DOCSLIB.ORG

Open Spaces 250

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Open Spaces 250 OPEN SPACES 250 (c) Precleansing To resite footbaths followed by a shower tunnel. Facilities (d) Learners Pool To increase the length of pool from 40 ft. to 55 ft. and raise level of water rather than provide a trench on either side for the instructors. (e) Filtration Plant Filtration plant for the outdoor bath to be included in the main plant room for the covered bath. (f) Open Air Pool Improvements to the surrounds of the outdoor pool and to the water circulation plant. (g) Car Park To construct car park in two parts. The Borough Architect reported that the total additional cost for the above- mentioned items would be approximately £40,000, however, the cost plan for the building indicated that savings may be made on other items. (B) Floodlighting and Signs: RESOLVED: That no floodlighting be provided and that signs should refer to " Men " and " Women ". (Q Materials and Finishes: RESOLVED: That the report of the Borough Architect upon the proposed materials and finishes to be used in the construc­ tion of the bath be received and that he be asked to display at the meeting of the Open Spaces Committee on 7th July, 1964, a sample of the plastic moulded seat recommended for use. (D) Running Costs: RESOLVED: That details of the annual deficiency at the Southampton (£57,000) and Cardiff (£100,000) Baths be noted. (E) Temporary Changing Accommodation: RESOLVED: That, to assist the Contractors when work on the main building is in progress, temporary dressing accommodation be provided for the outdoor pool to replace approximately 50 existing cubicles to be disturbed during the 1965 Summer Season. The Sub-Committee congratulated Mr. Weitzel upon his excellent presentation of the Borough Architect's Report. (The meeting ended at 8.12 p.m.) (Signed) W. A. TACKLEY, Chairman. HOUSING COMMITTEE: 14th July, 1964. Present: His Worship the Mayor (Alderman MacRae, J.P.); Councillor Buckle (in the Chair); Alderman Mrs. Potts, M.B.E.; Councillors Adkins, Mrs. Carey, Clack, Mrs. Davies, Mrs. Edwards, Ellement, Harkett, Harris, Lovell, B.E.M., Sellers, Williams and Wilmott. PART I.—RECOMMENDATIONS. RECOMMENDATION I: Discretionary Improvement Grants. Pursuant to Sites and Building Sub-Committee recommendation I (22nd June, 1964) (printed as appendix I to this report), Resolved to RECOMMEND: That the Council approve applications 181/1072 (revised) and 185/419, as detailed in the schedule to the report of the Sites and Building Sub- Committee (22nd June, 1964). 251 HOUSING RECOMMENDATION II: Elstree Hill Estate: Vacant Back Land at Northern End of Sullivan Way. Resolved to RECOMMEND: That the Council approve recomendation 2 of the Sites and Building Sub- Committee (22nd June, 1964) to incorporate this back land into the rear gardens of adjacent Council houses, and agree that expenditure, not exceeding £140, upon the provision and erection of the requisite dividing fencing, be regarded as a revenue contribution to capital. RECOMMENDATION III: New Policy Concerning Applications for Inclusion in the General Housing Waiting List. Pursuant to Housing Management Sub-Committee recommendation 2 (2nd July, 1964) and Housing Management Special Sub-Committee recommendation 3 (29th May, 1964), Resolved to RECOMMEND: That paragraph (1) (a) of Council resolution 1661 (VII) (24th April, 1959) be hereby amended to read: — " That normally no application (to the General Housing Waiting List) be considered where the joint income of husband and wife exceeds £1,200 (instead of £1,000) per annum. RECOMMENDATION IV: Land at South-east Corner of Kenton Lane and Vernon Drive (Mountside): Proposed Site for Electricity Sub-Station. Under the terms of the 99-year Lease of this 0-92 of an acre site, granted to them by the former Urban District Council on 6th November, 1953, for use originally as a site for a new Fire Station and now for the erection of an old persons' home, Middlesex County Council seek permission to sub-lease to Eastern Electricity Board, for 42 years at an annual exclusive rent of £15, about 30 square yards at the rear for the erection of a sub-station. They also seek permission to grant the Board right of access from Mountside to the said site and a right to lay pipes, conduits and cables through land between the site and Kenton Lane; and request the Borough Council's consent to waive Clause 9 of the Lease (as to insurance cover for the sub-station), which it is the County Council's practice to require the Board to effect. Your Committee raise no objection to the County Council's proposal. Resolved to RECOMMEND: That the Council grant permission to Middlesex County Council to sub­ lease to the Eastern Electricity Board, as an electricity sub-station site, 30 square yards (or thereabouts) of the 0-92 of an acre site at the south-east corner of Kenton Lane and Vernon Drive (Mountside), leased to the County Council by the former Harrow Urban District Council; and to grant the Board rights of access over, and an easement to lay cables, etc., through, the land to the sub-station site, as shown on the plan attached to, and upon the terms and conditions stipulated in, the County Clerk's letter of 19th June, 1964. RECOMMENDATION V: Re-letting of Dwellings Purchased in Advance of Highway Improvement: 6, Elm Park, Stanmore. This is one of the dwellings purchased on the recommendation of the High­ ways and Cleansing Committee for the Stanmore By-pass project, which your Committee have been asked to manage for three years in the first instance and which the Council have agreed shall be re-let temporarily through agents on HOUSING 252 the open market at an economic rent. Owing to its poor internal decorative condition, etc., only one offer, some­ what below the open market value usually expected for sound houses of this type in this locality, has been received in the sum of £4 weekly exclusive, the prospective tenant agreeing to undertake all necessary internal repairs and decorations. As it is estimated it would cost the Council about £560 to put the house into reasonable order for letting to a family from the waiting list and it is likely that such a family could not be expected to pay a rent likely to match the offer, your Committee consider that the most economical course to follow would be to accept the offer for a period of two years in the first instance and to continue the tenancy for such period as the house may remain available there­ after at an exclusive weekly rent of £5. Resolved to RECOMMEND: That the Council accept the offer to rent 6, Elm Park, Stanmore, at £4 per week exclusive, subject to the ingoing tenant carrying out necessary internal repairs and decorations; that if such tenancy is required to be extended beyond an initial period of two years the rent shall automatically be in­ creased to £5 weekly, exclusive. RECOMMENDATION VI: 94-110 (even, inclusive), Greenford Road, Sud- bury Hill: Possible Housing Site after Re-location of Industry: 96, Greenford Road. The Council will recall that it was at the request of the Planning Committee, following proposals made by the County Planning Committee, that your Com­ mittee, on 20th December, 1962 (resolution 2453), agreed, in principle, to the acquisition of this site under Housing Act powers on the understanding that the County Council shall contribute towards the cost of buying out "non- conforming uses" in so far as they would exceed the value of the land for residential purposes. By 30th April, 1964, negotiations for the vacant property, 96, Greenford Road, had reached a stage where the Council, in accordance with your Com­ mittee's recommendation unanimously supported by the Planning Committee, resolved to acquire it by the exercise of compulsory powers, if necessary. However, the District Valuer has reached agreement with the Vendors for the freehold interest in the property for the sum of £6,600 based on the assumption that planning permission exists for use of part of the property for light industrial purposes, plus Surveyor's fees (£96 12s. Od.) and Solicitor's scale costs, Stamp Duty, etc., estimated at £157 10s. Od. Also, he has reported separately as to the estimated residential value of the property. Resolved to RECOMMEND: That, subject to Middlesex County Council contributing the difference between the cost of buying out non-conforming industrial use and residential values (plus an appropriate portion of Vendors' Surveyor's and Solicitor's scale costs, stamp duty, etc.), the Council agree to acquire, pursuant to Part V of the Housing Act, 1957, the freehold interest in the detached dwelling house and land, 96, Greenford Road, Sudbury Hill, for the sum of £6,600, plus Vendors' Surveyor's fees (£96 12s. Od.) and Solicitor's scale costs, stamp duty, etc., of about £157 10s. Od., in accordance with the terms and conditions specified in the District Valuer's report of 10th July, 1964. (Note: The Finance Committee recommend that this expenditure be met by loan.} 253 HOUSING RECOMMENDATION VII: Appointment of Consultant Quantity Surveyors on New Housing Schemes. By resolution 1631 (XI) (13th March, 1959) the Council adopted a policy to engage private architects to supplement the Council's own technical staff on the preparation of new housing schemes. Design drawings for the extension of Stonegrove Estate, redevelopment of the Pinner Hill Estate, and the Sports dressing accommodation at Elstree Hill Estate, by private Architects, and for the Pinner Green site by the Borough Architect's staff, have progressed to the stage of Bills of Quantities and the appointment of consultant Quantity Surveyors to ensure that there will be no avoidable delay in starting the work is now desirable.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Simultaneous Cabinet Further Transformation In
    6 SIMULTANEOUS CABINET Monday 13 November 2017 FURTHER TRANSFORMATION IN EAST SUFFOLK (REP1629) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1. Suffolk Coastal District Council and Waveney District Council agreed in January 2017 to create a new Council for east Suffolk. This was preceded by an intensive period of public consultation in November 2016, the results of which demonstrated that the majority of residents were in favour of one district Council in east Suffolk. 2. The decision to create a new Council for east Suffolk was both ambitious and ground breaking. A “super district” Council will be formed which will be the largest in England in terms of population. The creation of a new Council follows the successful legacy of both Councils working closely together for many years. Officers of all levels of seniority are shared, a joint Business Plan has been adopted and other key policies such as the Housing Strategy are shared. The Councils already share one website under the “East Suffolk” banner and Councillors from both authorities have attended meetings of each Council’s Cabinets since 2010. Cabinet portfolios are aligned and members have shared representation on various outside bodies. 3. The creation of a new Council will be a model other authorities follow as they decide how best to grapple with the significant challenges facing local government. Councils need to be of a scale large enough to face these challenges by having a loud enough voice, a strong bargaining position, a healthy balance sheet and a resilient workforce, yet small enough to feel connected to their residents. The creation of the new Council for east Suffolk will strike that balance.
    [Show full text]
  • Children's 76
    CHILDREN'S 76 this Committee agree to make provision in revenue estimates for continuing, on a proportionate basis, the financial aid at present being afforded by Middlesex County Council to the extent shown hereunder to the Voluntary Organisations respectively named, viz.: — £ The Middlesex Association for the Blind ... ... 150 approx. The Southern Regional Association for the Blind ... 49 approx. Middlesex and Surrey League for the Hard of Hearing ... 150 approx. 27. Appointment of Deputy Welfare Officer: RESOLVED: That the Com­ mittee note the appointment by the Establishment Committee (Appointments Sub-Committee) on 16th November, 1964, of Mr. Henry James Vagg to this post (Scales A/B). (The meeting dosed at 9.10 p.m.) c Chairman. CHILDREN'S COMMITTEE: 30th December, 1964. Present: Councillors Mrs. Nott Cock (in the Chair), Cohen, G. Da vies, Mrs. Edwards, Mrs. Haslam, Mrs. Rees, Rouse, Tackley and B. C. A. Turner. PART I.—RECOMMENDATIONS.—NIL. PART n.—MINUTES. 10. Minutes: RESOLVED: That the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 30th September, 1964, having been circulated, be taken as read and signed as a correct record. 11. Appointment of Children's Officer: RESOLVED: That the Committee re­ ceive the report of the Town Clerk that the London Borough of Harrow Appointments Sub-Committee on 16th November, 1964, appointed Miss C. L. J. S. Boag, at present Area Children's Officer Middlesex County Coun­ cil, to the post of Children's Officer in the Department of the Medical Officer of Health with effect from 1st April, 1965, at a salary in accordance with lettered Grades C/D.
    [Show full text]
  • List of Councils in England by Type
    List of councils in England by type There are a total of 353 councils in England: Metropolitan districts (36) London boroughs (32) plus the City of London Unitary authorities (55) plus the Isles of Scilly County councils (27) District councils (201) Metropolitan districts (36) 1. Barnsley Borough Council 19. Rochdale Borough Council 2. Birmingham City Council 20. Rotherham Borough Council 3. Bolton Borough Council 21. South Tyneside Borough Council 4. Bradford City Council 22. Salford City Council 5. Bury Borough Council 23. Sandwell Borough Council 6. Calderdale Borough Council 24. Sefton Borough Council 7. Coventry City Council 25. Sheffield City Council 8. Doncaster Borough Council 26. Solihull Borough Council 9. Dudley Borough Council 27. St Helens Borough Council 10. Gateshead Borough Council 28. Stockport Borough Council 11. Kirklees Borough Council 29. Sunderland City Council 12. Knowsley Borough Council 30. Tameside Borough Council 13. Leeds City Council 31. Trafford Borough Council 14. Liverpool City Council 32. Wakefield City Council 15. Manchester City Council 33. Walsall Borough Council 16. North Tyneside Borough Council 34. Wigan Borough Council 17. Newcastle Upon Tyne City Council 35. Wirral Borough Council 18. Oldham Borough Council 36. Wolverhampton City Council London boroughs (32) 1. Barking and Dagenham 17. Hounslow 2. Barnet 18. Islington 3. Bexley 19. Kensington and Chelsea 4. Brent 20. Kingston upon Thames 5. Bromley 21. Lambeth 6. Camden 22. Lewisham 7. Croydon 23. Merton 8. Ealing 24. Newham 9. Enfield 25. Redbridge 10. Greenwich 26. Richmond upon Thames 11. Hackney 27. Southwark 12. Hammersmith and Fulham 28. Sutton 13. Haringey 29. Tower Hamlets 14.
    [Show full text]
  • Giving Prescriptions Instead ; This Would Bring the Expendi
    43 attending the casualty department-, had increased of latt- HOSPITAL REFORM. years with excessive rapidity. while there had also been an increase of out-patients, and that many cases in both departments were of a trivial character which could be dealt A SPEClAL meeting of the Council of the Charity Organisa- with satisfactorily by general practitioners and for which tion Society was held on June 20th at the United Services hospital aid was unnecessary. The practical suggestions Institntiouto discuss suggestions for the reform of the which he submitted as the result of conference with others were that all cases should a casualty and out-patient departments of London hospitals. casualty be seen by medical officer, who should select from them cases which were urgent Sir JOSHUA FITCH was in the chair and there was a large or of value for educational purposes, referring the rest in attendance. general terms to local medical men or an approved provident Mr. T. CLINTON DENT, surgeon to St. George’s Hospital. dispensary. In the out-patient department also the selec- described an experiment which is about tu be made in tion was to be made by a medical officer. but the suggestions connexion with the New Belgrave Hospital for Children. for disposing of them were more complicated, including a It was proposed to guard against the overgrowth of the limitation of the number of new cases to 15 or 20, a prefer- number of out-patients by limitation of new cases and ence for members of friendly societies, provident dispen- selection and at the same time to place a check upon the saries, and others recommended by their own medical undue multiplication of casualty patients.
    [Show full text]
  • Goschen's Assigned Revenues System and the Chiswick High
    ‘A bad bargain for local authorities’: Goschen’s Assigned Revenues System and the Chiswick High Road, 1902-1911 Tracey Logan, University of Leicester, ([email protected]) Supervisors: Professor Simon Gunn and Professor Rosemary Sweet Figure 1: A quiet lunchtime on Chiswick High Road (circa 1905).1 Considering a short-stretch of strategically-important highway in Greater London, this paper addresses the impact of a post-1888 financial settlement on local government which underfunded main roads in the pre-First World War decade. Chiswick High Road is a one and three-quarter mile (2.8 km) stretch of the ancient London to Bath ‘Great Western Road’, within the county of Middlesex. As a major London artery it had always been busy, but the turn-of-the-century separation of home and work life added commuters to the High Road’s business and pleasure traffic. This was especially true after 1900 when motor vehicles joined the horses, trams and traction engines pounding its wood-paved surface, increasing road maintenance and improvement costs, including safety measures. Constraints of space limit this paper to main road maintenance. From 1902 Chiswick’s main road funding became precarious, forcing its Urban District Council (UDC) to compensate through increased district rates and borrowing. By 1906 community tension over this posed a threat to its local government, when Chiswick’s Ratepayers Association- backed candidates challenging councillors in four of the district’s six wards.2 It was the most highly- contested poll in over a decade. Ratepayers were not told their high rates and UDC indebtedness were partly due to Middlesex County Council’s (MCC’s) underfunding of their main road and its unfavourable post-1902 reimbursement terms for constituent local authorities.
    [Show full text]
  • Written Evidence Submitted by East Sussex County Council [ASC 021]
    Written evidence submitted by East Sussex County Council [ASC 021] • How has Covid-19 changed the landscape for long-term funding reform of the adult social care sector? The challenges facing the adult social care market prior to the pandemic are well documented and, in many cases, have been brought into sharp focus over the last 12 months. Local Authority published rates; contract arrangements (e.g. block arrangements); commissioning approaches (e.g. strategic partners) and CCG funding agreements including Better Care Fund allocations are all key funding reform considerations which sit alongside the necessity to offer choice, personalised care and high quality, safe services. Residential and nursing care There are 306 registered care homes in East Sussex – the majority are small independently run homes, which don’t have the wrap-around organisational infrastructure enjoyed by larger / national providers. In East Sussex, Local Authority placements are made across around one-third of the residential and nursing care market. At the peak of the second wave over 100 care homes in East Sussex were closed to admissions due to Covid outbreaks. Week commencing 04/01/21 there were 853 confirmed cases of Covid19 in East Sussex care home settings. During 2021, as of the week ending 19/03/2021, East Sussex has had 2,404 deaths registered in total and 1,110 of these have been attributable to COVID-19, of which 597 have occurred in hospital and 436 have occurred in care homes (LG reform data). In the two years up to April 2019, there were 26 residential and nursing home closures in East Sussex resulting in a loss of 435 beds, across all care groups.
    [Show full text]
  • IPPR | Empowering Counties: Unlocking County Devolution Deals ABOUT the AUTHORS
    REPORT EMPOWERING COUNTIES UNLOCKING COUNTY DEVOLUTION DEALS Ed Cox and Jack Hunter November 2015 © IPPR 2015 Institute for Public Policy Research ABOUT IPPR IPPR, the Institute for Public Policy Research, is the UK’s leading progressive thinktank. We are an independent charitable organisation with more than 40 staff members, paid interns and visiting fellows. Our main office is in London, with IPPR North, IPPR’s dedicated thinktank for the North of England, operating out of offices in Newcastle and Manchester. The purpose of our work is to conduct and publish the results of research into and promote public education in the economic, social and political sciences, and in science and technology, including the effect of moral, social, political and scientific factors on public policy and on the living standards of all sections of the community. IPPR 4th Floor 14 Buckingham Street London WC2N 6DF T: +44 (0)20 7470 6100 E: [email protected] www.ippr.org Registered charity no. 800065 This paper was first published in November 2015. © 2015 The contents and opinions in this paper are the authors ’ only. POSITIVE IDEAS for CHANGE CONTENTS Summary ............................................................................................................3 1. Devolution unleashed .....................................................................................9 2. Why devolve to counties? ............................................................................11 2.1 Counties and their economic opportunities ...................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 985 EDUCATION (2) That the Revised Estimates Of
    985 EDUCATION (Note: This report was presented to the Council at its meeting on \2th Decem­ ber, 1952.) EDUCATION COMMITTEE: 4th December, 1952. Present: Councillors Brown (in the Chair), Adkins, Alien, J.P., Bailey, A. C. L. Bishop, Buckle, Collins, Duff, Gange, J.P., Leigh, J.P., C.C., Lovell, MacRae, Mason, Mrs. Milner and Sheldrake (Representative members); Messrs. F. W. Coppin and C. A. Lillingston, Rev. H. Eland Stewart, and Miss D. E. Hunt (Co-opted members); Mr. J. Barrow, C.C. (Appointed member); Mr. J. Rostron, Miss A. Robinson and Miss D. E. Ross (Members of the Youth Sub-Committee). PART I.—RECOMMENDATIONS. RECOMMENDATION I: Education Estimates of Capital Expenditure for the Year 1953/54. Your Committee has considered, and is in agreement with, recommendation I of the report of its General Purposes and Finance Sub-Committee of 4th December, 1952, relating to capital expenditure for the financial year 1953/54, details of which are set out in paragraph 61 (2nd December, 1952) of the report of the (Education) Sites and Buildings Sub-Committee. Resolved to RECOMMEND: That a resolution in the following terms be passed by the Council: That the items included in the estimates of capital expenditure, amounting to £52,365, for the financial year 1953/54, in accordance with the details now submitted, be approved and submitted to the Middlesex County Council. RECOMMENDATION II: Education Estimates on Revenue Account for the Years 1952/53 and 1953/54. Your Committee has considered, and is in agreement with, recommendation II of the report of its General Purposes and Finance Sub-Committee of 4th December, 1952, relating to the approval of estimates of income and expendi­ ture on revenue account for the financial year 1953/54, and revised estimates for 1952/53.
    [Show full text]
  • Blaenau Gwent County Borough Council Bridgend County Borough Council Caerphilly County Borough Council the City of Cardiff Counc
    Welsh Local Authorities gritting information (alphabetical order) Blaenau Gwent Info and map of http://www.blaenau-gwent.gov.uk/resident/highways- County Borough gritting routes cleansing/winter-gritting/winter-gritting-routes-salt-bins/ Council http://www.blaenau- gwent.gov.uk/resident/emergencies-crime- prevention/preparing-for-winter/ Bridgend County Info and map of http://www.bridgend.gov.uk/winter.aspx Borough Council gritting routes http://www.bridgend.gov.uk/services/highways.aspx Caerphilly County Info and map of http://www.caerphilly.gov.uk/Services/Roads-and- Borough Council gritting routes pavements/Gritting-and-snow-clearing/Winter-Service- Plan http://www.news.wales/south/caerphilly-county- borough-council/caerphilly-council-is-monitoring- weather-conditions-2017-01-25740.html The City of Cardiff Info and map of https://www.cardiff.gov.uk/ENG/resident/Parking-roads- Council gritting routes and-travel/Winter-maintenance/Pages/Winter- Location of salt maintenance.aspx bins https://www.cardiff.gov.uk/ENG/resident/Community- safety/Severe-winter- weather/Documents/winter%20weather%20guide.pdf Carmarthenshire Info and map of http://www.carmarthenshire.gov.wales/home/residents/t County Council gritting routes ravel-roads-parking/gritting/#.WH4UVk1DT9Q Twitter https://twitter.com/CarmsCouncil/status/7992671481998 25409 Ceredigion County Info and map of https://www.ceredigion.gov.uk/English/Resident/Travel- Council gritting routes Roads-Parking/Highways-During- Twitter Winter/Pages/default.aspx https://www.ceredigion.gov.uk/English/Resident/Travel-
    [Show full text]
  • List of Elected Officials
    Wayne County Elected Officials State Officials Governor Statewide Eric Holcomb Rep Lt. Governor Statewide Suzanne Crouch Rep Attorney General Statewide Todd Rokita Rep US Senator Statewide Mike Braun Rep US Senator Statewide Todd Young Rep Secretary of State Statewide Holli Sullivan Rep Auditor of State Statewide Tera Klutz Rep Treasurer of State Statewide Kelly Mitchell Rep US Representative District 6 Greg Pence Rep State Senator District 27 Jeff Raatz Rep State Representative District 54 Tom Saunders Rep State Representative District 56 Brad Barrett Rep Judge of Circuit Court 17th Circuit April Drake Rep Judge of Superior Court Superior Court I Charles “Chuck” Todd Rep Superior Court II Greg Horn Rep Superior Court III Darrin Dolehanty Rep Prosecuting Attorney 17th Circuit Mike Shipman Rep Wayne County Officials Auditor Kimberly Walton Rep Clerk of Courts Debra Berry Rep Coroner Kevin Fouche Rep Recorder Debbie Tiemann Rep Sheriff Randy Retter Rep Surveyor Gordon Moore Rep Treasurer Nancy Funk Rep Assessor Tim Smith Rep Wayne Twp-Assessor Gary Callahan Rep Commissioner-District 1 Kenneth E Paust Rep Commissioner-District 2 Mary Ann Butters Rep Commissioner-District 3 Jeff Plasterer Rep Wayne County Council Officials County Council-District 1 Robert (Bob) Chamness Rep County Council-District 2 Rodger Smith Rep County Council-District 3 Beth Leisure Rep County Council-District 4 Tony Gillam Rep County Council At-Large Max Smith Rep County Council At-Large Cathy Williams Rep County Council At-Large Gerald (Gary) Saunders Rep Wayne County Trustee Abington-Trustee Chelsie R Buchanan Rep Boston-Trustee Sandra K Nocton Rep Center-Trustee Vicki Chasteen Rep Clay-Trustee Rebecca L Cool Rep Dalton-Trustee Lance A.
    [Show full text]
  • Harrow Urban District Council
    3ist July, 1934. Vol. 1—No 6. HARROW URBAN DISTRICT COUNCIL, MINUTES of the Monthly Meeting of the Council held in the Technical School, Station Road, Harrow, on Tuesday, the 31st day of July, 1934. PRESENT: Councillor Mr. T. Charles, J.P. (Chairman). „ Mr. G. F. Telfer (Vice-Chairman). Councillor Mrs. M. E. Webb. Councillor Mr. T. A. Ellement. Mr. W. T. Adams. Mr. A. G. Elliot-Smith. Mr. G. VV. Alien. Mr. D. C. Ellis. ., Mr. A. C. Andrews. Dr. R. Forbes, J.P. ,, Mr. C. Brown. ,, Mr. J. Greer. ,, Mr. A. Buttle. Mr. J. E. Ousey. Mr. F. A. Coles. Mr. D. J. Pratt. Mr. F. P. Cope. Mr. S. J. Rust. ,, Mr. H. Cornish. Mr. J. V. Smith. Mr. R. W. Cowan. ,, Mr. E. G. Swann. ,, Mr. E. L. Cridford. Mr. H. Walker. ,, Dr. N. Crosby. ,, Mr. W. Weston. ,, Mr. H. Dawson. ,, Mr. J. Wibberley. Mr. G. W. B. Wilkins. (131) MINUTES.—The Minutes of the Meeting of the Council held on 3rd July, 1934, being printed, were taken as read and the file copy signed, attention being directed to the following :— (a) an inaccuracy in Minute No. 118, which should refer to children at Roe Green having to attend the new school at D'Arcy Gardens, Kenton ; 3ist July, 1934. 274 (b) Minute No. 119, Resolutions Nod. 664 and 665, page 239—Councillor Cowan not shewn as voting against; (c) Minute No. 105, Resolution Nod. 521, page 202— the grounds for the proposition not stated, i.e., on a point of equity, having regard to the Council's decision to supply surplices for clergy ; and (a) Minute No.
    [Show full text]
  • Caerphilly County Borough Council by Email Only [email protected] Dear Councillor Poole
    Our ref: NB Ask for: Communications 01656 641150 Date: 7 September 2020 Communications @ombudsman-wales.org.uk Councillor David Poole Council Leader Caerphilly County Borough Council By Email Only [email protected] Dear Councillor Poole Annual Letter 2019/20 I am pleased to provide you with the Annual letter (2019/20) for Caerphilly County Borough Council. I write this at an unprecedented time for public services in Wales and those that use them. Most of the data in this correspondence relates to the period before the rapid escalation in Covid-19 spread and before restrictions on economic and social activity had been introduced. However, I am only too aware of the impact the pandemic continues to have on us all. I am delighted to report that, during the past financial year, we had to intervene in (uphold, settle or resolve early) a smaller proportion of complaints about public bodies: 20% compared to 24% last year. We also referred a smaller proportion of Code of Conduct complaints to a Standards Committee or the Adjudication Panel for Wales: 2% compared to 3% last year. With regard to new complaints relating to Local Authorities, the overall number has decreased by 2.4% compared to the previous financial year. I am also glad that we had to intervene in a smaller proportion of the cases closed (13% compared to 15% last year). That said, I am concerned that complaint handling persists as one of the main subjects of our complaints again this year. Amongst the main highlights of the year, in 2019 the National Assembly for Wales (now Senedd Cymru Welsh Parliament) passed our new Act.
    [Show full text]