, will be taken into consideration before planning permission is granted. Recc*nmendat Ion No alteration to policy LTI.O
P.1: Yes Ref: OB024, 0B037, OBO51, OBO76—0B076F, OBO91—OB096
— 94 —
t101323 I''P In IIII C i!!II!tIII9III ui.u''u ' r 11111,111!
CHAPTER SIX INFORMAL COUNTRYSIDE RECREATION
0B094 Open Spaces Society
Paragraph 6.10.4 recognises the problems resulting from an inadequate bridleways network. The Council should therefore seek to create more bridleways under the 1980 }Iighway Act.
Comments
The Countryside and Conservation Committee of the County Council is to consider its position as regards the provision of bridleways throughout the County.
Recommendation
The District Council should await the outcome of the deliberations of the Countryside and Conservation Committee. S
S
P.1: Yes Ref: 0B024, 0B037, 0Z051, 0B076—0E076F, OBO9l—0E096
— 95 —
GO 132 4 CHAPTER SIX POLICY LT1
OBO9S Open Spaces Society
In policy LT1 no provision is made for the establishment of bridleways on publicly owned open space.
Comments
The Countryside and Conservation Committee of the County Council is to consider its position as regards the provision of bridleways throughout the County.
Re commenda t ion
The District Council should await the outcome of the deliberations of the Countryside and Conservation Committee.
P.1: Yes Ref: 0flO24, 0B037, 011051, 0BO76—OBO7ÔF, 011091—011096
— 96 -
001325 CHAPTER SIX HORSE RIDING FACILITIES
0B096 Open Spaces Society
Refers to paragraphs 6.11.4 and 6.11.5 commenting that the 4orking Party refuses to give proper consideration to the establishment of bridleways. preferring to discuss permissive routes.
Comments
The Countryside and Conservation Committee of the County Council is to consider its position as regards the provision of bridleways throughout the County.
Recommends t ion
The District Council should await the outcome of the deliberations of the Countryside and Conservation Committee.
S
P.1: Yes Ref; 0EO24, OB037, OBO51, OBO76—0B076F, OEO91—OB096
— q7 — S 001326 CHAPTER SIX — POLICY LT2
0B098 British Airways Object to the inclusion of land at Lower Wyburns Farm as Public Open Space because it would leave the balance of the marginal farm holding to the south of the A121 and necessitate the erection of a new farm house and associated agricultural buildings. Furthermore, the case for additional Public Open Space within this area of the District is not proven.
C cxnments
At present the public open space notation covers the area of the car park at the western end of the farm and the kennels at the eastern end. This allocation is not appropriate and should be deleted. A comprehensive study of land in Rayleigh concluded, however, that Lower Wyburns Farm was ideal for use as Public Open Space. The pleasing character of the land with its mixture of open grassland and trees together with its physical location in East Rayleigh make it ideal for this purpose. Furthermore, the open aspects and general appearance of the land would be maintained by utilising the whole of the farm area, excluding the car park and kennels, as public open space and it is, therefore, sensible for this allocation to remain unaltered.
Reccumendat ion
The deletion of the public open space notation from the car park (see 0B089) and kennels; the notation to remain unaltered over the farm.
P.1: Yes Ref: OBOS9
- 98 —
001327 OBJECTIONS TO CHAPTER SEVEN,. S
I
aw 001328 CHAPTER SEVEN PARAGRAPH 7.3.0 CONSERVATION AREAS
0B088 Hockley Parish Council
Would like to see the area around St. Peterts Church, Hockley, designated a Conservation Area. It would extend from the railway in the south to Vicarage farm in the north, and from the buildings on the west side of Church Road to Footpath 22 In the east.
Comments
Although the Draft Local Plan made reference to the designation of additional conservation areas, those were designated in March this year and consequently deleied from the Plan. They will be added to the list in paragraph 7.3.1. when the adopted Plan is published. The area referred to by the Parish Council has been considered for designation but is was found not to meet the criteria. Conservation areas are by statutory definition, "areas of special architectural or historic interest', but apart from the Church and Hall the area suggested would include ton many unrelated modern buildings and areas of undeveloped land. In any event the designation of Conservation Areas is not a local plan matter.
Reccxninendat ion
No change.
P.1: Yes
— 99 —
&9!3Z9 I
OBJECTIONS TO CHAPTER NINE.
S 001330 PROPOSALS MAP A - LOCAL NEIGUBOURHOOD SHOPPING NOTATION AT RECTORY ROAD/ASHINGDON ROAD
OBO2Ô Mr. H. A. Meredith, 243 Ashingdori Road, Rochford
British Telecom site at the junction of Rectory Road with Ashingdon Road should be designated as Public Open Space and not for residential or shopping development. There is no local Public Open Space nearby.
Comments
This site was allocated for residential development in the Approved Review Development Plan. British Telecon no longer require the site for a new telephone exchange and intend to dispose of the site. Although until recently the site has been leased to I-Jawkwell Parish Council for use as Public Open Space, the District Local Plan has allocated this primarily for shopping purposes.
An area of land on the north side of Brays Lane has been allocated for Public Open Space to serve this area.
Recominendat ion
This land cannot be realistically acquired for Public Open Space. The proposed and previous land use allocations have established a high financial value.
P.1: Yes Ref: OBO32
— 100 -
001331 PROPOSALS HAP A — LOCAL NEIGHBOURHOOD SHOPPING NOTATION AT RECTORY ROAD/ASHINGDON ROAD
OB032 Anglian Coastal District (L52), British Telecom
Considers that the appropriate use of the site is residential.
Comments
It is presumed that financial bids received by B.T. do not favour shopping development for the site.
Recommendation
No overriding reasons have been put forward for altering the existing notation.
.
P.1: Yes Ref; 0BO26
— 101 —
001332 ChAPTER NiNE HOCKLEY TOWN CENTRE
0B036 Hockley Parish Council
Objects to the loss of car parking spaces from the public car park to the rear of the library as there is no practical alternative space available.
Comments
9.8.4. The District Council recogriises the need for an Old Peoples Day Centre in the Hockley/Hawkwell area. The public car park in Southend Road is at present under—used throughout the week, partly because of its location and partly because of the existence of ample on—street and private car parking areas. It is considered that a Day Centre can be provided within the existing area of the car park without restricting the use currently made of it.
Recommendation
No alteration to paragraph 9.8.4 of the Written Statement.
P.1; Yes
— 102 -
O&133 ''III. iiji '. IwJI
TOWN CENTRES STREET LICIITING
0B043 ilockley Parish Council
Objects to paragraph 9.6.5. whIch states that "Parish Councils will be expected to follcM the District Council's lead when replacing existing street lightingt' and asked that the sentence be deleted from the paragraph. The Parish Council claims complete freedom in the matter of street lighting.
Comments
It is a valid point that the District Local Plan is not intended to govern the action of Parish Councils. It is, however, disappointing if Parish Council's are not prepared to follcc the CouncIls s lead in improving the urban environment. Paragraph 9.6.5 and policy SAT1I were inspired by the improvements conceived by the District Council in Rayleigh and Rochford Conservation Areas and intended as a guide to other authorities.
Reccxrmiendation
In paragraph 9.6.5, line 7 delete "expected and insert "encouraged".
.
P.lz Yes
— 103 - S 001334 SOUTHEND AIRPORT — SHOPPING — POLICY SAT1
0BO73 British Airports International
Contends that land should be allocated for a retail complex on the Airport to benefit both the shopping public and the Airport as a commercial enterprise. It would also make a contribution to the Plan's employment objectives. Objections are raised to policy SAT1 arid paragraphs 9.2.0, 9.4.7 and 9.4.10 which would seek to restrict shopping provisions outside the areas defined on the Proposals Maps.
Comments
The District Local Plan, whilst seeking to maintain existing retail centres, does not provide for limited non—food retail outlets on industrial estates.
Recommendation
No variation to shopping policies.
P.1: Yes
— 104 -
001335 'U!P ! II'I r" ppi pp Ill Ir
NINE — CHAPTER POLICY SAT1S S 013083 C.W. Pyle & R.D. Dunley, 2 Church Street) Rayleigh
Demand for office accommodation is limited and can be catered for by the conversion of the upper floors of retail buildings in Rayleigh. Consequently the London Hill site should be used to provide social and recreational facilities, namely a private snooker club/restaurant/wine bar.
Comments
Permission for office development has been extant for the past five years and it may well be some time before a demand is forthcoming.
Recommendation
No alteration to the notation on this site. Reference will, hoaiever be made in the written text to the fact that consideration may be given to other uses appropriate to this tcxqn centre location.
P.1: Yes
— 105 —
001336 CHAPTER NINE — POLICY SAT8
0B087 John Trott & Sons, Chartered Surveyors, Warley
The wording, style and reference of policy SAT8 go against the spirit and purpose of Clrculars 22/80 and 31.85 and inhibit individual freedom by imposing detailed aesthetic controls over tne design of advertisements. It is a negative, non—land use policy which inhibits trading activities by preventing the use of illuminated signs. An alternative wording is suggested, to refer to the discouragement of internally illuminated signs, a preference rather than a requirement for discreet forms of lighting and deletion of reference to plastic fascias and boxes.
Comments
Paragraph 20 of Circular 22/80 states that control of external appearance is especially important in conservation areas and that poor designs which are out of scale or character with their surroundings should be rejected. Illumination is a significant aspect of design in a conservation areas, and it is therefore considered that the policy is not contrary to the guidance contained in Circulars 22/80 and 31/85.
Recommendation
No alteration to policy SATS.
P.1; Yes
- 'i06 -
0D1337 .
.
GENERAL ANTI) APPENDICES.
S
001338 GENERAL COMMENTS
0B016 Mr. M.D. Astor, 8 Banyard Way, Rochford
The principal [ailing of the Plan is its short time scale. It could be modified to cover 50 years giving the people a real chance to participate.
Comments
The time scale of the Plan is governed by that of the Essex Structure Plan, the end date being December 1990.
Recommendation
No action.
— 107 —
001339 APPENDIX_ONE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT — DESIGU AND LAIOUT
0B041 1ockley Parish Council Object to the policy in Appendix A1.2.7. whjc.h ailmis for minimum garden areas to oc less than ioo2 in certain circumstances. They also consider tha minimum garden space sho'ln be increased In proportion to the size of the house.
C omrnen t s
Garden standards have always been a source for criticism btt the current standards have evolved from consideration of current needs and design guide advice.
Recommen'ation No alteration to paragraphs A1..2.6 and Ai.2.7. .
P.1; Yes
- 108 -
001340 APPENDIX 1
0B042 Flockley Parish Council
Objection to paragraph Al.3.5(iii) — car parking standard for sheltered housing for elderly persons. The standard is inadequate.
Comments
No evidence has been produced to suggest that the car parking standards for sheltered housing schemes are inadequate.
Recommendation
No alteration to paragraph Al..3.5(lii).
P.1: Yes
— io —
001341 RAYLEIGH TOWN CENTRE INSET — PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
0B097 Mr. R. D. Graham, 32 Crown Hill, Rayleigh .
The land is an orchard and has been part of an adjoining garden for fifty years. Its description as "private garden" should not be changed to 'private open space" because it will encourage trtrspass and invasion of privacy, it has only limited benefit to local people and no adjoining properties have been similarly designated.
Comments
The land, although allocated for residential development itt the Approved Review Development Plan, falls partly within the area of Rayleigh Castle Scheduled Ancient Monument. Consequently it was designated as "Open Space — Woodland" in the Draft Local Plan because it contains a number of trees subject to a Tree Preservation Order. It is used as a garden) although partly unfenced but has never been designated as a "private garden" * The "private open space" notation does not suggest possible access, but refers to policy LT3.
Recommendation
No variation to existing designation.
S
P.1: No
- 110 - S 001342 SECTION 2
RESPONSE TO THE INFORMAL COMMENTS
MAIE BY THE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT.
001343 RESPONSE TO THE INFORMAL COMMENTS MADE BY THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT
(I) The RES. ES, and N notations are not necessary on the proposals map, th first because they are already existing residential areas, and the other two because there are no policies/proposals relating to them.
Response: No comment at this stage. Land use notations to be shown on the adopted proposals map will be finalised at a later stage.
(ii) Policy ES would be much improved if it listed the settlements excluded from the green belt rather than referring to them as "listed above". There also appears to be 7 settlements excluded, instead of 5 as listed, on the PM — the 2 extra are Canewdon and Rawreth Lane, Rayle 1gb.
Response: Agree to meet this comment.
(iii) Policy 117 is very complex and requires figure 1 to add information not on the PM.
Response: Figure 1 is included as part of the Written Statement.
(iv) Policy MS should include a list of areas of special restraint and sane indication should be given of their size or capacity for housing development.
Response: Areas of special restraint are illustrated adequately on the proposals map and objections to policy H8 will be discussed in detail.
(v) The settlements identified in policy C112 are not notated on the PM. Response: The rural settlement areas are adequately described in Appendix 3.
(vi) Policy GBÔ(A) is open to challenge as infringing ODO rights. The GDO allows f or ll5m3 maximum for an extension whereas the policy is only referring to two—dimensional floorspace (the 35m2 allows for a 3.2m height). Why can't the policy be in cubic metres.
Response; The policy as stated in paragraph 3.7.4, Is not intended to infringe existing ODO rights. It is considered that owners of smaller properties in the Green Belt will be able to extend their dwellings in addition to their permitted development allowance but that much larer properties may be restricted to an extension totalling 1Dm maximum.
(vii) Policy EB3 allocates further land at Purdeys Farin Industrial Estate for "industrial, open storage and car breaking purposes" whereas the PM notation is "areas primarily for open storage".
Response: The area identified is primarily f or open storage. "Industrial" to be deleted H&irPolicy EB3 to reflect true notation.
091344 - 111 - (viii) Policy EB5 is probably "ultra vires' as it is trying to achieve landscaping improvements for the existing site as part of the consent for an extension or alteration. The second paragraph of the policy is also contrary to para. 41 of Circular 1185 which states that "only on permissions for change of use would it be acceptable to provide that the development permitted should not proceed until the landscaping has been substantially completed'1. Indeed it is fair to say that landscaping can rarely proceed until building operations are nearing complet ion.
Response: Accept these comments Policy to be modified.
(ix) Maps 2 and 3 refer to road proposals and HCV routes not on the PM.
Response: Maps are for information only. They are not referred to in any policy, therefore, it is not necessary to show them on the proposals map.
(x) Para. 5.7.6 should include a policy on the safeguarding zone around Southend Airport and this should be shown on the PM as it is an important development control consideration. Response: Not practical or necessary to show the safeguarding zone on the proposals map. (xi) Pare. 6.11.2 should refer to the GDO for clarity.
Response: No need to refer to the 0130 in paragraph 6.11.2.
(xii) Policy LT1O(F) should refer to Article 4 Directions for clarity. Response: Accepted. Insert reference to Article 4 Directions. (xiii) The references in Policy LT13(i) and (ii) to the PM is inaccurate — points A to D are only shown on figure 2 which is adding more information than on the PM. In paragraph 4 of the Policy the District Council have no right to make a legal agreement necessary before granting permission and is contrary to Circular 1/85.
Response: Points A, B, C and D should be shown on the proposals map. Delete figure 2. (xiv) Only 1 of the 6 sites covered by Policy LTI6(Canewdon) is shown on the PM.
Response: This site was not previously shown on the A.R.D.P.
(xv) The Conservation Areas referred to in Policy UC1 are not shown on the PM.
Response: Not necessary, nor practical to show the boundaries on the proposals map. All areas have been designated and larger scale maps exist.
(xvi) The historic cores referred to in Policy UClO are not shown on the PM.
Response: Boundaries to be shown on the proposals map. 00 13 4
— 112 — (xvii) The nature reserves and SSSI's referred to in Policy RC2 are not on the PM. . Response; Plot necessary to show SSSI's on the proposal map. The reference to national nature reserves should be deleted. (iviii) Policy RC3 should refer to proposal maps A, B and E, not A and B.
Response: Agreed.
(xix) The main shopping areas referred to in Policy SAT1 are not notated on the inset maps C, D, B the same as on maps A and B, as the insets only cross reference to the primary and secondary retail frontage policies SAT2 and SAT3. Response: Agreed. Add SAT1 to the inset maps.
(xx) Policy SAT15 only refers to one office allocation in Rayleigh, but two are shown on the PM. The key should also only refer to SAT15, not SAT14 and SAT1S. . Response: Agree alteration to the key. Policy SAT15 should be amended to reflect the response to objection 0B083.
(xxi) PM 3 for Rochford shoFJ' proposed road and pedestrian links not discussed in the Plan or covered in policies SAT18 or 112.
Response: Remove the road and pedestrian link symbols from the inset map. (xxii) Policy SAT2O — this proposal is not shown on proposals map B. It is not clear if this site is included in the housing provision. Response: Delete sub—paragraph 9.9.8(iv) and policy SAT2O from the written statement. (xxiii) Policy SAT2I — this proposal is not shown on proposals map B. Response; Add to notation on inset map B.
(xxiv) Not all the entries in the keys on the insets are cross— referenced to the relevant policy, e.g. Roach Valley Nature Conservation Zone on the Rochford inset B.
Response: Agree to ensure that cross—references are complete. (xxv) In Appendix 1. there are a number of development control policies which should be policies in the Plan. These are: Al. 4.2 — Landscaping Al. 4.0(u) — Infilling (iii) — extensions to houses (iv) — dormer windows (v) — balconies Al. 4.7(u) — CB aerials Al. 5.2 — housing density Al. 5.8 — childrens play space S 00fl41 - 113 Response: No other criticisms received to this method of dealing with the D.C. policies in the Appendices. All are cross—referenced to policy 119 and this seems more than adequate and ought not to be changed.
— 114 —
ff111347 CHAPTER TWO - POLICYH2
0B106 Mr. C.L. Flexman, 36 Connaught Road, Rayleigh.
Land east side of Connaught Road, south of Warwick Road should be released for residential development. The Green Belt boundary is illogical at this point and release of the land would not signifLcantly affect the integrity of the Green Belt. Comments This land is situated in a highly sensitive section of Green Belt separating the built—up area of Rayleigh from Eastwood. Any incursions into the Green Belt at this point should be avoided.
Recommendat ion No variation to Green Belt boundary. .
.
P.1.: YES
S 001348