INDEX
1988
January - December MINUTE iNDEX 1988
ALLOTMENTS
Allotment Competition: 318,417,456
ANGLIAN WATER AUTHORITY
Sea Bathing Water Quality: 22 Section 16 Main Sewerage Provision — South Fambridge & Ashtngdon Park Estate, Rochford: 71,181 Ferry Road, Hullbridge — Sewer Provision: 151 Eastwood Road, Rayleigh — Sewer Provision: 151 Capital Programme 1987/88 — 1991/92: 263 Privatisation: 550
ASSOCIATION OF DISTRICT COUNCILS
Constitution: 392,492 Conference and Exhibition — Blackpool 1988: 412
AUDIT
Complaints Procedure: 128,491(E) BRIDLEWAYS
Bridleway 38 Rochford — Proposed Diversion: 70,399 Proposed Diversion of Bridleway 27, Stambridge: 340,555
BRITISH RAIL
Meetings with: 460 CABLE TELEViSiON
Consultation on Franchise Arrangements: 395,469
CAGEFIELD ROAD, STAMBRIDGE
District Plan Working Party: 153,336
CAPITAL PROGRAMME
Capital Programme 1988/89: 15 Capital Programme - Lift installation - Civic Suite: 272 Draft Capital Programme — Clements Bali. Playing Field Pavilion Extension: 451 Provision for Construction, Fitting and Furnishing of an Emergency Centre at ilockley Woods: l7,49l(c)
CARAVAN SITES
Halcyon Caravan Site: Riverside Trailer Park Ltd - Licence Amendments: 228 Hullbridge Yacht Club: 229 Brandyhole Yacht Station, Hullbridge: 430(a) The Dome Country Club and Caravan Park Ltd, Lower Road, Hockley: 430(b) Spacing of Caravans - Progress Report: 440,511,528
CAR PARKING
Doctors Surgery Site, Websters Way: 24 Market Square, Rochford - Parking Space for Disabled: 264 Pooles Lane, Hullbridge - Bus Turning Area: 420(i),5O1,511 Hockley Village Centre: 463 Pooles Lane Car Park, Hullbridge - Trading: 562 ROC/925f88 - Extension of Public Car Park, Rear of Public Library, Southend Road, Hockley: 563(ii),588
CEMETERIES
Change of use of Agricultural Land to Cemetery - ROC/561/88: 487
CHAIRMAN' S ANNOUNCEMENTS
Visits to Doggetts County Primary School, Sweyne School, Westerings: 43 Radiotherapy Unit Press Conference: 43 Attendance of Pupils from Rayleigh Jnr and Gt. Wakering Schools: 112 Clebe School Donation to Tree Replanting: 112 Roadsweeper for Hockley Parish Council: 112 Retirement presentation Dliii & Principal Assistant Planning: 112 Royal Garden Party: 148,279,353 German Minesweepers Visit Shield Commemoration: 295 Wartime Plaque Recording Adoption of Motor Torpedo Boat 207: 295,353 Attendance of Mr. S. Walsh, Asst. Gen. Manager (Rochford & Westcliff Hospitals): 302 Presentation on Resignation of DF and DCS: 353
Cont' d.. CHAIRMANT S ANNOUNCEMENTS
Civic Funeral Service - Mr. W. Bowyer: 510 Civic Carol Service: 510,586 Love Lane Primary School: 510 Mrs. Joan Tate: 584
CHARGES
Scale of Charges 1988/89: 17 Leisure Charges 1988/89: 18,44 Community Charge and the National Non-Domestic Rate: 21,270 Review of Car Park Charges: 330
CHILDREN'S PLAY AREAS
Children's Playground Re—equipment: 445 Relocation of Play Equipment - C.snewdon Playing Field: 446 Laburnum Grove Playspace: 354,447 Children's Playground, Hockley: 135,320,354
CIRCA LEISURE
Circa Leisure - Council's Representation: 210,286,296 Articles of Association: 410 Membership of the Board of CIRCA Leisure PLC: 286,565(iii)
CLEMENTS HALL LEISURE CENTRE
Alternative means of Ventilation: 448
COMMITTEE STRUCTURE
Earlier Commencement of Planning Committee: 52,491(A),529 Reporting Arrangements for Planning Applications: 596
COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT
Replacement of Existing System: 178
COMMUNITY CENTRES
Ashingdon & East Hawkwell Memorial Hall - Repairs to Car Park: 174 Anne Boleyn Estate: 241,337,393 2 Flagpoles at Rayleigh Grange Community Centre: 387(vi)
COMMUNITY CHARGE
Community Charge & National Non-Domestic Rate: 21,270 Staffing Structure and Recruitment: 384(D) Accommodation: 270,404,495,573
Cont' d. COMPUTERS
Computer Services: 328(C) Future Management by Perthcrest 384(E) Housing Benefit System: 384(E)
CONFERENCES
103rd Conference CIPFA: 334 95th Environmental Health Conference: 433
CONCESSIONARY SCHEMES
Concessionary Television Licences for the Elderly: 437
CONTRACTS
Contract 1331 - Tree Surgery & Clearance, ilockley Woods: 37 Contract l26 - Grounds Maintenance: 38,131 Contract 1340 - Phase 1,2 & 3 Proposed General Needs Housing, Doggetts Close, Rochford: 52,439 Contracts Progress Report: 53,137,230,323,436,504,526,538 Contract 1338 - Repair to Fire Damaged Property 34 Glebe Close, Ct. Wakering: 89 Competitive Tendering Leisure & Catering management: 90 Contract 1339 - Carpeting to Various Sheltered Schemes: 91 Rochford Leisure Bus-Renewal of Contract: 93 Contract 1328: 120 Contract 1347 - Provision of Central Heating: 125 Contract 1335 & 1337: 126 Contract for landscaping Millview Park: 172 Contract 1335 - External Painting & Repairs - Lt. Wheatley Estate: 232 Contract 1348 - New Depot Compound & Yard, Rochford: 88,179 Contract 1346 - Replacement of Windows, Rayleigh, Paglesham & Hulibridge: 233 Contract 1371 — External Insulation: 284 Contract 1345 - Programmed Re-roofing: 311,327 Contract 1350 - Replacement of Gas Boilers & Warm Air Units: 312 Contract 1197 — Cleaning of Sports Centres: 338 Contract 1398 — Mercer Avenue, Ct. Wakering - Al' Bungalows: 435 Contract 1395 — Internal Decorations to ilardwick House, Rayleigh and Wedgwood Court, Rochford: 505 Contract 1384 - Office Cleaning: 507,511 Contract l3 - Cleaning of Elderly Persons Sheltered Accommodation: 508,511 Contract 1399 — Internal Decorations at Spa Court, Hockley and Bell House, Ct. Wakering: 575 Contract 1406 - Roofing of Orchard Bungalows, Canewdon: 576
COUNCILLORS
Councillor Mrs. Jo Jones: 10,110,205 Councillor B.T. Grigg: 294,315,355 Councillor Mrs. V. Grigg: 373,390,415 Councillor I.R. Godfrey: 374,415 Councillor A.J. Harvey: 418 Cont' d COUNCILLORS
Members to Declare their Membership of any Organisation which Seeks to Promote the Welfare of its Members: 420(iii) Memento of Service — Members: 512(iii),570(i),588(i)
COUNCIL PROPSRTY AND PREMISES
Rochford Depot: 14(b),88,1&5,283,387(iii),388,563(i) Ashingdon & East Hawkwell Memorial Hall - Repairs to Car Park: 174 Council Chamber, Rayleigh - Seating: 348 Love Lane Scout Site, Rayleigh: 397 Rayleigh Sports & Recreational Club - Assignment: 398,552,588 Annual Programme of Pre-painting and Decoration of Council Dwellings 1989/ 90: 434 Safe use of Electrical Central Heating: 523 DEEMED PLANNING CONSENTS
Change of use of Former Cafe/Score Building, Hockley Woods, Hockley: 274 Land off Doggetts Close, Rochford - To Erect Estate Roads & 88 Dwellings: 52,309,387(i) & (v)(a),4l9 Sweyne Park: 163(E) (i) ,387(ii)(a) Turret Rouse Farm: 237 ,387(ii) (b) Rochford Depot - Change of use to Coach Park: 185,387(iii) AP development adj. 49 Mayfield Avenue, llullbridge: 31,387(iv)&(v)(b) ,500(a) Land off Bardfield Way, Rayleigh: 387(v)(c) ,500(b) Land off Essex Close, Rayleigh: 387(v)(d) ,500(d) Land adj. to Springfield Close, Pearsons Farm Estate: 387(v)(e),500(e) Land at Junction of Downhall Road/Brooklyn Drive, Rayleigh: 387(v)(f) ,500(f) Two flagpoles at Rayleigh Grange Community Centre: 243 ,387(vi) P08 beside River Roach east of Rochford Depot: 387 (vii) Community Centre, Anne Boleyn Estate: 337,393 Mercer Avenue, Gt. Wakering - AP bungalows: 435 Land rear of 16/18 Tendring Avenue, Rayleigh: 500(c) Rochford Depot - Surplus Land: 283,563(1) ROC/925/88 - Extension of Public Car Park; rear of Public Library, Southend Road, Hockley: 563(u)
DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY
Delegation of Authority and Revision of 8.0.: 82 Delegation of Authority to issue Notice of Seeking Possession: 223 Authority to issue Notice of Seeking Possession to Chief Rousing Manager and Housing Manager: 223 Authority by Council Side of the Leisure Liaison Working Party to Determine the Organisation of Leisure Events: 239 Competitive tendering - Leisure & Catering - Audit Panel Delegation: 281 Authority enabling Local Authority to Serve Notice on Landowners Requiring them to Provide Particulars of their Interest in the Land: 427
DISABLED PERSONS
Appointment of Member with Special Responsibility for the Disabled with Regard to Planning Applications: 211 Parking Space, Market Square, Rochford for disabled: 264
DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST
Non-Pecuniary and Pecuniary Interests of Members - Revision of Standing Orders: 167
DOG FOULING
Bye-laws for the Regulation of Dogs: 276,564,588
DOGGETTS CLOSE, ROCHFORD
Proposed Housing Scheme: 52
Cont 'd..... DRAINAGE
Land Drainage Improvements - Murrells Lane: 339 ELECTIONS
Results of District & Parish Elections: 204 Bye-Election at Ct. Wakering West: 390 Sale of Electoral Registers: 566,588
ESSEX COUNTY COUNCIL
Consultation Paper - Day Care and Residential Holidays for Children Aged Over 5: 117 Ft NANCE
Sundry Debtor Accounts - Write-offs: 164
FOOT PATES
No. 7 Hawkwell - Proposed Diversion: 70 No. 21 Gt. Wakering - Proposed Diversion: 70 Creation at Tinkers Lane, Rochford: 399 Footpath Access to liockley Woods: 56,561
FOULNESS ISLAND
New ilavengore Bridge: 557
p GRANTS MiD LOANS
Grant Aid to Outside Bodies: 19,87 Intermediate Grant - The Anchorage, Ulverston Road, Ashingdon: 56 Citizens Advice Grant: 271 Grant Application - Careers Convention: 345 Intermediate Grant - 233 High Street, Gt. Wakering: 351 National Blood Transfusion Service: 405 Magnolia Manufacturing Limited - Loan Agreement: 574
GROUNDS MAINTENANCE
Planting: 543 Additional Works: 544 HACKNEY CARRIAGES
Minutes of: 479
HEALTH AND SAFETY
Heartbeat Award Scheme: 225 Fire Safety & Safety of Places of Sport Act 1987 Pt.IV: 224,300 Rochford Health Promotion Group - ClIr Budge Representative: 306 Essex C.C. Seminar regarding Care in the Community - Representatives: 327
HIGHWAYS
Rayleigh Weir Scheme: 62,250,296,429 South East Essex Traffic Study: 62,64,113,154,255,296,462,465,556 Improvement of the A130 from the A12 to the A127: 63 A130 Rawreth - Proposed Traffic Reg. Orders: 65 The Chase/Eastwood Road, Rayleigh - Traffic Signals: 66,251 Great Wakering Traffic Waiting Restrictions: 67,77 Leasway/Crown Gardens, Rayleigh - Waiting Restrictions: 68 A1015 - Eastwood Road, Rayleigh - Proposed Clearway Order: 69 Bramerton Road/Spa Road, Hockley - Waiting Restriction: 76 Transport Policies & Programmes (T.P.P.15) and Public Transport Plan (P.T.p,.l1) 1989-90 - Consultation Drafts: 155,191 Ferry Road, Hullbridge - Proposed Waiting Restrictions: 159 Barrington Park - Alexandra Road, Rayleigh - Bollard Erection: 291 B1013 Main Road, ilockley - Waiting Restrictions: 252 Spa Road, Waiting Restrictions: 253 Locks Hill, Rochford - Extension of Waiting Restrictions: 254- Pooles Lane, Hullbridge: 249,296,462 Members to Liaise with County Council on Highways: 255,296 Brays Lane/Aahingdon Road Waiting Restrictions: 327 Town Police Clause 1847 - Prohibiting use of Part of White Hart Lane, llawkwell: 341 Diversion of Bridleway 38 and Creation of Footpath - Tinkers Lane, Rochford: 399 Discussion Paper: 464 Al27 Slip Road/Brook Road (Eastern End) and A129 High Road/ Glasseys Lane/Weir Farm Road - Proposed Waiting Restrictions: 466(i) AlOtS Eastwood Road, Rayleigh - Proposed Urban Clearway: 466(ii),490,511
HORSE RIDING FACILITIES
Horse Riding Working Party: 73,257,476,551
HOUSING
Housing Rents 1988/89: 16,44 Homes Insulation Scheme 1987 49 Sheltered Schemes Staffing Arrangements: 51 Housing Act 1985 - Common Parts Grant: 121 Closing Order - 1, Church Street, Rayleigh: 122 Improvement Works to Housing Estates: 124 (Maine Crescent & Morrins Close) Formation of a New Housing Association - Submission to DoE: 83 Housing for Social Services Clients: 176
Cont 'd. HOUSING (Cont'cl)
Transfer of Council Houses to Crouch Valley Housing Association: 177 Sale of Tender Documents: 177 Policy for Sheltered Housing Units: 195,260,296 Housing Act 1985 - Grant Aid for Group Homes for Disabled: 226 Housing Act 1985 - Unfit Rouse - Midhurst, The Drive, Rayleigh: 227 Private Sheltered Housing Schemes Policy: 260 Housing Investment Programme & Strategy 19g9/90 (HIPS BID): 307 ,327 Civic Shield Award by EEB for Heating Improvements to Flats at Sudhury Close, Hawkwell: 353 Expenditure on Bed & Breakfast Accommodation: 400 Consultation Paper - New Financial Regime for Local Authority Housing in England and Wales: 493 Circulation of Leaflet Entitled "Your Rent: 570(u) ,588(ii) Proposed Council Rousing Development at Doggetts Close; Phase 1 - 34 Units: 387(i) ,578
HOUSING ASSOCIATION
New Build Project: 39 Formation of New Housing Association - Submission to DoE: 83,186 Lease of former Grested Court to Crouch Valley Housing Association: 163(B)(3) Use of part of Former Crested Court as Office Accommodation for Crouch Valley Housing Association: 163B(4) Transfer of Council Houses to Crouch Valley Housing Association: 177,191,212,298,35O,354,385,419,580,588 Notice of Motion - Crouch Valley Housing Association: 192(u) ,278,296,297,384(B) Supply of Information to Members: 215,344 Questions under S.O. 7.2 - Crouch Valley Housing Association: 422,423 Consultation Paper - New Financial Regime for Local Authority Housing in England and Wales: 493 Notice of Motion, Standing Order 5, Crouch Valley Housing Association: 512(i) Outcome of Ballot: 512(v),58O,581,588 Circulation of Leaflet Entitled "Your Rent": 570(u) Reports Issued Pursuant to the Requisition: 591
HOUSING BENEFITS
Teach In Housing Benefit New Scheme: 79 Computer System: 384(E) Appeals Panel: 413
HOUSING INVESTMENT PROGRAMME (HIPS)
Keswick Avenue Playspace: 31 HIPS Bid: 307,343
HOUSING STRATEGY
Housing Strategy and Policy and the Management Structure of the Council's Administration: 567 ,588 The Council's Housing Strategy: 568,588 IMPROVEMENT GRANTS
Homes Insulation Scheme 1987: 49 KESWICK AVENUE PLAYSPACE
Proposed AP Development: 31,180,191 • a- ,'run
LABURN{JM GROVE HOCKLEY
Proposed Site for Residential Housing: 35,180,191,280,335,354
LAFW
Laburnum Grove, Bockley: 35,180,191,280,335,354 Millview Park, Rochford: 36,172,191,275 Rio Public Conveniences, High Street, Gt.Wakering: 95 New Stadium for Southend Football Club: 141,191,197 Consultations front Neighbouring Authorities: 142 Little Wheatleys Chase, Rayleigh: 35,180,191 MAFF Land, Dowuhall, Rayleigh: 219 Rochford Depot - Surplus Land: 185,283 Land Compensation Act 1973 - Section 29 'Trewint', Wood Avenue, Nockley: 285 Land Drainage - Murrells Lane, llockley: 339 Change of Use of Agricultural Land to Cemetery — ROOf 561/88: 487 Land at Wood AvenuefEtheldore Avenue, Hockley - Area of Special Restraint: 503
LEG I SLATION
Environment and Safety Information Act 1988: 428
LEISURE - GENER
Rochford Sports Council — Festival of Sport: 84 King Georges Playing - Field use of - Festival of Sport: 84 Roclhford Reservoir - Management of Water: 85 Clements Hall Leisure Centre - Sports Shop: 94 Leisure and Catering Management Agreement: 90,109,281,317,346 Artawork Festival: 130 Woodland Sculptor/Craft Residency: 132 Soccer Pitches: 133 Rawreth Playing Field: 134,542 Childrens Playground - Hockley: 135,320,354 Summer Playschemes: 136 Leisure Bus Contract: 93 Open Space Provision: 173 Formation of New Leisure Company: 83,186 Rayleigh May Day Fair 1988: 158 Leisure Liaison Working Party: 239,321 Information Kiosk: 244,450,511 Sweyne Park: 163(E)(3)(88),245 Bye-Laws - Pleasure Grounds & Regulation of Dogs: 276 Royal Garden Party: 279 CIRCA Leisure - Council's Representation: 210,286,296 Armada Celebrations: 235,296 Essex Tourism Liaison Committee: 322 Rochford Sports Council Festival of Sport - Guarantee against Loss: 324 Privatisation: 420(11) Clesients Hall Leisure Centre — Alternative Means of Ventilation: 448 Cletnents Hall Playing Field Pavilion - Hawkwell Athletic Boys Football Club: 451 Eastern Council for Sport & Recreation Liaison Meeting: 452
Cont 'd i 911'r21 TCT rr' ii !F
LEISURE - GENERAL (Cont'd)
Essex Heritage Year 1989: 453 Arts Development: 454 Ernie Adcock Trophy - Essex Games: 455,587 Sweyne School Swimming Pool: 539 Action Sport: 540 Fencing of Recreation Ground Boundaries: 545 Rochford Sports Council - Minutes: 546
LICENCES AND LEASES
Licences for Fire Safety and Safety of Places of Sport Act 1987 - Part IV: 224 Temporary Licence for Contractor's Conipound on Land at Spencers Nursery - Bovis Development, Thorpe Close, Hockley: 473 Licensing Act 1988 - Charges: 497 Access to the rear of 120, Rectory Road, via Magnolia Playing Field - Licence: 553
LITTER INITIATIVE
Progress Report: 50,432,520 South Fambridge Litter Tipping: 462
LOCAL COVERNMENT FINANCE BILL
Community Charge: 21,44 MANPOWER SERVICES COMMISSION
JTS Scheme: 81,169 Community Programme: 81. Community Programme Managing Agency: 86,287 Proposed New Employment Initiative and Future of Community Programme: 168
MEETINGS WITH LOCAL ORGANISATIONS
Essex Tourist Officers Meeting: 541
MILL HALL
Coffee Mill - Sunday Opening: 317,449
MUNICIPAL HOUSING - DEVELOPMENT
Contract 1340 - Phase 1,2 & 3 Proposed General Needs Housing at Doggetts Close: 52,309 Cagefield Road, Stambridge: 153
MUNICIPAL HOUSING -. GENERAL
Housing Rents 1988/89: 16 Sheltered Schemes - Staffing Arrangements: 51,113 Chignal House, Rayleigh - Disturbance Incidents: 301 I"!MIIcVFI1l91 11flTU! .I:ITIr'qc Iur! !u!u:tI,.-i ii r T Ir-R—I — —
NOISE
Clay Pigeon Shooting: 522,588 Clay Pigeon Shooting - Moons Farm, Canewdon Road, Ashingdon: 525 - -in IN n-r,II.Iel W
OUTSIDE BODIES
Rayleigh Consultative Committee: 26 Bradwell Nuclear Power Station Liaison Committee: 28 Grant Aid to Outside Bodies: 19,165,271 Appointment of Representatives to Outside Bodies: 210,273,286,331,565 Rochford Sports Council Liaison Arrangements: 242 Citizens Advice Grant: 271 British Rail Liaison: 565(i) Anglian Water Authority: 565(u) Membership of the Board of CIRCA Leisure PLC: 286,565(iii) '1 I - 1W c
PANEL MINUTES
Staffing Sub-Committee: 14,81c,163(c) ,268,328(A) ,491(D) ,5ll,561(A) Sweyne Park Panel of Members: 163(A) ,163(E) Chairman's Panel: 81B,163(B) ,328(E) ,491(A) ,561(B) Audit Panel: l63(D),328(C),491(E),561(C & D),588 Hackney Carriage Panel: 152 District Plan Working Party: 153,173 Rate Consultation Panel: 58 Emergency Panel: S1A,491(C) Economic Development Panel: 328(D) Twinning Sub-Committee: 328(E)
PARISH BOUNDARIES
Review: 406
POST OFFICES
Rochford Post Office, Consultation on Conversion to Agency Status: 499,511 PUBLIC OPEN SPACES
Turret House Farm - Proposed Open Space: 171,191,237,296 Proposed disposal of land at Laburnum Crave, Rockley & Little Weatleys Chase, Rayleigh and Appropriation of Land at Keswick Avenue, Rayleigh: l80 Millview Park: 36,172,191 ,387(vii) Grove Road P.0.5. - Provision of Adventure Playground: 240,296 Sweyne Park: 245,384(A) Existing Open Space — Enhanced Tree Planting Proposals: 238,319,354,443 Community Facility - Anne Boleyn Estate: 241,337 Land at the Junction of Broad Parade and Greensward Lane, Hockley: 408 Rawreth Playing Field - Flying of Powered Model Aircraft: 444 Canewdon Playing Field — Relocation of Play Equipment: 446 Laburnum Grove Play Space: 354,447 Clements Hall Playing Field Pavilion - Hawkwell Athletic Boys Football Club: 451. Lower Wyburns Farm Public Open Space, flaws Heath Road, Rayleigh: 461,511 Hullbridge Foreshore: 471 Land between The Esplanade and Ferry Road, ilullbridge: 547 Spencer Nurseries adjacent to Clements Ball Leisure Centre, Hawkwell: 547 Land South of Pluinberow Mount, Rockley: 547 Bedloes Corner, Rawreth: 547 Land to the South of Itollytree Gardens, Rayleigh: 547 Bite-Laws for the Regulation of Dogs: 276,564
PUBLIC TRANSPORT
Effect of Deregulation & Privatiaation of the Bus Industry: 27,44 Bus Services in the Rochford District: 75 RACE RELATIONS ACT 1976
Principles of Practice for Contract Compliance: 25,44
RADIO ACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT
Discussion Document 'The Way Forward': 28 Radioactive Waste Management: 175,191
RATES - GENERAL
District Rate and Budget 1988/89: 59 Making the Rate 1988/89: 105 General Rate 1987/88 - Irrecoverable Items: 269 Community Charge & the National Non-Domestic Rate: 21,270 Rating of Sewage Works: 329,402
RATE RELIEF
Helping Hand Gift Shops Ltd: 403(i) Essex Community Concern Ltd: 403(u) 2nd Hockley Scout Group: 496,511
REFUSE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL
Reconstruction of Sea Wall South Fambridge: 62 Street Cleansing - Improvements: 521
RENTS Leaflet tlyour Rent": 5l2(iv)
ROACH VALLEY CONSERVATION ZONE
Minutes of Group Representatives: 72,256,478
ROCHFORD DISTRICT LOCAL PLAN
Open Space Provision: 173,238,267,547,588 Definition of Green Belt Boundary - Southern Hockley: 143, Para.21,258 Policy H8 - Areas of Special Restraint: 259 District Plan Working Party: 74,153,162,191,477 Resolution to Adopt: 389,419,481 Amendment to Rochford Town Centre Inset Plan: 401 Public Open Space: a19,443 Flat Conversions Policy: 467,511 Designation of Hulibridge Foreshore: 471 SEETEC
Temporary Buildings to rear of SEETEC: 33,44 Financial Arrangements & Future Status: 184,265,577 Additional Permanent Accommodation: 347
SELECTIVE TENDERING
Grounds Maintenance: 38 Leisure & Catering Services - Competitive Tendering: 90,109,281,317,346 Contract 1340 - Doggetts Close, Rochford - 34 Houses (Phase I): 439 Sale of Tender Documents: 498,511
SEWERS
Provision of Foul Sewer - Section 16 - Ashingdon Park Estate: 71,181
SOUThEN13 AIRPORT
Aeroplane Disaster at Rayleigh: 113 Atlas Air: 146 Fuel Spillage: - 248 Maerru4 t,aCTh flePgESE,TATLVa-3 OF TH gotFsuo Aiaeon-r Cwteu'-e SOUTHENID HEALTH AUTHORITY
Grant Aid to Southend and District Body Scanner Appeal: 19 Southend Radiotherapy Unit: 23,43,44,47,113,114 Southend Health Authority Matters: 118,305,518,588 Standing Order 5 National Health Service: 192,222,296,426,519 Consultative Document on Future Care of the Elderly at Westcliff Hospital: 304 Consultation Paper - "Working in Partnership: A Joint Strategy for Services for the Elderly": 517,588
SOUTH FAMBRIDGE VILLAGE PLAN
Production of Draft Plan: 363,470
STAFF - GENERAL
Management & Administrative Structure of Rochford D.C. 1988/1991 and Review of Term Contracts: 1,187 Food Hygiene Consultant (PostH38): 48 Wardens at Elderly Persona Accommodation: 51,313 Staff Award Scheme: 81,190 Retirement of D of I-I & H, Pinc. Asst. Planning: 81,112 Management & Administrative Structure of Rochford D.C. 1988/1991: Delegation of Authority and Revision of Standing Orders: 82 Presentation on Resignation of DF and DCS: 353 Redesignation of Council's Solicitor: 328(A)(1) Appointment of Senior Planning Asat & Planning Asat: 328(A)(2) Development Control Function: 328(A)(4) Relocation Package: 384(D)(5)
Cont ' d — 1IIl!I ! p-' -I IF'''
STAFF - GENERAL (Cont'd)
Staff Car Leasing Scheme: 384(D) Retirement - E. Batcewell: 416 Enforcement Section: 491(D) Secretary's Office - Review of Responsibilities and Commitments; 251,491(D) Development Directorate - Woodlands Team: 252,491(D) Appraisal interviews: 212,506 Miss Julie Slattery: 530
STAFF APT & C
Food Hygiene Consultant (Post 1138): 48 Director of Public Health, Southend Authority: 514
STAFF MANUAL
Council's Vehicle Workshop: 14(a) Grounds Maintenance Staff: 38(2)
STANDING ORDERS
Standing Order 18: 37,148,232,233,283,284,285,327,335,351 Standing Order 1.8: 40,107,144,214,299,474,486,589,590,595 Standing Order 14: 44 Revision of Standing Orders 2 82 Standing Order 5: 119,191,192(i)(ii)(iii),222,261,512(i),570,582,588 Revision of Standing Order 17: 167 Standing Order 12: 213 Standing Order 26.2: 219,292,301,327,348,359,579,583 Standing Order 4.4: 283,338 Changes to Standing Orders, Financial Standing Orders, Financial Regulations and Delegations to Officers: 332,354,391 Amendments to Standing Orders: 512(u) Questions under Standing Order 7.2: 513 Standing Order 6.2: 579
STREET CLEANSING
Improvements: 521
STREET NAMING
Land off Castle Road, Rayleigh: 30(a) Land rear of SEETEC, Main Road, Hockley: 30(B) 36 Flats, 7 Shops junc. Ashingdon Road/Rectory Road: 262,342(i) Development off Clements Hall Way: 342(u) Development off Avondale Road, Rayleigh: 396(i) Development off Dews Heath Road — "The Glen": 396(11) Sheltered Housing at 66-76, Downhall Road, Rayleigh - "Sheritan Square": 475(i) Development at Home Farm, Gt. Wakering - "Home Farm Close" and "Wedds Way": 475(u) Development off Sweyne Avenue, Rawkwell - "Sc. Clements Close": 554(i) Development on Site of 310, Eastwood Road, Rayleigh - "Lynwood Green": 554(u)
Cont' d. SUBSCRIPTIONS 1988/89
Schedule of Subscriptions: 20
SUNDAY TRADING
Coffee Mill - Sunday Opening: 317,449 Queensway Discount Warehouses Limited and Texas Romecare Limited: 527
SURFACE WATER
(See also: SEWERS) IT IF] Fl
TEACH-INS AND SEMINARS
Members Teach-tn on the Work of the ADC: 20(b)(2) Members Teach-tn on Rousing Benefit: 166 Members Induction Teach-tn: 333
TELEPHONE KIOSKS
Building Preservation Notices - Market Square, Rochford and High Street, Rayleigh: 472
TOURISM
Information Kiosk: 244- Essex Tourism Liaison Committee: 322
TOWN & COUNTRY PLANNING
Doctors' Surgery Site, Eastwood Road, Rayleigh: 24 Essex Structure Plan - First Alteration (El?): 29 Keswick Avenue Playspace: 31 District Plan Working Party: 74,153,162,191 Land to east of Sutton Road for Sports Stadium, Southend: 104(i) ,141 ,191,534 Land for Warehouse at Aviation Way, Southend-on-Sea: 104(u) Local Authority Building Control: 170 Essex County Council - Minerals Subject Plan (Sand & Gravel) - Second Consultation Draft: 156 Prevention of Further Large Scale Development within the Rochforct District: 192,261 Provision of Community Facility - Anne Boleyn area: 241,337 Erection of Flag Posts - Rayleigh Grange Community Centre: 243 Private Sheltered Housing Schemes Policy: 260,535 Waste Disposal Sites - Landfill Gas Monitoring: 308 Relaxation of Building Regulations, Schedule 2, Facilities for Disabled People: 365 Development off Cagefield Road, Stambridge: 153,336 Development on Former BSC Site at Kingsley Lane, Thundersley: 142,376(1) Consultation re Attwood, North Side of A127, Wickford: 376(2) Single Storey Extension - 170 Ashingdon Road, Rochford: 379 Little Wheatleys Farmhouse: 394 Flat Conversions Policy: 467,511,535 Isolation Distances Between Dwellings: 368,468 Proposed Diversion of Footpath 25 Rochford: 480 Community Charge - Accommodation: 495,573 Development of Backland Sites: 535 New Planning Legislation and Advice - Town & Country Planning General Development Order 1988: 597
TOWN & COUNTRY PLANNING - CONTRAVENTIONS
Non-compliance with Condition Requiring Removal of Mobile ilome at Friends Farm, Shoebury Road, Gt. Wakering: 98 8, Grove Road, Rayleigh: Unauthorised Car Repairs: 99 83 & 85 High Street, CL. Wakering: IJnauthorised Shop Fronts: 100 Traders Garden Centre: Unauthorised Manufacture of Timber Products: 101
Contdf. TOWN & COUNTRY PLANNING - CONTRAVENTIONS (Cont'd)
Unauthorised Erection Building Rawreth Lane: 102 Glazebrook Farm, Canewdon Road, Ashingdon: 147 2, Malyons Lane, Hulibridge: Unauthorised Vehicle Repairs: 358 240 Plumberow Avenue, ilockley: 359(1) The Willows, Apton Hall Road: 359(u) Midhurst, The Drive, Rayleigh: 380(u) 42 Crouch View Crescent, Hockley - Siting of Caravan and Unauthorised Dog Grooming Business: 484
TREES
Essex C.C. Tree Preservation Orders: 157 British Gas Contribution Towards Tree Replacement: 189 T.P.O. - 2 Tyms Way, Rayleigh: 366
TWINNING
Guests from Haltern: 415 Iuul
flHICLFS AND PLANT
Transfer of Two Vehicles to Rochford Civil Aid: 511,588 i 7W" II !T ¶r1 — •II
WASTE DISPOSAL
Waste Disposal Sites - Landfill Gas Monitoring: 30S Churchfield, Barling: 431(i),459 Unit 13, Rawreth Industrial Estate, Rayleigh: 431(u)
WLDDICOMBE COMMITTEE
Government's Response: 407,569
WOODLANDS MANAGEMENT TEAItI
Headquarters in Hockley Woods Car Park: 32 Tiockley Woods Patrol: 131 ROCHFORD DISTRICT COUNCIL MINUTES
1988
May (Part 1) ROCHFORD DISTRICT COUNCIL
Minutes of the Annual Meeting of the Council
At a Meeting held on 17th May, 1988. Present: Councillors R.A. Pearson (Chairman), R.S. Allen, R.A. Amner, P.A. Beckers, C.I. Black, R.H. Boyd, Mrs. R. Brown, Well. Budge, Mrs. P. Cooke, B.A. Crick, C.J.B. Paherty, Mrs. J. Fawell, T. Fawell, D.F. Flack, I-A. Gibson, I.R. Godfrey, Mrs. P. Godsell, B.T. Grigg, M.J. Handford, N. Harris, Mrs. E.M, Hart, A.J. Harvey, D.R. Ilelson, G.J. looper, Mrs. M. 'I-Iunnable, S.N. Jarvis, Mrs. S.J. Lemon, Miss B.G.J. Lovett, Mrs. E. Marlow, J.M. Roden, J.A. Sheaf, S.f-I. Si-iva, S.A. Skinner, C. Stephenson, Miss D.M. Stow, Mrs. L. Walker, P.F.A. Webster, D.A. Weir, D.C. Wood and C. Wren.
198. Council stood in silent tribute to the memory of C.B. Gowlett and Mrs. E.M. Frank, both former Members of this Authority, who had died recently.
•199. ELECTION OF THE CHAIRMAN OF THE COUNCIL FOR 1988/89
Resolved that Councillor R.A. Pearson be elected Chairman of the Council for the ensuing year.
Councillor Pearson then made the statutory Declaration of Acceptance of Office as Chairman.
200. APPOINTMENT OF VICE—CHAIRMAN OF THE COUNCIL FOR 1988/89
Resolved that Councillor Mrs. P. Cooke be appointed as Vice—Chairman of the Council for the ensuing year.
Councillor Mrs. Cooke then made the statutory Declaration of Acceptance of Off ice as Vice—Chairman.
201. APPOINTMENT OF CHAIRMAN OF THE POLICY AND RESOURCES COMMITTEE/LEADER OF THE COUNCtL FOR 1988/89
Resolved that Councillor A.J.Harvey be appointed Chairman of the Policy and Resources Committee/Leader of the Council for the ensuing year.
202. LIBERAL AND LABOUR GROUPS
The Leader of the Council advised Members that arising out of the altered composition of the Council it had been suggested that the Liberal Group should be known as the Opposition Party and the Labour Group as the Minority Party.
203. APPOINTMST OP CHAIRMAN'S CHAPLAIN
The Chairman reported that the Reverend Kenneth Plaister, the incumbent of St. Nicholas' Church of England Church, Great Wakering, had accepted his Invitation to serve as his Chaplain during 1988/89.
RESULTS OF DISTRICT AND PARISH COUNCIL ELECTIONS HELD ON 5TH MAY 1988 •204. The results of the District and Parish Council elections were received.
000470 Annual Council
205. FORMER COUNCILLOR MRS. JO JONES
In welcoming new Councillors and thanking those former Members who were retiring, the Chairman referred to Mrs. Jo Jones' unbroken service as a Councillor since 1973 and that her retirement had been occasioned by her husband's ill—health and their move from the District. On behalf of the Council he presented her with a dress ring inscribed with the Coat of Arms of the Council to mark that long community service to the District of Rochford.
206. RECORD OF' ATTENDANCES
Members received the record of attendances at Council, Committee and Panel meetings during the year 1987/88.
207. APPOINTMENT OF STANDING COMMITTEES
Consideration was given to the appointment of Members to the Standing Committees of the Council. Members were reminded that the Chairman and Vice—Chairman of the Council and the Chairman of Policy and Resources . Committee/Leader of the Council were ex—officio Members of all Standing Committees.
Resolved that the undermentioned Committees be constituted as follows:—
(a) DEVELOPMENT SERVICES (20)
Chairman Cllr. D.C. Wood Cllr. N.J. TTandford Vice—Chairman Clir. Mrs. EM. Hart Cllr. Mrs. H. 1-lunnable Cilt. R.S. Allen Clir. Miss B.G.J. Lovett Cllr. C.I. Black Cllr. Mrs. H. Marlow Cl Ir. Mrs. R. Brown CUr. SR. Silva Cllr. C.J.B. Paherty Cllr. S.A. Skinner Cur. T. Fawell Cllr. C. Stephenson Cllr. J.A. Gibson Cur. Mrs. L. Walker CUr. I.R. Godfrey Cllr. D.A. Weir Cl lr. Mrs. P. Godsell CUr. C. Wren . (b) HEALTH AND HOUSING SERVICES (20)
Chairman Cllr. J.A. Sheaf Cur. N. Harris Vice—Chairman Cllr. W.H. Budge Cllr. Mrs. E.M. Hart Cllr. R.A. Miner Cllr. G.J. Hooper Cllr. P.A. Beckers Cllr. S.N. Jarvis Cllr. Mrs. R. Brown Cllr. Mrs. S.J. Lemon Cllr. B.A. Crick Cllr. Mrs. H. Marlow Cur. Mrs. J. Fawell Cllr. J.M. Roden Cur. ELF. Flack ClIr. S.!!. Silva Clir. I.R. Godfrey Cllr. Miss D.M. Stow Cllr. Mrs. P. Godsell Cllr. P.F.A. Webster . Ii 000471 Annual Council
(c) LEISURE SERVICES (20)
Chairman Ci it. Miss B.G.J. Lovett Gilt. S.N. Jarvis Vice—Ghai rinan Gilt. R.S. Allen Gilt. Mts. S.J. Lemon Gilt. R.A. Ainner Gilt. J.M. Roden Gilt. P.A. Beckers Gilt. S.A. Skinner Gilt. W.H. Budge Gilt. Miss D.M. Stow Gilt. Mrs. J. Fawell Gilt. Mrs. L. Walker • Gilt. J.A. Gibson Gilt. P.F.A. Webster Gilt. N. Harris Gilt. D.A. Weit Gilt. D.R. Helson Gilt. D.C. Wood Cur. G.J. looper Gilt. C. Wren
(d) PLANNING SERVICES (All Members) Charmn Gilt. T. Fawell Vice—Chairman Gilt. P.P.A. Webster
(e) POLICY AND RESOURCES (20)
Chairman Gilt. A.J. Harvey Cur. B.T. Grigg Vice—Chairman Clir. J.A. Gibson Gilt. M.J. J-Iandford Gilt. R.S. Allen Gilt. Mrs. E.M. Hart Gilt. P.A. Beckers Gilt. D.R. Ilelson GlIr. C.I. Black Gilt. Mrs. M.A. Hunnabie Cur. R.H. Boyd Gilt. Miss. B.G.J. Lovett Gilt. W.ll. Budge Gilt. J.A. Sheaf Gilt. B.A. Crick Gilt. C. Stephenson Gilt. G.J.B. Pahetty Cur. P.F.A. Webster Gilt. T. Fawell Glir. D.C. Wood Gilt. D.F. Flack
208 • APPOINTMENT OF CHAIRMEN AND VICE-CHAIRMEN OF COMMITTEES ANT) PANELS OF COMMITTEES
At this stage of the proceedings, special meetings of all Standing • Committees were held for the sole purpose of appointing their Chairmen and Vice—Chairmen, shown recorded for convenience in the previous Minute, and for the purpose of appointing their dependent Panels.
On the recommendation of the Leader of the Council it was
Resolved (1) That the nominations as presented be adopted together with the consequential changes in the numbers serving on Sub—Committees.
(2) That the Rayleigh Grange Community Centre Management Committee be not reappointed.
(3) That the Chairmen and Vice—Chairmen of Committees be as set out above and that the dependent Panels he appointed as follows:—
(a) DEPENDENT ON TIlE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES COMMITTEE
(i) Hackney Carriage Panel (9)
Cur Mrs. R. Brown Gilt M.J. T-Iandford Gilt D.A. Weir Gilt Mrs. P. Cooke Cur A.J. Harvey Gilt C. Wren Gllr T. Fawell Gilt R.A. Pearson Cllr D.C. Wood 00372 Annual Council . (ii) District Plan Working Party (13)
Gilt P.A. Beckers Gilt Miss B.G.J. Lovett CI it Mrs. L. Walker Cl It T. Faweli Gut R.A. Pearson Gilt P.P.A. Webster Cut J.A. Gibson Gut J.A.. Sheaf Gilt D.A. Wait Ci it Mrs. E.M. Hart Gilt S.A. Skinner Cl it D.C. Wood Gilt A.J. Harvey
(b) DEPENDENT ON THE HEALTH & HOUSING SERVICES COMMITTEE
Music and Dancing Panel (5)
Gilt Mrs. R. Brown Gilt Mrs. S.J. Lemon Gilt W.H. Budge Gilt J.A. Sheaf Gilt Mrs. P. Cooke
(c) DEPENDENT ON THE LEISURE SERVICES COMMITTEE
(i) Freight House Management Committee (5) S
Gilt J.A. Gibson Gilt Miss B.G.J. Lovett Gilt A.J. Harvey Gilt Miss D.M. Stow Gilt S.N. Jarvis
(ii) Leisure Liaison Working Part1 (3)
Gilt R.S. Allen Gilt J#A. Gibson Gilt J.A. Sheaf
(iii) Sweyne Park Panel of Members (7)
Gilt R.S. Alien Gilt Miss B.G.J. Lovett Gilt G.I. Black Gilt S.A. Skinner Gilt T. Faweil Gilt D.C. Wood Gilt A.J. Harvey (d) DEPENDENT ON TUE POLICY AND RESOURGES COMMITTEE . (1) Appeais !anel (3)
Gilt J.A. Gibson Gilt A.J. Harvey Gilt Miss B.G.J. Lovett
(ii) Audit Panel (ii)
Gilt G.I. Biack Gilt A.J. Harvey Gilt C. Stephenson Gilt W.H. Budge Gilt Miss B.G.J. Lovett Gilt D.C. Wood Gilt Mrs. P. Cooke Gut R.A. Pearson Gift G. Wren Cllr J.A. Gibson Gilt J.A. Sheaf
(iii) Chairman's Panel (i2)
G 1 lr R.S. Alien Gilt J.A. Gibson Gilt R.A. Pearson Cilr W.I1. Budge Gilt Mrs. H.!'!. Hart Gilt J.A. Sheaf Gilt Mrs. P. Cooke Gilt A. J. Hatvey Gilt P.F.A. Webster S Gilt T. Fawell Cut Miss B.G.J. Lovett Gilt D.C. Wood 000473 Annual Council
(iv) Emergency Panel (8)
Cllr R.A. Ataner Cur A.J. Harvey Gilt B.A. Crick Cur Miss B.G.3. Lovett Cur T. Fawell Cur R.A. Pearson Cur J.A. Gibson dir C. Stephenson
(v) Housing Benefits Appeals Panel (7)
Cllr W.H. Budge Clir Mrs. E.M. Hart Cllr Mrs. P. Cooke Cur A.J. Harvey ClIr B.A. Crick Cur JA. Sheaf Cllr D.F. Flack
(vi) Rate Consultation Panel (6)
Clir CI. Black Cllr A.J. Harvey Clir T.H. Budge Cllr Miss 13.G.J. Lovett Clir J.&. Gibson Cllr R.A. Pearson
(vii) Staffing Sub—Committee (8)
Cllr T. Fawell Cllr DR. Helgon Clir D.F. Flack Cllr Miss B.G.J. Lovett Clir N. Harris Clir J.A. Sheaf Cllr A.J. Harvey Cllr D.C. Wood
(viii)Twinning Sub—Committee (7)
Cllr W.ll. Budge Cur R.A. Pearson Cllr P4.3. Handford Clir J.A. Sheaf Cllr D.R. Relson Cllr D.C. Wood Cllr Miss B.G.J. Lovett
(ix) Economic Development Panel (8)
Cilr T. Fawell Cllr Mrs. P4. I-lunnable Clir J.A. Gibson Cllr R.A. Pearson Cllr AJ. Harvey Cllr C. Stephenson Cllr D.R. Helson Cllr D.C. Wood
209. DATES OF MEETINGS
The Council at the request of the Chairman of the Policy and Resources Committee approved an amendment to the Cycle of Meetings by the cancellation of the Audit Panel scheduled for 25th May 1988.
Resolved That the timetable of Meetings during the year 1988/89 as amended be noted.
210. APPOINTMENT OF REPRESENTATIVES TO OUTSIDE BODIES AND ORGANISATIONS
On the suggestion of the Leader of the Council it was agreed that the appointments to CIRCA Leisure PLC and to the governing bodies of the Glebe Junior and Infants School and Rawreth Church of England Primary School would be considered at the first Meeting of the Policy and Resources Committee. It was noted that Councillor Mrs. H. Hunnable would relinquish
0004 4 Annual Council
her seat on the Southend Community Health Council in favour of Councillor D.F. Flack and that Councillor 13.A. Crick would fill the vacancy on the Rochford and District Abbeyfield Society.
Resolved (1) that representatives be appointed as detailed in the schedule appended to these Minutes.
(2) that unless otherwise indicated the person so appointed be authorised to arrange for the attendance when necessary of a substitute Member at meetings of outside bodies and organisations.
(3) that the appointments to CIRCA Leisure PLC and to the governing bodies of the Glebe Junior and Infants School and Rawreth Church of England Primary School be considered at the first Meeting of the Policy and Resources Committee. (SEC)
211. APPOINTMENT OF MEMBER WITH SPECIAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE DISABLED WiTH REGARD TO PLANNING APPLICATIONS
Resolved that the Chairman and Vice—Chairman of the Planning Services Committee be so appointed.
S
000475 .ROCUPORD DISTRICT COuNCIL APPOINTMENT OF REPRESENTATIVES TO OUTSIDE BODIES AND ORCANISATIONS
ORGANISATION REPRESENTATIVE(S) 1988/89
Anglian Water Customer Consultative Committee (OS) Council br D.C.Wood S Association of District Councils (P&R) Councillor A.J .Ilarvey (Essex Branch)
Bradwell Local Community (P&R) Councillor D.C.Wood Liaison Council
Cedar Centre Governing Body (P &R) Councillor Mrs. P. Cooke Councillor Mrs. S.J. Lemon
Citizens Advice Bureau(Rochford) (P&R) Councillor Mrs. R. Brown Councillor W.H. Budge Councillor B.A. Crick
Citizens Advice Bureau(Rayleigh) (P MI.) Councillor Mrs. P.Cooke Councillor S.N. Jarvis Council for the Protection of Rural Essex (OS) Council.lor D.C.Wood.
Crossroads Care kttendant Scheme (H&H) Cotrncillor Mrs. P.Cooke Councillor Mrs. L. Walker
Crouch Harbour Authority (DS) Councillor D.C.Wood Councillor T.Pawell (Sub)
Crouch Valley Housing Association (P&R) Councillor Mrs. P. Codsell Councillor Mrs. E.M. Hart Councillor A.J. Harvey
Crouch Valley Scout Council (LS) Councillor Miss B.G.J.Lovett
Dutch Cottage Management Committee) (LS) Councillor J.A. Gibson & ) Councillor Miss B.G.J. Lovett Rayleigh Mount Local Committee ) Councillor S.A. Skinner Councillor P.F.A. Webster Chairman of Rayleigh Mount Local Committee Chairman of Rayleigh Civic Society
Eastern Sports Council (LS) Councillor Miss B.G.J. Lovett Councillor N. Harris (Sub)
Electricity Consultative Council (DS) Councillor P.P.A. Webster East Anglian (South) Local Committee .(Nomination)
DM476 ORGAN I SATION REPRESENTATIVE(S) 1988/89 . Essex County Council Liaison Committee (P&R) Councillor A.JHarvey
Essex County Council Tourism Liaison Committee (LS) Councillor Miss 8.G.J. Lovett
Essex & Herts Provincial Council for Councillor .J.A. Gibson Local Authorities APT & C.Services (P&R) Councillor A.T. Haney (Sub)
Essex & Herts Provincial Council for Councillor J.A. Gibson Local Authorities Manual Workers (P&R) Councillor A.J. Harve7 (Sub)
Essex Local Authorities Supplies (P&R) C ounc ill or C. Wren Consortium
Gas Consumers Council (DS) Council br R.A. Pearson Councillor P.F.A. Webster
Flockley Community Centre Association Councillor C.J.B. Faherty Executive Committee (LS) Councillor Mrs. E.M. Hart . Hockley & Hawkwell Old Peoples Welfare Council (H&H) Councillor Mrs. E.M. Hart
Hullbridge Community Association (LS) Councillor Mrs. H. Brown
Hullbridge Community Association (LS) Councillor Mrs. H. Brown Executive Committee Councill or Mrs. Li. Walker
Hullbridge Senior Citizens Welfare Council (H&H) Councillor Mrs. L.Walker
Hullbridge Sports & Social Club (LS) Councillor G.J. Ho o per Councillor Mrs. L.Walker
Inter—Club (LS) Councillor R.S. Allen
Keep Britain Tidy (H&H) Councillor Mrs. P. Cooke Councillor J.A. Sheaf S
National Housing & T.Planning Council Eastern Regional Executive Committee (DS) Counci liar J.A. Sheaf
Oil Refineries Sub—Committee (DS) C oun ci 110 r WH. Budge Council lot S.N. Jarvis Councillor R. A. Pearson Council lo r CR. Hooper (Sub)
Police Consultative Committee (P&R) Councillor R.A. Pea rson
Rayleigh &ge Concern (R&d) Councillor .1 .A. Gibson
Rayleigh Charities (P&R) Councillor Mrs. P. Cooke a) Poors Land — Unknown Donor
5' Richmond b) Gilbert & Sykes c) Rayle gh Medical Comforts Committee .
00047 ,ATION REPRESENTATIVE(S) 19B8/89 Rayleigh Flats House Committee (H&H) Counctilor J.A.Gibson
Rayleigh Grange Community Association (LS) Councillor P.A. Beckers Councillor Mrs. P. Cooke
Roach Valley Conservation Zone (OS) Couneillor RS. Allen Group of Representatives Councillor S.A. Skinner Councillor Mrs. L. Walker Councillor U. C.Wood S Rochiord & District Abbeyfield Society (H&H) Councillor B.A. Crick Limited Councillor J.A. Sheaf Councillor D.C. Wood
Rochford District Arts Council (LS) Councillor R.H. Boyd Councillor Mrs. E. Marlow
ochford Hundred Rugby Football Club (LS) Councillor R.S. Allen
Rochford Job Training Scheme Councillor W.H. Budge Consortium — Management Committee (P&R) Councillor J.A. Gibson Councillor A.J. Harvey
Rochford Maplin & District Chamber (P&R) Councillor A.J. Harvey of Trade & Commerce
Rochford Old Peoples Welfare (H&H) Councillor R.A. Amner Committee Councillor S.N. Jarvis
Rochford Road Safety Study Group (DS) Councillor S.A. Skinner Councillor Mrs. L. Walker
Rochford Sports Club (LS) Councillor Miss B.G.J. Lovett
Rochford Sports Council (LS) Councillor Miss B.G.J. Lovett Deputy: Councillor R.S. Allen
Rochford Youth Training (P&R) Councillor J.A.Gibson Advisory Committee
Rochford Youth Training Consortium (P&R) Councillor W.H. Budge Managing Committee Councillor J.A. Gibson Councillor A.J. Harvey
Rural Community Council of Essex (P&R) Councillor D.C. Wood
Sanctuary Housing Association (H&H) Councillor Mrs. E.M. Hart
Silver Jubilee Centre Management (LS) Councillor Miss B.C.J. Lovett Committee Mr. D.P.C. Huskisson
South East Essex Technology Centre (P&R) Councillor C.J.B. Faherty Councillor l.A. Gibson Councillor A.J. Harvey Councillor D.R. Helson
00 78 ORGANISATION REPRESENTATIVE(S) 1988mg
Southend Airport Consultative (DS) Councillor J.A. Sheaf Committee Council].or D.C. Wood
Southend Community Health Council (1-I&T-I) Councillor Mrs. It. Brown Councillor D.F. Flack Courtcillor Mrs. E.M. Hart
Southend.Criine Prevention Panel (P&R) Councillor LA. Amner
Southend & District Asociation Councillor Mrs. P. Godsell for Mental Health (H&H) Councillor Mrs. E.M. Hart
Southend Health Authority (H&T-I) Councillor D.C.Wood
Southend Health Authority! Councillor Mrs. E.M. Hart District Councils Liaison Committee (H&E1) Councillor D.C. Tjood
Southend—on--Sea Post Office & Telecom Advisory Committee (DS) Councillor R.S. Allen Council].or M.J. Tlandforcl
Traffic Commissioners and Deputies — (DS) Councillor D.C.Wood Eastern Traffic Area (Nomination)
Transport Users Consultative Council (US) Councillor B.A. Crick (Nomination)
SCHOOL GOVERNING BODIES (P&R)
By the provisions of the Education (No. 2) Act 1986, all Governing Bodies of County Schools have to be reconstituted by 1st September 1988 and all existing appointments will cease on 31st August. The revised constitution provides for only one appointment to be made on the nomination of minor local authorities. These provisions do not apply to Rawreth Church of England or Our Lady of Ransom Roman Catholic Primary Schools and those appointments will continue until 3lst December 1989.
Until 31st August 1988
Oownhall Primary School Councillor Mrs. S.J. Lemon #
Edward Francis Junior & Infants School Councillor D.R. Helson II Mr. A. Mason
Grove Junior & Infants School Mr. R.D.Foster 0 Mr. I.M.Edwards
Rayleigh Junior & Infants School Mrs. J. Perrintan Mr. J.P. Taylor 0
Wyburns Junio & Infants School Mrs. C. Warren 0
000479 •SAT ION REPRESENTATIVE(S) 1988/89 Until 31st December 1989
Our Lady of Ransom RC Primary School Mrs. A. Kemp (Cllr.S.T-I. Silva)*
* Replacement representatives approved on nomination but not in office Minute 285/86
# Nominee to reconstituted Governing Bodies as from 1st September 1988.
bA____ 000480 ! '' N
ROCRFORD DISTRICT COUNCIL
Minutes of the Council
At an Extraordinary Meeting held on 18th Nay, l98B. Present; Councillors R.A. PearsoniChairman), R.S. All Amner, P.A. Beckers, C.I. Black, R.H. Boyd, Mrs. R. Brown, W.H. Budge, Mrs. P. Cooke, B.A. Crick, D.F. Flack, J.A. Gibson, I.R. Godfrey, Mrs. P. Godsell, B.T. Grigg, N.J. Handford, N. Harris, Mrs. E.M. Hart, A.J. Harvey, D.R. Helson, G.J. Hooper, Mrs. N. Hunnable, S.N. Jarvis, Mrs. S.J. Lemon, Miss B.G.J. Lovett, Mrs. B. Marlow, J.M. Roden, J.A.. Sheaf, 5.11. Silva, S.A. Skinner, C. Stephenson, Mrs. L. Walker, P.P.A. Webster; D.A. Weir, D.C. Wood and C. Wren.
212. TRANSFER OF COUNCIL HOUSES TO CROUCH VALLEY HOUSINC ASSOCIATION (Minute l77/SQ)
Note: Councillors Mrs. E.M. Hart, A.J. Harvey and Mrs. F. Godsell declared a non—pecuniary interest by virtue of their membershiji of the Housing Association but remained in the Meeting and participated in the discussion and the voting thereon. Members of the Council had before them the appended report of the Chief - Executive setting out the results of the recent consultation exercise with the Authority's tenants on the proposal to transfer Council houses to the Crouch Valley Rousing Association and the action which would need to he taken if it were decided to proceed with that policy, and asking Council to take a decision on a request from a Member for certain information associated with the excercise. The Chairman said that the report was of a complex nature and that he intended to ask Council to deal with it in stages so as to ensure that it received the most thorough consideration. Council concurred with the proposal to relax the rule that no speech should exceed 5 minutes. At his request the Leader of the Council then formally moved recommendations (I), (2) and (4) as printed in the report. In presenting that part of the report relating to the recent consultation exercise with tenants, the Chief Executive said that the first forms returned had reflected a favourable reaction and that later responses indicating opposition had been of a stereotyped nature. Re asked Members to note that the figure shown in Appendix 2 for the number of tenants attending the consultation surgery at Goodmans, Great Wakering Was incorrect and should read 22. Reference was made in paragraph 8 of the report to special categories of property, and that should include Ministry of Defence and Essex County Council properties leased to the Council. Finally, the Chief Executive said that in a recent article in a local newspaper views had been attributed to the Electoral Reform Society which did not accord with his understanding from them, which was that they would be prepared to conduct the ballot on the basis proposed.
In response to questions from Members, Council was advised as follows:—
(i) That guidance was currently being sought from the Department of Environment on whether with joint tenancies each of the tenants of a Council property would have a vote in the proposed ballot and an affirmative response was expected.
0010 81 Council
(ii) That the terms of the proposed tenancy agreement had heen adopted by the Housing Association and could be issued to all tenants.
(iii) That residents of sheltered housing schemes did not have a Right to Buy and under the proposed arrangements neither would new tenancies.
(iv) That the next stage of transfer would be to advise the flepartment of the Environment of the Council's decision and seek their agreement to the proposals subject to a ballot of the tenants. Arrangements would then be made for such a ballot to be conducted by the Electoral Reform Society, who although not acting as Returning Officer would issue the forms to tenants and collect !the responses. A further report would then be made to Council.
(v) That the reference in the report to Cagefield Road concerned the two properties which had been earmarked for demolition to provide an access to other Council—owned land.
(vi) That Crested Court was to be retained for the purpose of providing units of accommodation for the homeless together with offices for the new Housing Association.
(vii) That the Chief Executive had replied to all queries which had been raised by or on behalf of individual tenants.
Members considered the method by which it was proposed to finance the transfer of the housing stock, and it was argued that the Council would be selling at a loss and that this could have an adverse effect upon the ratepayers. Furthermore, if the Housing Association had to raise money in the City to provide further housing for the rented sector then interest rates could be less favourable to the detriment of -the tenants.
Council was advised however that the value placed upon the Council's housing stock for the purpose of sale to the Housing Association would be determined by the Department of the Environment and would need to be acceptable to both parties, providing on the one hand that the Housing Association would remain viable and on the other that the Council was not placed in deficit. The only way in which it was envisaged that the housing stock would be depleted was through the Right to Buy mechanism which Council wished to see preserved for existing tenants and a projection had been made showing the likely trend based on previous yearst experience. It was the case that interest rates could be secured by Housing Associations which were comparable with those enjoyed by Local Authorities. It had to be borne in mind also in considering the financial aspect that future legislation would Include the Imposition of ring fencing whereby Local Authorities would lose control of their Housing Revenue Account.
It was proposed by Councillor R.H. Boyd and seconded by Councillor U.]?. Flack:
"That recommendation (1) be amended by deleting the phrase "as outlined above" and substituting the words "to conduct a vote amongst tenants on thA basis of voting in accordance with traditional constitutional methods, i e. a simple majority of those voting"."
0 482 I Council
In favour of the amendment it was suggested that the counting of abstentions as votes cast in favour was being advocated because it was the only way in which the transfer could he achieved. That system was at variance with other electoral processes under this country's system of democracy and would bring down penalties if practiced by a trade union. Whilst it was seen as inevitable that pending legislation would prevail and that tenants would be given freedom to choose a new landlord, there was as yet no compulsion for the ballot to he conducted on that basis. It would make sense and be far fairer for the ballot to be held under the normal rules as widely understood and accepted. -
The Leader of the Council pointed out that the Council could legally - transfer the housing stock to the new Association without any need to ballot the tenants, but the consultation process and the ballot procedure had been that defined in consultation with the Department of the Environment as satisfying all of the requirements of forthcoming legislation. Other Members argued that the rules under which the ballot - was to be conducted would be made abundantly clear to all those eligible to participate and it was up to those who were opposed to the proposals • to vote against them so as to safeguard their interest in the outcome. The Council had suggested that the exercise be carried out by the Electoral Reform Society so as to ensure that the ballot was conducted strictly in accordance with the rules. It was also significant that the Council's policy had been known when the recent elections had taken place, and that it had been one of the main issues. Furthermore, despite all the claims to the contrary, there was no evidence to show that any rights would be lost if tenants were transferred to the Housing Association.
On a requisition pursuant to Standing Order 14 voting on the motion was recorded as follows:—
For the Amendment (17) Councillors P.A. Beckers, C.I. Black, R.H. Boyd, BA. Crick, D.F. Flack, Mrs. P. Goctsell, M.J. Handford, N. Harris, D.R. Ilelson, Mrs. M. Hunuable, S.N. Janis, Mrs. S.J. Lemon, S.H. Silva, S.A. Skinner, C. Stephenson, D.A. Weir and C. Wren.
Against the Amendment (19) Councillors R.S. Allen, R.A. Amner, Mrs. II. Brown, W.H. Budge, Mrs. P. Cooke, l.A. Gibson, I.R. Godfrey, B.T. Grigg, Mrs. E.M. Hart, A.J. Haney, G.J. Hooper, Miss B.C.J. Lovett, Mrs. B. Marlow, R.A. Pearson, J.M. Roden, J.A. Sheaf, Mrs. L. Walker, P.F.A. Webster and D.C. Rood.
The amendment was declared LOST.
If was proposed by Councillor R.H. Boyd and seconded by Councillor S.A. Skinner:
000483 Council
"That recommendation (1) be amended by the addition after the phrase "as outlined above' of the words —
"and that all further consultation or voting documents contain the following textt
"if you do not vote or you abstain then this will be counted as a positive vote in favour".
- such wording to be in capitals and twice the size of all other text contained in the consultation document".
That amendment was accepted and the substantive motion as amended was
adopted. I It was proposed by Councillor R.H. Boyd and seconded by Councillor B-A. Crick: -
"That recommendation (2) be amended by deleting the word "endorse" and substituting the word "note' and by adding the following words, namely —
"and that they shall continue to ensure that each and every tenant is aware that abstention, absence, illness, holidays, lost paper, or any other reason for not voting will be counted as a vote in
favour" -
after the phrase "since the last Meeting".
Some Members argued in support of the amendment that mistakes had been made during the consultation exercise which should not be endorsed by the Council, and that every endeavour should now be made to clarify the basis on which the ballot was to be conducted. Other Members, whilst not opposed to that latter objective, maintained that since the Officers had been acting in accordance with Council policy it would be customary to endorse their actions and in the present circumstances, where there was strong evidence of an orchestrated campaign of opposition by members of the public, it would be invidious not to do so. It was recalled that at earlier Meetings the Chief Executive had been congratulated on the initiative which had been put forward to ensure the best option for the District in anticipation of the proposed legislation.
With the consent of the seconder of the motion, Councillor Boyd agreed to withdraw part of the motion so as to leave the word "endorse" unaltered.
On a requisiton pursuant to Standing Order 14 voting on the amended motion was recorded as follows:—
For the Amendment (31) Councillors R.S. Alien, R.A. Amner, P.A. Beckers, C.I. Black, R.R. Boyd, Mrs. IL Brown, W.H. Budge, Mrs. P. Cooke, B.A. Crick, J.A. Gibson, I.R. Godfrey, Mrs. P. Godsell, M.J. Randford, N. Harris, Mrs. E.M. Hart, A.J. Harvey, D.R. Helson, G.J. Hooper, Mrs. M. Hunnable, S
0004 Council
S.N. Jarvis, Mrs. S.J. Lemon, Miss B.G.J. Lovett, Mrs. E. Marlow, R.A. Pearson, J.M. Roden, J.A. Sheaf, S.&. Skinner, Mrs. 1.. Walker, P.F.A. Webster, D.C. Wood and C. Wren.
inst the Amendment (4) Councillors D.F. Flack, S.H. Silva,
- C. Stephenson and fl.A. Weir.
The Motion was declared CARRIED and recommendation (2) as amended was adopted and it was
Resolved (1) that the Council proceed with the next stage of transfer and fljiji the Electoral Reform Society to conduct a vote as outlined in the report and that all further consultation or voting documents contain the following text:
"If you do not vote or you abstain then this will be counted as a positive vote in favour"
such wording to be in capitals and twice the size of all other text contained in the consultation document.
(2) that the Council endorse the action taken by the Officers since the last Meeting and that they shall continue to ensure that each and every tenant is aware that abstention, absence, illness, holidays) lost paper, or any other reason for not voting will be counted as a vote in favour.
(3) that Officers seek to establish as quickly as possible the Department of the Environment's likely view on the proposal before going to final consultation. (The Ballot)
213. ADJOURNMENT OF MEETING
During discussion on the preceding item and on the ruling of the Chairman S the Meeting was adjourned from 9.10 p.m. to 9.20 p.m. pursuant to Standing W Order 12 relating to disturbance by members of the public.
214. SUSPENSION 0? STANDING ORDER 1.8
Prior to consideration of the residue of the Agenda it was
Resolved that Standing Order 1.8 be suspended to enable the business to be completed.
215. SUPPLY OF INFORMATION TO MEMBERS
A report by the Chief Executive setting out the action which he had taken consequent upon a request from Councilior D.F. Flack for certain information associated with the new housing initiative was circulated for Members' information and copies were made available to the press, together with a report setting out advice from the Chief Executive to Council relating to that request. It was agreed that they should form part of the Minutes of the Meeting.
000485 Council
Members noted that the information requested fell into three categories, first that part or the information pack which had not already been issued to all Councillors and was the property of the Rousing Association, namely a staffing structure for the Housing Association, secondly a mailing list of all Council houses within the District and thirdly the CIPFA Services Feasibility Study. They concurred with the Chief Executive's view that he did not have authority to issue such documents and that the request should be determined by Council, and noted that there was no CIPFA Services Feasibility Study as such. The first detailed financial profile had already been issued to all Councillors -and the other financial detail had been prepared by the Rousing Association. The majority were of the view firstly that it was a matter for the Housing Association to decide whether the documents within their purview should be issued to Councillors on a confidential basis and! secondly that it would be wrong to provide individual Members with details of all Council house tenants for use by a third party. Since the-purpose of the latter request was to enable the newly formed Tenants' Rights Association to circulate a leaflet to all tenants, Members took the view that this could be achieved through the offices of the Electoral Reform Society when they conducted the ballot.
Resolved (1) that the Chief Executive be asked to approach the Rousing Association to ascertain whether they were prepared to make available to all serving Members of the Council a copy of the proposed staffing structure.
(2) that the Electoral Reform Society be asked to issue to all Council tenants in association with the ballot on the transfer of housing stock to the Crouch Valley Housing Association any documents that may be produced for their information in that connection.
.
.
000486 ROCHFORD DISTRICT COUNCIL
SPECIAL MEETING OF THE COUNCIL— 18TH MA? 1988
REPORT OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE
TRANSFER OF HOUSING STOCK TO CROUCH VALLEY HOUSING ASSOCIATION (Min.556/87)
1. INTRODUCTION
The Chief Executive reports that the consu1taton procedure as determined by recent Council policy was carried Out during the period 8th April to 9th May 1988 and the following report is presented to Members in order that Council can make further decisions as to whether it is to proceed with the proposal to transfer Council housing stock to Crouch Valley Housing Association.
Members are reminded that the policy was first proposed at the }-leaith and Housing Services Committee dated 17th November 1987 (Miii 519/87), was debated in detail at Policy and Resources Committee on 8th December, 1987 (Miii. 556/87) and decided by the Council on 15th December 1987 (Mm. 587/87).
In accordance with that policy, the Chief Executive initiated a series of action and kept Members informed in letters dated 15th and 22nd January and 5th February, 1988. Some of those letters were also sent to the Members of the new1.y formed Housing Association.
At the meeting of the Policy and Resources Committee on 12th April Members requested more venues be provided for meetings of tenants and officers were also requested to give maximum assistance to the tenants in order that they would understand this most complex document.
2. TI-fE TENANT CONSULTATION DOCUMENT
The document was in three parts:
(i) The brochure giving a general description. (ii) An insert which gave precise comparisons. (iii) A return Latin for views. A copy was sent to all Councillors and has also been sent to those Councillors recently elected. They were delivered to tenants by Council staff over the weekend 9/10th April, 1988. (2452) All tenants, regardless of status were consulted in the first process since the Management arrangement would probably apply to all of them.
Out of 438 forms returned, 322 were opposed, 78 were in favour and 38 undecided, a response of 17%. Tenants views on the consultation are summarised in Appendix 1. All properties including those not to be transferred (see paragraph 8) were consulted and these figures included views received from them. (8) Returns also include those from tenants who had begun the Right to Buy process (12)
3, MEETINGS WITH TENANTS A list of meetings and the number of persons attending is shown in Appendix 2. During these meetings, wide ranging questions were raised, and these are shown in Appendix 3 attached. In addition to the meetings, an attempt was made to visit each tenant who had returned the consultation form, since many of these contained queries. However, in view of the higher than expected number returned, it was later decided to '000 87 restrict visits only to persons who had raised queries. Visits were not made to those who simply replied 'yes'. These interviews were carried out in a strictly confidential way, although where necessary, tenants were encouraged to include members of their families. Where tenants made their views of opposition clear, there was no attempt made to change their views, although clearly some had been confused by the consultation document and were grateful to receive guidance from the staff, who of course, are supporting Council policy.
4. CONFIDENTIALITY
Members are reminded that whilst the Council's policy is of a public nature and has been givenmaximum exposure to the public and the media, there are many aspects of the consultation which are of a private and confidential nature, and the return forms themselves will remain ccnfidential information, and should only be made public with the written consent of the tenant concerned. They will of course be retained for examination, if necessary, following a later stage of the process and will then be placed on the personal file of the tenant.
5. INTEREST BY OTHERS I During the course of the consultation considerable interest has been shown by a group of people who have described themselves as the Rochford Housing Action Group. To date the Council has not received the terms and articles of reference of that group, nor of its members, but it is understood that they have been making approaches to some tenants directly, and also at some of the meetings referred to earlier, have handed out leaflets to tenants, a copy of one is attached at Appendix . it is unclear how many tenants have received this document, but no restriction was placed on non—tenants attending the meetings.
6. CORRESPONDENCE WITH CO(JNCILLOR FLACK
The Chief Executive has received a number of letters from Councillor Flack and these are attached. The Chief Executive is the proper officer to decide what documents should be issued to Councillors within the constraints of the Freedom of Information Act, the Data Protection Act and the Council's Standing Orders, but is of the view that he would have been acting incorrectly in supplying information to Councillor Flack as requested and believes that his request should be considered by Council.- Infor'rtnation requested:
(i) A mailing list of all Council houses. (ii) A copy of the information pack sold to other Local Authorities. (iii) A copy of the C.I.P.F.A. Services feasibility study.
The Chief Executive continents on these requests as foliows:
The Council might be acting illegally if it supplied to any person a list of names amd addresses of Council tenants, for this reveals a tenancy arrangement and would also enable that person to know who had purchased his Council house. It has never been the practice of the Council to supply the addresses of Council houses to anyone and if the Council decides that in this case it will do so, it will need to seek the following information from the person to whom it w 11 be supplied. S
000488 (i) Row will the information be used, what contact and in what • form will it be made, and by whom9 (ii) Will the information be used exclusively for that purpose or will it be used for other purposes, and to which organisations will it be given2 (iii) If the information is to be used for one purpose approved by Council, will the information then be destroyed or retained9
The Chief Executive believes that if it is the wish of Members that information from other interested parties be supplied to tenants, that this could be given in Privaie & Confidential sealed envelopes, and delivered by Council staff in the normal way, once the Council is satisfied as to the contents of those envelopes. Information PackThe information pack only consists of 'the consultation document and the submission by the Housing Association for registration, copies of which have already been sent to Members. There are some details regarding the Crouch Valley Housing Association which Members have not received.
S . ACTION BY COUNCIL The Council must now decide whether it wishes to proceed with the policies established in Minute 556/87, and if it does, the following activities will take place:
Electoral Reform Society. This Society has been provisionally engaged to carry out a secret postal ballot of all tenants in properties, which would be transferred, first by a management agreement and secondly by the freehold sale to the Crouch Valley Rousing Association. Copies of the ballot paper will be sent to all Members for their information. It is likely that the ballot papers will be posted to the tenants about the end of May and tenants will have approximately 3 weeks in order to return those ballot papers to the Electoral Reform Society in the pre—pald envelope provided.
The Council must send with those ballot papers details of any amendments made to the first proposal e.g. not transferring properties for the homeless, and any other amendments the Council now wishes to make in the light of the tenant representations. It would be advisable for that document to also set out the key elements of the proposal and may include a repeat of some of the information previously supplied.
There will be two types of ballot paper, one for the Management arrange- ment only and the other where the Transfer would apply, where tenants would be invited to vote on both aspects.
It is suggested that the Electoral Reform Society be used to deliver any documents to tenants supplied by any interested party. The Society to be used as an arbiter of the fairness of any such material. If it is the wish of Council that staff actively canvass the Council's proposals, that any material they use should be approved by the Society.
The ballot papers will only be made available to the Department of the Environment, if necessary, in order that they should arrive at a decision, otherwise they will be retained for a period and then destroyed, as with normal election procedures. A summary of the voting will be issued simultaneously to the Council and the Department of the Environment and will form part of a report to be considered by Council on 6th July, 1988.
'ftO 489 8. PROPERTIES THAT MAY BE TRANSFERRED
Al). Council House Revenue Account houses with the exception of those exclusively tenanted by 'homeless families' and those that might be demolished to make further deveiopment of the adjoining land possible, e g , Cagefield Road, are the subject of the Transfer arrangement and only those tenants will be balioted on both the Management by, and Transfer to, the Crouch Valley HousLng AssocLation proposal.
Tenants of the excluded properties referred to above and Genera) Rate Fund Housing will be balloted on the Nanagement proposal only Tenants of Einchfield and Dutch Cottage which are subject of Trusts will not form part of the Transfer arrangements, nor will they be balloted.
9 HOMELESSNESS The Council will retain statutory responsibilities for the Homeless, and it is thought prudent that those houses used for that purpose exclusively should remain in the ownership of the Council, although it is suggested they be managed by the Crouch Valley Housing Association if the transfer of the other properties takes place. The Council will enter into a Management Agreement with the Housing Association who will be responsible for the administration of the 1-tomelessness problems for which they will receive a fee from the Council and a contract will be concluded between the Council and the Housing Association whereby a certain number of homeless persons will be given priority housing by the Housing Association and only In the event of there not being a vacant property would the Housing Association then use Bed and Breakfast accommodation facilities, the cost of which would be born by the Council. It Is thought that the Council retaining the ownership of the properties would strengthen that contract between the Housing Association and itself.!
10. DISPOSAL PRICE If, after going through all the procedures above, the Council sell the qualifying housing stock to the Housing Association, the price will be determined between the Council and the Housing Association, which will have to be acceptable to the Department of the Environment, who are likely to consui.t the Valuation Office. At the time of the preparation of this report that price has not been agreed and it is essential that the price is such that it will enable the Housing Association to function properly and in the best interest of tenants and for the transaction not to leave the Council in a deficiency position. 11. FINCI-IFIELD AND DUTCH COTTAGE
It is envisaged that if the transactions above are completed, that the Crouch Valley Housing Asspciation will enter into a management agreement with the Council and the Trustees of those houses.
RECOMMENDED
(1) That the Council proceed with the next stage of transfer and engage the Electoral Reform Society as outlined above.
(2) The Council endorse the action taken by officers since the last meeting.
(3) The Council consider the desirability of canvassing tenants during the period of the ballot and the form such canvassing should take.
(4) That officers should seek to establish as quickly as possible h the Department of the Environment's likely view on the proposal before to finn] consu]tni-inn (Thp Ba1Tn1 APPENDIX 1
H 0) C0) -CO -r----r----w--mrEcrrC > H > 0 >CD 0 C 01 H Z 0 CX) C) z rfl" t-t EXI C') CXfl:' C-. H rxlr w Cxl -1 Cxi H C)C rttl F-I 0 I-i 0 'W F-I -i Z C) -c H CA 0 -C = 0 0 0 Z 0 0 C/) Cxl Cxl 1
Cr1 0)
to i— Wish to Remain 0 F-' U) Cs) F- F-' 0) 0 z CD UI -J Council Tenants Cl' — 0) A 0) Cxl CD to L—j Insufficent H F- '4 Cli 0 CD Information 0 z0 oi 1—' to No Reason C)) F- C') F-4 CD A U) C . Given - r 0z H — - H to Worried F--I CD 0) 0 h-' to CD Re Rent z C - 0 Too C0 -"3 —LI Quick H No to Purchase C)) U) Management Only
11(i) ' I—. to CD 0) Ilto —1 ci) CD 01 AREATOTAL Ilto CYI to - 0
-C IIH I—' I—' A Yes Cr1 HCD to I—' 0) CD to to w
'—' CO DotYt to U) i- A CO F- to to Know
Wish to see F- - - Conditions of Tenancy zc -- Cr1 Insufuicent o F-I 01 F- F- U) Information C — —- — CCxi
I Ito) Co AREATOTAL li0) to C') ( E to 01 A
000491 APPENDIX 2
TENANT 'QUESTION & ANSWER SURGERIES'
Nos Attending Date Venue Time Tine 2—4 7—9
11th April Chignal House Rayleigh 41 30 12th April Millview Court Rochford 35 13th April 1-lardwick House Rayleigh 20 14th April Britton Court Rayleigh 25 30 18th April Francis Cottee Lodge, Rayleigh 15 2 • 19th April The Layers, Rayleigh 29 19th April Canewdon Village Hall 9 20th April Romney House Rochford 32 23 21st Apr11 Rupert Jarvis Court Hockley 42 22nd April Pembroke House, Rochford 21 7 25th April Weclgwood Court, Ashingdon 37 26th April Goodmans, Gt. Wakering 60 26th April, Bellhouse, Gt. Wakering (3—4 pm) 30 19 27th April Spa Court, Hockley 22 11 29th April Rawreth Parish Hall 17 p
000492 _APPENDIX 3
QUESTIONS RAISED AT 'QUESTION & ANSWER SURGERIES'
Question Answer
Repairs would these be done on the Yes. Priority list given same priority as the Council gives in the consultation document is the same as the Council.
Rent Increases — would rent increase No. Aim is to keep increases to pay for the proposed new buildings' to 7%. Money for new build would come from outside sources
Would residents of long standing still Yes. The '21 year terancy' enjoy the tenancy of the same house, point was explained as referring (this referred to point in supplementary to shops. info on '21 year tenancy')
Will transfers still be allowed Yes.
Why do we have to pay SOp Giro fee when paying rates. Questioner referred to D.o.Finance.
Where will proposed new build take place Hopefully on part of the new Grange Village site, and elsewhere. Depending on land/money available.
Will my children be able to take over the tenancy under the HousLng Assoc. Yes.
Will my Right to Buy be protected for myself/my children. Yes.
Why change if rio advantage to me. To secure rented housing in the future. Will flats in AP schemes be sold No. Will redecoration of AP schemes remain on the same basis. Yes Would future allocations for housing be done on the same basis Yes Would a tenant under occupying a house be forced to move. No Can the Housing Assoc. really run the properties within its means Yes Would housing staff jobs be safe Yes Could tenants be represented on the Board Yes Rent increase of 7% seems high. This is the average over the past few years for the Council.
000493 APPENDIX 3 (cont1j
How will the vote be counted Impartially by Electoral Reform
Where will the money come from The money will be raised in the City. to purchase the stock From residents at scheme being extended: Why are we being 'boxed in like Building materials being stored on rabbits'. site, Builders being told to cause as little disturbance as possible. Flats at the back are too close New flats do not contravene Building to existing flats Regulations. Those schemes with Will all AP schemes be extended land available would be considered for extension. (Money/regulations I I permitting).
Will the Housing Association be govered by Rochford Council. No. I What happens to tenants if Housing Tenants would be secure. Housing Association goes bankrupt Corporation monitors finances and administration and would step in if' problems occurred. Wil] the present 'Mobility' schemes be continued by the Housing Assoc. Yes. What is the difference between Those rights enjoyed by secure a secure tenancy and an assured one tenants (Right to Buy, right to succession etc) are statutory rights. They become contractual rights under an assured tenancy. However, the Housing Assoc. has agreed to continue all the statutory rights enjoyed by present tenants.
•
I 000494 DISTRICTQPROCHFöW CHIEF EXECUTIVCf 1 8 APR 2 Pooles Lane. Hul Ibridge, Hoc i-clay, I Essex. 15/U/B 8 Dear Arthur. I am afraid that you seem to have a somewhat mistaken impression of the events at the Tenants Consultation Meeting at Brittons Court yesterday. I am well aware of all the purposes for these meetings. I must totally reject the suggestion that I took part in the meeting or asked any Questions from the floor, although I must say that I found it more informative than most of our Council meetings on the subject My intention was to sit in the meeting and observe listen and learn as much as I could from all sides of the meeting and I was drawn into conversation with David Ellis in a corner of the room after the meeting had finished. With regard to Mrs. George, she is the daughter of a a council tenant and as such has the perfect right to obtain information for and on behalf of' her parents. She is not a member of my party but did phone me with her worries after initial contacts with David at the first consultation meeting. Her principal worry was that she had been informed by David Ellis that there was no intention on the part of the Council/ Mousing Association to provide tenants with copies of tenancy agreements prior to their being required to vote against transfer of the Housing Stock (there being no need in practice to vote in favour). I phoned David to see if this was true, spoke to his secretary who confirmed that that was the situation but that she thought it might change and that she would get David to phone me, this he did later and said that Mrs. George had a good point and that he would do his best to ensure that copies of tenancy agreements were issued prior to tenants voting on the transfer (this in my view is not adequate there must be a firm and binding commitment from both the Council and the Mousing Association and not to do so would be both morally and most probably legally wrong). Mrs George Is still very concerned (as are her parents) over the Question of whether or not there may be any loss of rights or tenure associated with the transfer from secured to assured tenantry and that was the reason for her attendance at yesterdays meeting, she now feels that there is no point in attending any more meetings and she has indiceted that she will seek advice from other sources. However I intend to assist her and others to set up a Council Tenants Association so that they can obtain independent advice as to whether it is in the tenants best interests for them to transfer ownershipto the Crouch valley Housin Association and given the needless haste in taking the ballot for transfer (save for the Ministers desire to approve before going on holiday 0 and the absence of such independent advice, my advice to them must be to vote against transfer. This position is not dogmatically held and is open to change subject to verifiable legal safeguards to the tenants rights and interests. Returning to your letter I must reject your suggestion Of any "intervention" on my part in the meeting between the Councils officers/Crouch Valley Housing Association Employees and tenants and am happy with your assurance that Officers will not in future attempt to engage in Political debate and refrain from direct political comment at these meetings a task that seems to have been somewhat complicated by the inevitable confusion of roles, I for my part am quite happy to avoid all and any discussion with officers of the Council at any of the further meetings I might choose to observe
1 I take it that your letter ( which was entirely expected) not confidential and is subject to the "Political" guidance of the Conservative leader of the Council and will feel free to circulate copies together with my reply subject to any clarification you might care to make to the content and tone of your letter before next Monday evening.
yours sincerely
Cur. David Flack .
S
S
000496 2 '%JSThlCT OF ROCHFOBD_ _a__sc}uEF EXECUTiVE
______2 Pooles Lane1 Hitlibridge. L - Hock 1 ey, gs sex. 28/ft/RB
Dear Arthur, Re Crouch Valley Housing Association I have a number of requests for information ;— 1. Would you please supply me with the addreses of all Council Houses within the Rochford District1 may I say that as a councillor I understand that I am entitled to this information under the freedom of information act amd that I understand that this position is supported by a recent test case in the Nigh Court, 2 I would like to see and study one of the information packs being made available to other organisations and Councils. 3. Information has reached me (not via any official source) that the Tenants will be required to vote on the proposal for transfer of ownership of the Councils Housing Stock on or by 31/5/88 and not in June. Could you please explain why the rush has now turned into a headlong gallop if this is indeed the case and why councillors have not been informed9 Zj., Please correct me if I have misunderstood but the Council is seeking to meet the proposals put forward in the Housing bill using current legislation and a contractural "device", The valuation placed upon the Councils housing stock is to be that of "the Government". My Question is this;- Under current legislation is the council required -1-0 seek the valuation of the District Auditor when disposing of its assets and would the District Auditor have to be satisfied that any "option to sell" arrangement was based upon a satisfactory valuation. AlternatJ vely would the District Auditor be satisfied with a contractural arrangement to dispose of assets at some future date and at a price as yet unquantified °
yours s
r. David Flack V
00049? I copy to A- Cooke P Pooles Lane, Hulibridge I Hockley, Essev Mr. David Ellis, Housing Department, Rochford District Council. Council Offices, Roch ford, Essex. it/5/88
Dear Mr Ellis, I have a number of requests for information regarding the Councils role in both the setting up of the Crouch Valley Housing Association and in the "Consultation" procedure, these are;— 1. I should like a copy of the CIPFA Services feasibil study commisioned by the Council as background material the meeting scheduled for the 18th of May. 2. I should like a copy of the infomatiori pack being made available to interested parties.
3. 1 would like a copy of the mailing list used for the "Consultation" with Tenants or alternatively a list of Council owned accoinodation in Rochford. 4. Some Tenants have approached me alledgeing that members of the Councils staff are approaching them after they have returned their consultation response, in an effort to change their response to one favourable to the proposal to transfer ownership. Could you please comment I have taken advice and I understand that as a member of the Councils Health & Housing Committee I am entitled to this information in order to carry out my duties as a councillor, the case lS precedent being Birmingham & 0 (1983). As the "Consultation" peri for transfer of management ends on 9th May I would evpect a sPeedy complience with my request
yours sincerely
Cllr. David Flack
000498 2 Fades Lane H'illhridge, Hockley, Essex. Mr. A. Cooke, Chief Executive. Rochford District Council, Council Offices. Fochford, Essex li/5/88
Dear Arthur, I have tried to contact you regarding a meeting but have been told that you are too busy to see me this week. In view of the S straightforward request I made for information I would be most W grateful if you would comply with my requests es a matter of urgency together with those set out in my letter to Mr. Ellis (copy attached). Having taken advice on the matter I understand that I am entitled to all this information as a member of the Health & Housing Contmittee on a "need to Know" basis the case precedent being 8irmingham & 0 (1983). I consider that any denial of this information would severely impair my ability to fulfill my duties as a councillor in this matter. In view of the very limited time scale involved I must seek your speedy response to these requests. With regard to point four of my letter to Mr. Ellis I view these allegations as being very serious. If true it would mean that officers of the Council are seeking to influence Tenants in favour of a Conservative group policy both at the time of Elections and during a period of "Consultation". I urgently await your detailed response
yours sincerely
Cllr. David Flack
000499 DISTRICT OEROCHF(B) CHIEF rXECIITIVE - a-9 MAY - 1.988 2 Pooles Lane, H u 1 lb ridge, Hockley, Mr. A Cooke, Essex Chie Executive Rocford District Council Council Offices, Roch ford. Essex. 7/5/88
Dear Mr. Cooke1 Having now requested informstion from you both by letter, phone and keeping an appointment at which you were not present I now feel that I am being obstructed in the performance of my duties as a councillor. I regard your vague replies to my specific requests for information as unsatisfactory and amounting to a refusal to supply information to which I am entitled to access, I will theref be lodgeing a complaint with the Onbudsman on Monday 8th of May will object to the one sided, hurried and unjust nature of the "Consultationt' presently being carried out by RDC.
Cllr. David Flack
000500 Copies to: Leader of the Council Chairman of Health &
Housintittee
3000 AGC/EFB/231 6th May 1988
a Flack, De29i.iaCtl1or I refer to your recent letters and more particularly the last1 and in view of the comments contained therein I feel it appropriate for me to respond. I think that the matters you raised are properly those for the Council to consider and in the report that I have prepared for the Special Council Meeting on 18th May I have included as appendices to that public document all of your letters. The report deals with each of the points that you have raised. I am forwarding a copy of this letter to the Leader of the Council and to the Chairman of the Health and Housing Committee.
Yours sincerely,
Chief Executive V Councillor DF. Flack, 2 Brickfield Cottages, Pooles Lane, Hulibridge, Hockley, Essex. 000501 r r it 91,rIrIr "ir' IflqIwl
17 .
0 ¶19c, @®®® The Association association is acceptable The under the current conditions Crouch Qalley Housing being btiposed by the Association has been set up government S by Conservative contolled Bochford District Council in Transfer of response to the Coc'ernrnents Housing Bill Ownenhip) which seeks to allow private The council intends to landlords take over Council transfer ownership of its Houses Bather than allow a Housing Stock to the new total free for all the association and promises Council has decided to set safeguards for tenents who up its "own" Housing will lose their status as Association, The hoard of SECURED tenants and receive which is made up of two ASSURED tenencys1 We can see Consevative and one Liberal no advantage to you in this otiuncilior and the change as YOU WILL LOSE remainder being nominees of RIGHTS AND THE ABILITY TO the conservative group. INFLUENCE HOUSING POLICY • The Labour party viewed THROUGH THE BALLOT BOX! this development as the better of a whole range of Vote against the undesirable fates for Council Tenents but did not Transfer of your like the loss of DEMOCRATIC Home to Crouch CONTROL and the weakening of the associations Va/Icy Housing accountabilit to those it #ssociation - form serves. your own Tenents Mousing Association Management FOR HELP AND ADVICE IN We feel that the SEflING LiP THE ROCHFORD • management of the COUNCILS COUNCIL TENENTS ASSOCIATION / CONTACT MRS GEORGE RAY./ HOUSING stock by this 777317 or CLLB. D. flacW on Southend 231704. st4 t flao1 2 P*In lam. IMth*i4a 00050 ii I !!I!!P
COUNCIL - 18TH MAY 1988
Personal Statement byh e Chi ef Execut3.Vt In view of various references made concerning me in letters from Councillor Flack and articles appearing in the newspaper, I consider it necessary to make available a printed statement to Council. On 28th April 1988 I received a. letter from Councillor Flack (attached to agenda). I repLied to that letter on 29th April suggestinq that a meeting could be held either at Rochford or in the Civic Suite, and to assist him it could be early morning or early evening, to discuss the request. The reason for that letter was that I believed that some of the information being required was of an exempt nature and in any event most of it was outside the limits of my delegated authority. My Secretary tried in vain on 4th May to fix a meeting that did not clash with those already in my diary and at one point the only time acceptable to Councillor Flack was immediately after the Count on Election Day 5th May, which my Secretary said was unacceptable. She then made an appointment for 4.00 p.m. on Friday, 6th May, not appreciating that I was attending that evening as a principal guest for tile Rating arid Valuation Association in London. When she advised me of the appointment time I asked her to communicate with Councillor Flack, which she was unable to do despite attempts to both his home and his-school, where a message was left. Advised of this during Election Day I purposely went down to I-Iullbridge to a Polling Station, located Councillor Flack and cancelled the appointment and offered him one at lunchtime on the 6th, which he declined. I then left him, saying it must take place later, The purpose of that meeting was to advise Councillor Flack personally that I intended to refer all of his requests to Council and I intended to supply him with the reasons. On 6th May I advised Councillor Flack of that formally (attached to the agenda). I believe that the Council should be made aware of the reasons for my decisions. They are these.
000503 —2— Some, if not all of the information requested by Councillor Flack was of an exempt nature, or such that I did not believe that I had the authority of Council to give that. information. I had reason to believe that information he could have received as a Councillor was to be made available to other organisations, which point I will deal with later in Council, and in any event, as Returning Officer, I am most careful not to become involved in any aspect of political literature at Election time. ,knother reason was that some of the information requested was not the property of Rochford Council, and finally, but as importantly, since I had found myself from 4th May onwards being asked questions by an Evening Echo newspaper reporter, David Brown, as to the contents of letters sent to me, I took the view that the only course of action open to me was to refer all the matters to Council. The complaints contained within Councillor Flack's letters should be referred to Council. In view of the continuing action of Councillor Flack to supply directly or indirectly letters that he was sending to me to the local newspaper (or the contents of those letters) I made a decision that I would not see him. I instructed my staff that all of his problems, complaints and requests were being referred to the Special Council Meeting. Councillor Flack rang my Secretary and advised her that he would bring a legal representative to the office on 17th May. I responded by writing formally that all matters had been referred to the Special Council Meeting. Since the letters that were attached to the agenda were circulated by me I can make no personal complaint in that respect, but I think, through Council, that I should warn Councillor Flack that if he were to continue making untruthful statements regarding my handling of this situation I might be compelled to take action, which would be regrettable. I have enjoyed a good working relationship with him and I hope that will continue in the future. I attach a copy of a letter written to CounciJ.lor Flack by John S Honey, which is self—explanatory. The above dates and events are verified by my personal Secretary and if necessary could.be checked with both diaries and list of telephone calls received and made from my office.
18th May 1988 Executive
S
000504 ROCHFORD DISTRICT COUNCIL
PETER W. FIUGHES D.M.A. A-C..I.S. COUNCIL OFFiCES • Secretary to the Council SOUTH STREET A 0CM FORD DX 39751 ESSEX R0CHFORD 534 18W
Tel Southend-on-Sea 546366 FAX - Sowflerid (0702) 545737
My Ref. RJH/JS Your Ref. 16th May, 1988
Dealt With by Mr.. R.J. Honey Ext. 3301
Dear Councillor Flack,
Access to Information
I thank you for your letter of the 14th instant and note the contents.
As you know, 1 act on behalf of the Council and as your request has been referred to Full Council for consideration, I cannot provide you with assistance in obtaining the information you have requested until I receive instructions to do so. However, you have also asked for advice and although I note that you have already-sought this from a number of quarters, I would contribute the following on the Counci].ts behalf.
Since the 1st April 1986 a Councillor. has had a statutory right of access to documents concerned with busjness to be transacted at a meeting. This right is limited to those documents not identified by the proper Officer as disclosing exempt information. Section 100(F), Local Government Act 1972.
In addition, every Councillor has a common law right to inspect documents which it is reasonably necessary for him to see in order to carry out his duties as a Councillor. Where a Councillor cannot rely on his statutory right of access he must resort to the right of access available to the public generally and his common law entitlement.
cont' d
Councillor D.F. Flack, c.c. Chief Executive 2 Brickfield Cottages, Pooles Lane, 'dulibridge, HOCKLEY, Es sex
O&0595 -2- .
This common law entitlement is dependent, and always has been,upon a Councillor's "need to know" in order to enable him properly to perform his duties. R. —v— Barnes Borough Council ex parte Conlan 1938. However, it has never been an absolute right and does not extend to all documents because in the words of Humphries J. in the Barnes case "it would be an impossible burden to become acquainted with all the Council's business".
In the earlier case of H. —v Hampstead Borough Council 1917, the Court looked at the reason for the Councillor requiring the information and decided that the right could not be properly exercised for an indirect motive, i.e. to assist a third party.
These principles were upheld by the House of Lords in the case towhich you refer, H. —v— Birmingham City District Council ex parte 0. 1983 and this is of course the most important recent precedent dealing with access to information.
Lord Brightman stated in that case that "the general principle must be that a Councillor Is entitled by virtue of his office to have access to all written material in the possession of the Local Authority of which he is a Member, provided that he has good reason for such access". He then went on to suggest that as a general rule in the case of a Committee of which the Councillor is a Member, a Councillor will "ex hypothesi have good reason for access to all written material of such Committee".
It seems therefore that when a Councillor requests information in relation to the business of a Committee of which he is a Member and there is no reason offered or apparent for the request, as a general rule it is sufficient reason that he is a Member of that Committee. However, where there is a reason offered or apparent then it must be "a good reason" and is to be viewed in the light of cases such as those mentioned above.
Usually a decision as to access will be taken by the proper Officer subject to resort to a decision of the Council if the decision of the delegate is challenged, but a request may be referred to Council for decision.
I would again quote Lord Brightman in the Birmingham case "in the event of a continued difference of opinion, the decision would ultimately lie with the Councillors meeting in Council. There the matter would rest. The Court has no jurisdiction to substitute its own opinion. The decision of the Council Is the final word".
In this particular case the matter has properly been referred to a meeting of the Council and as such the procedure under Standing Orders, the Local Government Act 1972, and common law are satisfied and, as
coat d .
000506 —2—
I have said, I must await the Council's decision before proceeding further with this ruatter.
I trust the above is of assistant to you.
Yours sincerely, - - -
R.J. Honey Solicitor -
000507 SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING - 18TH MAY 1988
TRANSFER OF HOUSING STOCK TO THE CROUCH VALLEY HOUSING ASSOCIATION SUPPLYING OF INFORMATION TO MEMBERS
Advice of the Chief Executive
If the Council decides to go ahead with the above project by holding a ballot for tenants it will need to give consideration as to what further information should be issued to tenants The document that will go with the ballot paper will draw out the main points of the earlier document, deal with any amendments that are made by Council and draw attention to things such as the exclusion of houses to be used for the homeless, etc., etc It will not take the form of promotional material. The Council may decide that it would like to send further information of a promotional nature but the Chief Executive suggests that if this course is to be followed that any such documents should be vetted by the Electoral Reform Society as to reasonableness and issued to tenants through that organisation. The Chief Executive believes that if any other material is to be issued that it should go via the same channel and therefore if the Council is of the view that the Housing Action Group should be encouraged to issue material rather than supply names/addresses to that organisation that the Council agrees to meet the expense of sending communications through the Society The Chief Executive believes that it would be reasonable for the Council to want to see what is issued and should be given the opportunity of responding, since at the end of the exercise the Council must make a judgment on the situation and the various things that tenants have received might Influence Members in arriving at their decision. The Chief Executive has already made a statement to the effect that as an Officer he felt unable to make information available to Councillor Flack and in this respect he refers to his delegated authority and more particularly Standing Order 35.2.
000508 . —2-—
Members of the Council are entitled to receive all relevant information in order that they can participate properly in the decision making process of Council, and the 'need to know' rule has been established in law for a long number of years. Normally a Member must demonstrate his 'need to know' either to the Officer or to the Council, but the Birmingham case which Councillor Flack cites contained a new and interesting ruling, the effect of which was that in those particular circumstances a Member of a Committee does not need to demonstrate the 'right to know' for matters which are properly the subject of the Committee of which he is a Member. This much referred to case does not however change the basic rules that are all referring to the material that the Member needs himself in order to arrive at a decision. The Chief Executive is unaware of any ruling that A Member is entitled to information if the sole intention is to supply that to others, In fact in the Birmingham case the information then being sought was of an exempt nature. The Chief Executive believes therefore that as Councillor Flack does not require the information for his personal use different considerations apply than those dealt with in the Birmingham case and that they should be properly considered by Council, having first established from him the purposes to which he intends to put some of the information requested. Having said that, two aspects of Councillor Flack's request can be dealt with easily. The Information Pack to which he refers is being sold to other Councils. Councillor Flack already has the main contents of that pack which are the Consultation Document and application to the Housing Corporation, which were issued to all Members. The only other document refers to staffing structure of the Housing Association, that does not belong to the Council, but if it Council's wish the Housing Association can be requested to makewere that information available to Councillor Flack, or for it to be supplied to all Members of Council. It has no relevance to the matters currently being discussed.
The CIPFA Services Feasibility Study is non existent. However, Councillor Flack may be referring to other documents. The draft submission to the Department of the Environment was issued to all Members (Minute No. 83/88). He may be referring to the financial forecast produced for the Housing Association for submission to the Housing Corporation, which is not a document in the ownership of this Council. He may be referring to another document to be submitted by the Housing Association in course of preparation There are no others to which this description could possibly apply. .
000509 —3—
This leaves only one other matter referred to by Councillor Flack in the letters that t have published and that is what he variously describes as a 'mailing list', or alternatively 'a list of Council owned accommodation in RochE ord' A mailing list which contains names and addresses is exempt information, Standing Order 26.3.3. It is assumed that the request is for a list of addresses of all Council owned properties. It is unlikely that Councillor Flack could possibly need that in order that he could arrive at a decision. A summary of properties in various localities, etc., etc., maybe, but why a list of addresses? If the reason is to supply that to another organisation the Chief Executive believes that that is the incorrect use of information supplied to Members and would not recommend that. However, if Councillor Flack was able to convince the Council that an organisation should receive that information, that might be a decision properly arrived at as long as the Council exercised caution in the way that that information might be used subsequently. The Chief Executive believes that there may be a good case for agreeing that the communication recently produced by the Housing Action Group1 with one or two omissions, could properly go through the Electoral Reform Society. The Chief Executive is aware of the circumstances regarding Councillor Skinner, which he believes are totally different to those which are currently being considered.
18th May 1988
CHA A 6?.:r—------bA /
0005111 ROCHFORD DISTRICT COUNCIL
Minutes of the Planning Services Committee
At a Meeting held on 19th May 1988 Present Councillors T. Fawell (Chairman), R.S Allen, R.A. Miner, P.A. Beckers, C.I. Black, R.H. Boyd, Mrs. R. Brown, W.11. Budge, Mrs. P. Cooke, B.A. Crick, C.J.13. Fahecty, Mrs. J. Fawell, D.F. Flack, J.A. Gibson, I.R. Godfrey, Mrs. P. Godsell, M.J. Handford, N. Harris, Mrs. E.M. Hart, G.J. Hooper, Mrs. N. Himnable, S.N. Jarvis, Miss B.G.J. Lovett, Mrs. E. Marlow, R.A. Pearson, J.M. Roden, J.A. Sheaf, 5.11. Silva, S.A. Skinner, C. Stephenson, Miss D.M. Stow, Mrs. L. Walker, P.F.A. Webster, D.A. Welt, D.C. Wood anciC. Wren.
Apolies: Councillors BT. Grigg, D.R. tielson md Mrs 84. Lemon.
I 216. MINUTES
Resolved that the Minutes of the Meeting of 21st April 1988 be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman. -
117. MONITORING OF PERFORMANCE — MEETINGS OF 17TH DECEMBER 1987, 21ST JANUARY,
10TH FEBRUARY AND 24TH MARCH 1988 -
The Committee were satisfied that all necessary action had been taken. Minutes 582/84(DD), 714/85(tio), 249/86(DD), 300186 Para.S32(DD), 94/87(SEC), 465187(DD), 466/87(DD), 468/87 Fara.2(DD), and Para.21(SEC), 469(i)187(SEC), 469(iii)187(DD), 595/87(SEC), and 147188(DD) were carried forward.
On Minute 469(iii)/87(Land Adjoining Fambridge Road, South Fambridge) a Member expressed concern at the lack of progress in clearing the tipped material and re—establishing the footpath and was given an assurance by the Chairman that the matter would be kept under review.
The Committee were also advised by the Chairman that the breaches which had been reported in respect of "Buffers" Restaurant, 200 Main Road, Hockley (Minute 469(i)/87 refers) were being actively pursued.
218. SCHEDULE OF DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The Director of Development submitted a Schedule for consideration and a list of planning applications and Building Regulation Applications decided under delegation.
Resolved that decisions be made in accordance with the recommendations in the appended Schedule subject to:—
Para.1 — ROC/302/88
Authority delegated to the Director of Development to determine following consideration of submitted amendments reducing the height of the proposed glasshouse.
Para.6 ROC/352/88
Cnsideration of the application was deferred to enahie a more detailed examination of car parking and servicing arrangements within the total site.
000511 Planning Services
Para.l2 — ROC/l041/87
Add condition:
"8. The existing trees shall be retained and shall not be removed or reduced in height without the previous written consent of the local planning authority. Any trees being removed without such consent or dying, being severely damaged or becoming- seriously diseased shall he replaced with trees of such size and species as may be agreed with the local planning authority."
Para.14 — ROC/9l3/87 - I - Add condition:
"10. The screen fencing indicated on the submitted drawing number TC.l45/4/B, along the northern flank boundary of the site, shall be 1.8 metres in height as measured from the ground level of No.7 Hillview Road and be provided prior to the occupation of the development hereby permitted."
Para.22 — ROC/2020/87/LJ3 Para.23 — ROC/W59/87
Applications deferred for a Member site visit.
Para.25 — ROC/l052/87
Add conditions:
"5. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted details shall be submitted and agreed in writing by the local planning authority of arrangements for the storage and disposal of manure and thereafter such arrangements shall be maintained to the satisfaction of the local planning authority.
6. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted details shall be submitted and agreed in writing by the local planning authority of fencing and gating arrangements to the field cross- hatched on the plan and thereafter such arrangements shall be maintained to the satisfaction of the local planning authority."
Para.26 — ROC/022/88
Application deferred pending a policy on the provision of sheltered housing accommodation for the District being determined at the Neeting of the Development Services Committee on 31st May 1988.
Para.27 — ROC/262/88
Amend Condition 3 by the deletion of the word "noise" and the substitution of the word "music". .
000512 P la nn in g_rv ices
Para.30— ROC/007/88
Application deferred to enable further consideration of the layout and content of the development.
Para.33 — ROC/129/88
Application refused for the following reasons:
1. The proposed dwellings by reason of their size, form and massing, would be out of character with the existing properties in the area and detrimental to the street scene generally.
2, If granted permission, this development would create a precedent for other similar dwellings elsewhere in the locality) making it difficult for the local planning authority to resist such development.
3. The local planning authority is not satisfied that adequate foul sewage arrangements can be provided for this site.
219. MAFF LAND, IJOWNHALL, RAYLEIGH
Pursuant to Standing Order 26.2 the Chairraan introduced as an itert of urgent business that the County Council had asked that development on the above land should be conditioned by a Section 52 Legal Agreement with the Council concerning the highway infrastructure requirement and it was
Resolved that arrangements be made accordingly.
090513 SCHEDULE OF PLANNING APPLICATIONS TO BE CONSIDERED BY
PLANNING SERVICES_COMMITTEE_19th MAY, 1988
All planning applications are considered against the background of current town and country planning legislation, rules, orders and circulars, and any development, structure and local plans issued or made thereunder. In addition, account is taken of any guidance notes, advice and relevant policies issued by statutory authorities.
Each planning application included in this Schedule and any attached list of applications which have been determined under powers delegated to the Director of Development is filed with all papers including representations received and consultation replies as a single case file.
All building regulation applications are considered against the background of the relevant building regulations and approved documents, the Building Act, 1984, together with all relevant British Standards. The above documents cart be made available for inspection as Committee background papers at the office of the Director of Development, Acacia House, East Street, Rochford.
0005J4 PLANNThG SERVICES CONMITTEE 19th MM 1988
SCEEDDLE flWEX
SITEM CASE NO. PROPOSAL OF?ICEIR
1. ROC/3O2/88 &'ection of glasshouse (amended design to ROC/633/87). Witherden Farm, Old Cholmsford Road, Rawreth.
2. ROC/3003/88/Ai) Display advertisements on five first floor windows. First floor Offices, Lloyds Eank Chambers, 16—18, West. Street, Rochford. LG
3. ROC/O61/88 Erect aircraft hangar. North West Boundary, Southend Mu.nicipal Airport, Rochford.
4. ROO/3O3/88 Erect two detached houses with integral garages. , Stanley Road, Ash.ingdon. LG ROe/i 87/88 Change of use of shop to residential accommodation, erect two storey side extension to provide an additional dwelling and layout parking at rear. 262, Lower Road, Hullbridge. LG
6. ROC/352/88 Erection of a warehouse. Screenoprints Ltd., 90, Main Road, Eawkell.
7. R0O/242/88 Renewal of permission for animal convalescence and boarding home. Crofters, Belce Hall Chase, Rayleigh. LG
8. R0C/240/68 Demolish existing dwelling and erect two 4-bed. detached houses with garages. Site of 8, Grasmere Avenue, Rulibridge. JAW
R0C/283/88 Deta'ched garage to rear of church. Evangelical Church, Eastwood Road, Rayleigh. JW
10. ROC/171/88 Demolish existing dwelling and erect detached bungalow with integral garage. 3, Eastern Road, Rayleigh. JW
ii. R0C/098/88 Add new office front and ground floor side extension. 3, Spa Road, Rockley.
12. ROC/1041/87 Outline application to erect one detached house. R/0 10, Tudor Way, llawlcwell. NACB
13. RoC/233/88 Change of use of the second. floor, part ground, part first (access only)from residential flat Class Bi (Business Class) offices. 15, West Street, Rochford. JAW
14. R0C/913/87 Erection of one detached dwelling and double garage. • 9, Rillview Road, Rayleigh. NAUB 15. ROC/91i/87 Reposition boundary fence to edge of pavement. 15, Banyard Way, Rawkwell. JAW
Ii 1ft.1 ! i6. 1100/297/88 ctension to ensting warehouse building to provide two bulk outload bins. Rankin Flour 1ulls, Mill Lane, Staznbrid.ge. JAW 17. ROC'/162/88 Erect single storey office building. 49, Brook Road, Rayleigh.
18. R0O/224/88 Add two storey front extension for office/reception (ground floor), Office/display (first floor). 41, Brook Road, Rayleigh.
19. ROC/247/86 Outline application to erect a detached bungalow. Land. Adj. 4, The Bailey, Rayleigh. SJK
20. 1100/327/88 Demountable classroom. Our Lady of Ransome School, Little \iheatley Chase, Rayleigh. LG I 21. ROC/191/88 Retention of existing field shelter. Land at junction of Church Road and Lower Road, Hockley. LU
22. ROC/2020/87/LB Demolition of existing stable block/wall and erection of extensions to form new dwelling, two stores, study and workroom. Cottawight, Common Road, Great Wakernig. MACB
23. 1100/959/87 Demolition of existing stable block/wall and erection of extensions to form new dwelling, two stores, study and workroom. Cottawight, Common Road, Great Wakenng. MACB 24. ROC/268/88 Erect detached bungalow and attached garage. Dolce Domun, Nore Road, Rayleigh. JV
25. ROC/1052/87 Demolition of ensting, erection of stables and bairn and use of land for paddock purposes. 121, Main Road, Hockley. MACB Outline application to 26. ROC/022/88 Demolish 7 houses and erect sheltered accommodation units with wardenst flats, layout parking with access from Righains Road. 7, 9, 9a & 11, White Hart Lane, and 1, 5, & 7 Highams Road, Hawkwell. JAW
27. R0O/262/88 Erect single storey and two storey side extensions. The Chequers Public House, High Street, Csnewdon. LU
28. R0O/359/88/GD Internal Alterations and demolition of single storey washroom. Monkton Barn Farm, Foulness Island. 53K 29. ROC/193/88 Erection of agricultural storage building. Great Stambridge Hall Farm, Stasibridge Road, Great Stambridge. NACB 30. ROO/007/88 Outline application to erect 3 houses and 3 bungalows with garden and privgte drive. 154 — 156, Main Road, Hawkwell. NACB 31. ROC/054/88 Change of use to restaurant. 14, High Street, Great Wakering. NACB 000516 32. ROC/947/88 Revised change of use of part of field to provide and extension to public house garden for use by public and car parking extension to north east of building (22 spaces). The Cock Inn Public House, Hall Road, Rochford. JW
33. 1100/129/88 Demolition of existing house and erection of two ohalets and garage. Squirrels, Hhliview Road, Hockley. NAOB PLANNING SERVICES COMMITTEE
19th MAY, 1988
SCHEDULE 0? DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS, WITH DIRECTOR'S RECOMMENDATIONS, FOR DETERMINATION AT THIS COMMITTEE
1. ROC/302/8B RAYLEIGH WITHERDEN FARM, OLD CUELMSFORD ROAD, RAWRETH
Erection of glasshouse (amended design to ROC/633/87). Mr. A. Tomei, c/o Planning & Development Partnership, 16, Paddock Close, Leigh—on-Sea, Essex.
RECQM?4ENDATION: REFUSAL, FOR TUE FOLLOWING REASONS: The increased height and mass of the proposed greenhouse to that previously approved under reference ROC/633/87 would result in the building being unduly intrusive in the landscape and the setting of the nearby Listed Building, Witherdens Farm.
REPORT: The proposal seeks permission for a single pitched roof greenhouse instead of a double pitched structure which would increase the height of the structure by some l.Sxn.(6ft.). This increased height over the length of the building would significantly increase its mass and scale. The applicant is pursuing the amended design on the advice of the manufacturers of the building to avoid the problem of snow build up in valley gutters in greenhouses when only a limited amount of heating is applied in peak periods.
Consultations: County Surveyor — by direction confirms no objections. County Planners Specialist Adviser — recommends refusal for the reason stated.
1
000518 2. ROC/3003/88/AD ROCHFORD —FIRST FLOOR OFFICES, LLOYDS BANK CHAMBERS, 16-18, WEST STREET, ROCUFORD
Display advertisements on five first floor windows.
Barrie J. Hilbery & Co., Lloyds Bank Chambers, 16—18, West Street, Rochford, Essex.
RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO;
The height of the lettering shall not exceed 100mm.
REPORT: The premises comprise first floor offices above Lloyds Bank, in Market Square, within the Rochford Conservation Area. The advertisements the subject of this application are already betng displayed and take the form of identical signs on two windows indicating the company name, and "Licensed Conveyancers" and the telephone number on three windows. The lettering is in gold with black highlighting and is 100mm. (4ins.) high. The applicant has been requested to amend the proposal in line with the County Planners Specialist Advisers comments, which are reported below, but has declined to do so. He states that the proposals are consistent with other such displays in Market Square, and that to reduce the size of some of the advertisements would render them unreadable from ground level. On balance, the proposal is considered reasonable, subject to a condition restricting the height of the lettering.
Consultations:
County Surveyor - no objections. Essex County Council — repetition of signs is considered unnecessary and the diagonal display would be better reduced an size and compacted so as to be displayed horizontally. Rochford Hundred Amenities Society — the signs are considered to be too large and dominating.
3. ROC/061/88 ROCHFORD NORTH WEST BOUNDARY, SOUTHEND MUNICIPAL AIRPORT, ROCUFORD
2
000519 Erect aircraft hangar.
JRB Aviation Ltd., c/o The Livemore Partnership, 98, Broadway, Leigh—on--Sea, Essex.
RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO: The building shall be used as an aircraft hangar or for the maintenance and repair of aircraft and for no other purpose, including any other business or industrial uses within Classes 13.1. to 3.7 inclusive of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order, 1987 unless otherwise approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
REPORT: The building has already been constructed as the original hangar was destroyed in the hurricane last year and the applicants urgently required replacement accommodation.
4. ROC/303/88 HAWKWELL 8, STANLEY ROAD,_ASHINGDON
Erect two detached houses with integral garages. Maple Developments, do Ron Hudson Designs Ltd., 309, London Road, Hadleigh, J3enfleet, Essex. Frontage: 19.5m.(64ftJ; Depth: 48.7m.(l6Oft.).
RECOMMENDATION:__APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO:
1. Std. Cond. 3 - Commence in five years.
2. Std. Cond. 8 - Submit materials schedule.
3. Std. Cond. 12A - Garage to be incidental to enjoyment of dwelling.
4. There shall be a minimum distance of Cm. retained between the garage doors and the boundary with the highway.
5. Windows in the east and west elevations marked X on the plan returned herewith shall be glazed with obscured/patterned glass and permanently retained as such.
6. Std. Cond. 14 — l.8m.(6ft.) high fencing to be erected.
3
000520 REPORT: • The application site is at present occupied by a detached bungalow; to the west of the site is a two storey house, nearing completion and, to the east, a detached bungalow, with its garage abutting the boundary. The proposal is to erect two two—storey houses with semi—integral double garages in an area of mixed residential development.
Neighbour Representations: Number Notified — 7; Number of Replies — Nil.
5. ROC/l87/S8 HIJLLBRIDGE 262, LOWER ROAD, HULLBRIDGE . Change of use of shop to residential accommodation, erect two storey side extension to provide an additional dwelling and layout parking at rear.
Mr. D. Shaw, c/o B.R. Haspineall, 47, Marine Parade, Leigh-on—Sea, Essex.
RECOMMENDATION: REFUSAL, FOR TUE FOLLOWING REASONS:
1. Std. Rsn. 36A - M.G.B.
2. The proposal is contrary to the Rochford District Local Plan Policy G.B.2., which will allow a relaxtion of control for extensions to existing dwellings within rural settlement areas in the Green Belt. However, this proposal to create an additional dwelling goes far beyond that policy.
3. The proposed two storey building would appear obtrusive and bulky in the street scene due to its prominent position forward of the general pattern of development which is predominently bungalows and spaciously set in relation to Pevensey Gardens. This, together with the inadequate garaging/car parking provision and amenity space available to serve the two dwellings on the site, constitutes an overdevelopment of the site to the detriment of the amenities of the area and appearance of the Metropolitan Green Belt.
4. The granting of planning permission for the proposal, being contrary to the above policies, and without very exceptional circumstances, would create an undesirable precedent encouraging similar applications elsewhere which the Local Planning Authority would find difficult to resist. 4 1
OOO21 REPORT: The application property is one of a pair of two storey semi- detached premises. comprising shops on ground floor with residential to the rear and above. The site is situated on the south east corner of the junction of Lower Road and Pevensey Gardens. Planning permission was refused on 17th December, 1987 to convert and extend the premises to form four self—contained flats for reasons that the proposal was contrary to Metropolitan Green Belt policies, increased traffic hazard and substandard amenity areas. The present proposal is for a two storey side extension to provide an additional dwelling, and conversion of the existing shop into residential use. Parking space for four vehicles is available at the rear of the site with access from Pevensey Gardens, and the front garden is shown as a communal grassed area. The rear amenity areas are still below the Council's recommended minimum standards.
Consultations:
County Surveyor - no objections in principle.
Anglian Water - no objections in principle.
Neighbour Representations: Number Notified - 4; Number of Replies — 1 — from the owner of 264, Lower Road, who raises no objection per se to the development but states that a right of way some 9ft. wide exists at the bottom of the site which should be maintained unimpeded.
6. ROc/352L88 HAWECWELL
SCREENOPRINTS LTD., 90, MAIN ROAD, HAWKWELL
Erection of a warehouse. Screenoprints (Vacuum Formers) Ltd., do R. Holland, Richmonds, Stambridge Road, Rochford, Essex.
RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO:
1. Std. Cond. 3 — Commence in five years.
5
000522 2. The proposed building shall be used solely as a warehouse for the storage of raw materials or finished products only and shall not be used for any other purpose without the prior approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority.
3. The existing trees and hedgerows on the boundaries of the site shall be retained and shall not be removed or reduced in height.
4. The 16 car parking spaces indicated on the submitted plan and the means of access thereto shall be provided and made available for use prior to the proposed warehouse being first used.
REPORT: I The total site lies within an area allocated for industrial use in the District Local Plan. The building is urgently required to provide storage space particularly for finished products arising from increased export orders, The applicant states that the proposal will relieve storage congestion in existing buildings and, in so doing, will create an additional 15 to 20 jobs. The Regional Enterprise Unit of the Department of Employment support the proposal and request that a decision is made as soon as possible in the interests of creating employment and enabling the applicant to fulfil valuable export orders. The neighbouring commercial occupiers, Lentern Aircraft Ltd., also support the proposal. Arising from neighbour consultations (18) just one reply has been received to date front the occupier of 100, Main Road, objecting to the existing spray booth, drainage and parking problems. The question of the spray booth is currently before the Department of the Environment following the service of enforcement notices and an appeal. Drainage has been considered by the Council's own Engineer who raises no objection. As regards car parking, current standards require six spaces. 16 Spaces are proposed to improve on site parking generally and to discourage parking on roadside verges in Main Road.
7. R0CL24f88 RAYLEIGH CROFTERS, BEKE HALL CHASE, RAYLEIGH
Renewal of permission for animal convalescence and boarding home.
6
OOOi23 Mrs. C. Wright, Crofters, Beke Hall Chase, Rayleigh, Essex
RECOMMENDATION:__APPROVAL,_SUBJECT_TO:
1. This permission shall enure for the sole benefit of the applicant and shall not be carried out by any other person without the prior approval, in writing, of the Local Planning Authority. 2. The maximum number of dogs kept at any time on the site shall be 12.
3. The area shown hatched on the plan returned herewith shall be permanently reserved for the parking of staff and visitors' cars in connection with the animal boarding and convalescent home, and shall provide a minimum of six car parking spaces.
4. The animal convalescent and boarding home shall be used in connection with domestic animals only.
REPORT: The application site is situated on the east side of Beke Hall Chase South which, in part runs parallel to the AI3O and has been used generally in connection with pet animals for many years. In October, 1984, a personal planning permission, limited to three years, was granted for the current use of the site, i.e. the boarding of pet animals, keeping up to 12 dogs and 12 cats. This permission was renewed on 23rd January, 1987 for a temporary period of two years, due to expire on 31st January, 1989. The use actually commenced on 1st January, 1987.
Ample space is available within the site for car parking and many of the animals are actually collected and delivered by the applicant. Since the use commenced, no complaints have been received from adjoining residents and the Environmental Services Department do not object to a permanent permission being granted. The applicant has requested that a permanent permission be granted, to give additional security. The business has been successful thus far but, to ensure continued success, further financial investment will be necessary and the applicant is loathe to make such investment based only on a temporary planning per miss ion.
7
OOOj4 Consultations: • County Surveyors — do not object to the grant of a permanent planning permission, subject to there being no intensification of the use. Environmental Services - do not object to the grant of a permanent planning permission.
Neighbour Representations: Number Notified - 6; Number of Replies - To be reported. A press notice was also displayed as required by Section 26 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1971.
8. ROC/240/88 HEJLLBRIDGE SITE OF 8, GRASMERE AVENUE, FIULLERIDGE
Demolish existing dwelling and erect two 4-bed detached houses with garages. Mr. S. Rider, Essex Design and Construction, 11, Colworth Close, Hadleigh, Benfleet, Essex. Frontage: 17.65m.; Depth; 38.5Gm.
RECOMMENDATION: REFUSAL,_FOR THE FOLLOVTING REASONS:
1. The proposal, if permitted, would create an unduly dominant development in the street scene by reason of the bulk, size and scale of the two dwellings on such a relatively restricted plot. The dwellings would also be out of proportion with the size and scale of the predominantly smaller surrounding properties, many of which are small bungalows. In particular, the adjacent bungalow No. 10 would be adversely affected by the size and depth of the proposals. Furthermore, the design of the dwellings incorporating a pair of linked double width garages would create an undully dominant appearance to the detriment of the area.
REPORT:
The proposal is for two detached houses with part integral double garages to the front. The plot is located on the northern side of Grasmere Avenue.
I 8 .
000525 The street comprises generally a mix of house types with a number of small scale bungalows to the east and south of the site. However, there are also examples nearby of previous plot sub- division, e.g. 7/71. and 15/17 creating pairs of detached houses. Notably, those at 15/17 are on a total frontage of 16.45m. (54ft. ). Thus, whilst the current proposal falls below the normally applied frontage policy of 9.l5m. (Soft.) per detached dwelling, it could be difficult to justify an objection in principle to two detached dwellings on this site having regard to the surrounding development. it is considered, however, that the depth, size and scale of these dwellings is out of proportion with those in the vicinity and particularly the adjacent bungalow No. 10. Furthermore, the design incorporating two linked double width garages would create an unduly dominant feature in the street scene. Members should also note that the submitted site plan is inaccurate and does not correctly demonstrate the relationship of existing dwellings to the proposals. It is suggested that an informative be added to this effect.
Consultations:
County Surveyor — De-minitnus. Therefore, at the discretion of this Authority.
Anglian Water - no objection in principle.
Hullbridge Parish Council - no objections.
Neighbour Representations: Number Consulted - 7; Number of Replies - Nil.
9. ROC/2f8S RAYLEIGH EVANGELICAL CHURCH, EASTWOOD ROAD, RAYLEIGH
Detached garage to rear of Church.
D.A. Smee, Evangelical Church, Eastwood Road, Rayleigh, Essex.
RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO:
1. Std. Cond. 3 — Commence in five years.
9
1 000526 2. Std. Cond. 9 - Materials to match existing.
3. Std. Cond. 4 - Hedgerows to be retained.
4. The garage shall be used for the garaging of vehicles only in association with the Church. No vehicle repairs, panel beating or paint spraying or other industrial process shall be carried out on the premises in connection with the development hereby permitted without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority.
REPORT: The applicants are seeking to erect a single garage to provide secure accommodation for their new mini bus. The proposed garage is sited adjacent to an existing wooden building which is to be retained for storage purposes. There is natural cover to the south eastern and south western boundaries of the site and a six foot walled fence on the north western • boundary adjacent to the commercial premises and yard at No. 34, Eastwood Road.
Consultations: Environmental Services — no adverse comments, subject to the matters covered by Condition No. 4.
County Eiighways - no objection.
Neighbour Representations: Number Consulted - 3; Number of Replies - Nil.
10. ROC/l71/BS RAYLEIGH 3, EASTERN ROAD, RAYLEIGH
Demolish existing dwelling and erect detached bungalow with integral garage. Mr. & Mrs. Jenkins, do Architectural Services, Oriel House, 53, Elm Road, Leigh-on-Sea, Essex.
Frontage: 19m.; Depth; 3Dm.; Floor Area; l52sq.m. Density: 7 d.a.
10
00052,7 RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO:
1. Std. Cond. 3 - Commence in five years..
2. Std. Cond. 4 — Hedgerows to be retained. 3. Std. Cond. 7 — All trees, shrubs and hedges to be protected by fencing.
4.. Std. Cond. 8 — Submit material schedule. 5. Std. Cond. 10 - Details of screening. 6. Std. Cond. 12A - Garage to be incidental to enjoyment of dwelling. 7. Std. Cond. 29 - Dwelling not to be enlarged or altered without prior approval.
8. Std. Cond. 30 — Access and crossings laid out to sketch attached.
9. If the existing dwarf wall is removed, a brick wall 600mm.(2ft.) in height shall be erected to the front boundary of the site in the position indicated by the letters A, C, D and E on the plan returned herewith, except for access, prior to the occupation of the proposed dwelling. 10. The finished surface of the proposed drive and hardstanding shall be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of the development. 11. The development hereby permitted shall be constructed and thereafter retained in accordance with the revised plans received on the 4th May, 1988 drawing No. AS.468.l.
REPORT: The site lies on the eastern side of Eastern Road and has a small return frontage to Gladstone Road which is unmade. There is a bungalow adjacent to its northern flank (facing Gladstone Road) and a chalet style house to its southern flank boundary (facing Eastern Road). The applicants are seeking to demolish an existing dilapidated bungalow and erect a new larger bungalow. The new dwelling has a rear projection which is approximately 2..lm. (7ft.) deeper and wider than the present one. The width of the dwelling has also increased towards the southern flank boundary by some 3.6m. (l2ft..) to accommodate a double width garage.
11
009528 A revised plan has been submitted indicating improved detailing to the front elevation, including a gable feature, double doors to the garage and bay windows. It is considered that the proposed dwelling is a reasonable replacement to that that already exists.
Consultations:
County Surveyor - no objections.
Anglian Water - no objections.
Neighbour_Representations:
Number Consulted - 57 Number of Replies - 1.
Number Objecting - Nil.
Li. ROC/098/88 H0CKLEY 3, SPA ROAD, HOCKLEY
Add new office front and ground floor side extension.
G.D. Bishop & Co.., do Michael- N. Withers, FRICS., 20, Lime Avenue, Leigh—on—Sea, Essex.
RECOMMEtqDATION: APPROVAL, SUBJECT_TO: -
1. Std.. Cond. 3 — Commence in five years.
2. Std. Cond. 8 — Submit materials schedule.
3. The development hereby permitted shall be constructed and thereafter retained in accordance with the revised plans received on the 29th April, 1988.
4. The external painted finish to the shop front shall be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of the development.
REPORT:
The site is sandwiched between two retail outlets (a bakery — No. 5 - and a jewellers — No. 1, Spa Road).
12
000529 The applicants are seeking a small ground floor side extension as part of a general refurbishment of the premises, together with a , new facade. The revised plan submitted indicate improved treatment to the shop front as suggested by the County Planners Specialist staff.
Consultations:
County Planner (ESB) — no objection to revised proposal. Environmental Services — no adverse comments.
County Surveyor - no objection.
Neighbour_Representations: Number Consulted — 2; Number of Replies - 1.
Number Objecting - Nil.
12. ROC/104l/'87 HAWKWELL R/O 10, TUDOR WAY, HAWKWELL
Outline application to erect one detached house.
Mr. Living, 0/0 B.R. Haspineall, 47, Marine Parade, Leigh—on--Sea, Essex.
Frontage: l6m.; Depthr 24m. • RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL,_SUBJECT TO:
1. Std. Cond. lB - Reserved matters to be approved.
2. Std. Cond. 2 - Commence in five or two years.
3. Std. Cond. 6 - A scheme of landscaping to be approved.
4. Std. Cond. 10 - Details of screening.
5. Prior to the occupation of the dwelling hereby permitted, provision shall be made within the curtilage of the plot for a minimum of either (a) one garage or garage space in addition to one parking space where the dwelling concerned has less than four bedrooms; or
13
000530 (b) three parking spaces, two of which can be within the garage hereby permitted where the dwelling concerned has four or more bedrooms.
Each hardstandirig shall be a minimum of 2.5m. x 5m. (or 6m. where in front of garage) and the floorspace of the garage shall be used for no other purposes incidental to the enjoyment of the dwelling house hereby permitted. 6. The access to the site shall be constructed prior to commencement of the development hereby permitted and shall be 2.5m. in width and splayed to a 4m. wide dropped kerb crossing.
7. Prior to the commencement of the development, the site frontage shall be cleared and at no time shall any obstruction above lm. in height be placed along this frontage.
Members will recall that this item was deferred at the last Planning Services Meeting for further consideration. This proposal seeks to utilise part of a large rear garden to a "corner plot" property. The site is situated in a residential area comprising mainly chalets and houses, although in front of No. 6, Bosworth Close there is adequate isolation and a tree screen between the proposal and this property.
ions:
Anglian Water — no objections.
e sent a tions: Number Notified — 6; Number of Replies - 1.
Material_Planning_Ob]ections: loss of privacy; - run-off of surface water.
13. ROC/2338 ROCEiFORD 15, WEST STREET, ROCHFORD
14 t
000531 of use of the second floor, part ground, part first • Change(access only) from residential flat to Class El (business class) offices.
Barclays Bank Property Services, 250, Euston Road, London, 1*11 2PZ.
RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO:
Std. Cond. 3 - Commence in five years.
REPORT:
The site is a. Listed Building (Grade it) which is situated on the south side of Market Square within the Rochford Conservation Area. • The planning application relates to the change of use from Residential to Offices of principally the second floor of the building but also the stairwell through the ground and first floors (access being gained from the rear of Back Lane). The renasnder of the building i.e. virtually all the ground and first floors are in office use. The District Plan identified the site within a prime shopping frontage wherein policies SAT 2 and SAT 14 apply. The application does not involve the loss of any retail frontage and the policy indicates that small scale office suites may be acceptable in principle. There is no on—site parking available whatsoever. In a letter accompanying the application, the applicants indicate that since January, 1986, business at the branch has steadily increased with a commensurate rise in staff levels from 23 — 26. This proposal reflects the continued projected growth rate over the next five to ten years indicating an anticipated total of 41 staff.
Consultations: County Planner (Specialist Advice) — very much regrets the loss of residential accommodation in the Town Centre. However, the continued use of the building as a bank is appropriate and, if this proposal ensures complete occupation of the building, no objection would be raised.
County Surveyor - no objection. Environmental Services — no objection.
15
000532 Rochford Hundred Amenity Society — express concern generally at the number of offices in Rochford but that apart consider this proposal quite suitable in the circumstances.
Neur Representations: Number Consulted - 2 (in addition to Section 28 Advertisement and Site Notice); Number of Replies — Nil.
14. ROC/913/87 RAYLEIGH 9, HILLVIEW ROAD, RAYLEIGH
Erection of one detached dwelling and double garage.
Town and Country Developments Ltd., do Terry L. Hyland, AMIAS., 1, Mildmay House, Foundry Lane, Burnham—on—Crouch, Essex.
RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL,_SUBJECT_TO:
1. Std. Cond. 3 — Commence in five years.
2. std. Cond. 8 - Submit materials schedule.
3. Std. Cond. 10 - Details of screening.
4. Std. Cond. 34 - Certain windows to be obscure glazed.
5. The garages and adjoining hardstandings indicated on the submitted drawing No. TC 145/411 shall be provided commensurate with the occupation of the dwelling hereby permitted and thereafter these areas shall be used solely for the parking of vehicles and no other purposes incidental to the enjoyment of the dwellings.
6. The various trees on and adjoining the site, subject to Tree Preservation Order No. 47/83, shall be protected for the duration of the construction period (including the initial demolition and clearance of the site) by chestnut paling fences l.Sm. high, erected at the full extend of their canopy or such lesser extent as might be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such fencing shall be removed only when the development (including pipelines and all other underground works and services) has been completed. At no time shall any equipment or materials, including displaced soil, be stored or buildings/structures erected inside this fencing. In addition, no change in ground level may be made within these fences and the trees
16
000533 shall not be felled, lopped, topped or wilfully destroyed without the previous written consent of the Local Planning Authority. Any excavations within Sm. of the trunks of these trees shall be carried out in accordance with a scheme of working previously submitted to and agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority.
7. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted, a surface water drainage scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development hereby permitted shall incorporate this scheme prior to occupation of the dwelling.
8. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in strict accordance with the revised plans (and slab levels indicated thereon) drawing Nos. TC.l45/4B and TC.l45/513 received on the 5th April, 1988.
9. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning General Development Order, 1977 (or any Order revoking and re—enacting that Order), no extensions, hardsurfaciny, excavations, fences (other than those permitted by Condition No. 3) or walls, buildings or structures, including sheds and greenhouses, shall be constructed or carried out within the area 1iatched on drawing No. TC.145/4/B REPORT: This item was deferred atthe Planning Services Meeting of the 25th February, 1988, when Members supported the Officers' views that negotiations should be pursued to secure amendments to the design of the dwelling to reduce its impact, particularly that of the overhanging first floor projection, on the outlook and amenities of the occupier of No. 7, Hillview Road. Following further negotiations and a site meeting with the Agent and applicants, additional revised plans have been received. a These show a reduced overhang by 300mm.(lft.) and a narrowing of the projection by lm.(3ft.3ins.), thereby creating more space to the front of No. 7, Hillview Road. Consequently, the overall width, height and bulk of this projecting element which was causing concern has been reduced. In addition, the entire proposal has been lowered a further O.2m.(O.6Sft.) into the site. Whilst complete deletion of the first floor projecting clement was the preferred option, it is considered that the above package of reductions would satisfactorily reduce the impact on No. 7. Members will recall the conpiex history of the site which included a Member site visit and two previous appeal decisions which dismissed proposals to develop the site for one bungalow (ROC/439/83) or two dwellings (ROC/GlO/85). Both appeals were decided mainly on the possible detrimental effect on the occupier of No. 7, but they both equally acknowledged that a development plot existed here.
17
000524 In the circumstances, having regard to the further reductions achieved, the current proposals are considered to be a reasonable solution to the residential development to what is clearly a most difficult site insofar as site levels, preserved trees, neighbouring properties, etc. are concerned.
Consultations: Rayleigh Civic Society — unduly dominant effect both on Rayleigh Mount and adjacent properties. Would lead to further similar applications if permitted. National Trust — no comments. Essex Naturalists Trust — refer to presence of badger sett to rear of site. County Planner's Specialist on Listed Buildings/Conservation Areas - states that site will be prominant from Conservation Area and ancient monument but overall form is acceptable. Suggests several revisions to detail (which have now been incorporated).
Anglian Water — has withdrawn objection following the completion of a Section 30 Agreement.
Neighbour Rpresentations: Note: The following are the result of the initial proposals and no objections have been regarding the amended plans and that neither of the objectors object in principle to the development Number Notified - 7; Number of Replies - 2.
Material Planning Objections: - unacceptable effect and overshadowing of adjoining residences; S - conditions required concerning height, protection of badger sett and trees, safe—guarding of structural stability of adjoining property; — soakaway to be placed at rear of site or otherwise deep into ground to prevent flooding; - earthworks affecting the adjacent preserved trees should be restricted; - retaining walls should be strong enough to support earth embankments; — windows on flank wall should be obscure glazed;
18
900535 k - suggest buff/yellow brick be used7
- unmade road should be made good after developing site.
15. Roc/9ll/87 HAWKWELL 15,BANYARD WAY, HAWKWELL
Reposition boundary fence to edge of pavement. Mr. A.K. Butcher, 15, Banyard Way, Rochford, Essex.
RECOMMENDATION: REFUSAL, FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: The proposed enclosure of the existing grass verge at this W prominent position in the street scene along the main spine routes into this residential area and erection of screen fencing up to the back edge of footpath will create an obtrusive feature in the street scene detracting from the appearance of this residential area.
REPORT: The site occupies a prominent corner location at the junction of Banyard Way and Westbury, and in a forward position when viewed from along Westbury. These roads form main spine routes into the residential area. Notably, on the approval ref. ROC/282/61 for this part of the estate development, a condition was imposed requiring a 6ft. high close board fence be erected and maintained in a position parallel to the highway leaving an open grass verge of some • 3m.(lOft.) to 3.3m. (lift.) in depth. Currently, a grass verge of only o.5m.(5ft.) exists. It would appear, therefore, as also suggested by one of the letters of representations, that the fence alignment has been previously repositioned roughly halving the grass verge. It is considered that the further erosion of this open grass verge and its enclosure with 6ft. high fencing should be resisted in this prominant location, in the interests of the appearance and character of the area generally.
Consultations:
County Surveyor — no objection in principle. (However, Members should note that if they were minded to grant consent, a l.5in. x 1.5m. pedestrian sight splay should be provided adjacent to the existing vehicular access).
19
000536 Neighbour Representations: Number Consulted — 38 (in addition to a Site Notice); Number of Replies - 2.
Material Plann Objections: — highway danger due to lack of visibility for vehicles and pedestrians; — originally verge was twice its present width as three trees removed therefrom; - although one reply states that should applicant own the land, no objection would be raised, although a boundary fence at the pavement edge will detract from the townsacpe.
16. ROC/297J88 STAMBRIDGE RANKIN FLOUR MILLS, MILL LANE, STAMBRIDGE
Extension to existing warehouse building to provide two bulk outload bins. Allied Mills Ltd., c/c Gelder and Kitchen, Maister House, 160, High Street, Hull. RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL, SUI3JECT TO:
1. Std. Cond. 3 — Commence in five years.
2. Std. Cond. 9 - Materials to match existing. REPORT The proposal is for am extension to qne of the large warehouse buildings on the site. The extension has a relatively small floor plan area 6.Om.(2Oft.) x 8.3m.(27ft.3ins.) but is to the full height of the building. It is to provide two bulk outload bins for overhead loading of vehicles. The site is zoned for industrial purposes. The existing warehouse building is one of the large structures on this site which form strong and commanding features viewed from far afield in this part of the District. This particular building cuts a very clean profile on the skyline and this proposal, especially by employing a continuation of the existing roof slope, should not detract from this crisp, if dominent, appearance.
20
'N 000537 Consultations:
County Surveyor — de minimus, left to this Authority. Environmental Services — no adverse comments.
Neighbour Representations: Number Consulted - 17; Number of Replies — Nil.
17. ROC/182/88 RAYLEIGH 49, BROOK ROAD,_RAYLEIGH
Erect single storey office building. TB. Parker, T/A T.B. Parker & Son, 39A, Brook Road, Rayleigh, Essex.
RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO:
1. Std. Cond. 3 — Commence in five years.
2. Std. Cond. S Submit materials schedule.
3. The proposed car parking and service/loading area fronting the existing factory buiding shall be surfaced to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority prior to the proposed building hereby permitted being first used. 4. Std. Cond. 33 - Car parking spaces to be marked on parking area.
5. The proposed car parking and service/loading area fronting the existing factory building shall be retained for that use and shall not be used for any other purposes.
6. The front site boundary shall be defined with a suitable means of enclosure to be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority and erected prior to the proposed office hereby permitted being first used.
7. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out and thereafter retained in accordance with the revised plans received on the 6th May, 1988, drawing No. lA.
8. Notwithstanding the submitted plan, the access gates shall not open outwards over the highway.
21 4 OOO38 9. The building hereby approved shall be used as ancillary office accommodation in connection with the existing joinery works and for no other purpose, person or separate business undertaking.
REPORT:
The applicants are seeking an office building of wood construction for use in association with a joinery business. The original submitted plans have been revised to show the building re-sited, together with minor changes to the access arrangements to achieve additional car parking producing a maximum of ten spaces.
Consultations:
Environmental Services — no adverse comments.
County Surveyor - no objection.
County Fire Officer - no objection subject to specific observations and recommendations.
Anglian Water - no objections.
tat i one:
Number Notified — B; Number of Replies - Nil.
18. pQC/22jQ___RAYLEIGH 41, BROOK ROAD, RAYLEIGH
Add two storey front extension for office/reception (ground S floor), office/display (first floor). Shinecrest Ltd., c/o Ronald G. Radley & Associates, 607, Daws Heath Road, Hadleigh, Benfleet, Essex. Floor Area: lOOsq.m.
RECOMMENDATION; Delegate to Director for determination on completion of neighbour consultations.
1. Std. Cond. 3 — Commence in five years.
2. Std. Cond. B - Submit materials schedule.
22
000539 3. The proposed car parking/service/loading area to the front • and rear of the factory building and office shall be surfaced to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority prior to the extension hereby permitted being first used.
4. Std. Cond. 33 - Car parking spaces to be marked on parking area.
5. The proposed car parking/service/loading area to the front and rear of the factory building and office shall be retained for that use and shall not be used for any other purposes.
6. The site shall be defined with a suitable means of enclosure to the side and rear boundaries to be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority and erected prior to the front extension hereby permitted being first used.
7. The existing extension to the rear of the factory building shall be removed commensurate with the office extension hereby permitted being first used.
8. Std. Cond. 6 - A scheme of landscaping to be approved.
REPORT: The applicants are seeking a front extension as part of an improvement and refurbishment package to enhance their image. An explanatory letter has been submitted in support of the application, part of which is reproduced below
"We are a small company employing skilled and unskilled workers engaged in the manufacture, painting and packing of fabricated metal products. The largest proportion of our work is with Japanese multi—national companies, viz., Sony, Mitsubishi, Sanyo and Hinari. Other well known names that we supply include Amstrad, Philips and Fidelity. Whilst we have been able to WS obtain such accounts by our ability to produce to high standards of product quality, our factory appearance and thus our image is not of the same standard. We feel it is imperative that this be quickly corrected, hence this planning appliction. We ate currently negotiating with Toshiba and Philips for further business but feel reticent about offering an invitation to visit because of our image. Such an inthibition is effecting not only our growth but the accounts we hold. If allowed to continue this situation would eventually reflect in our ability to maintain our staffing levels.
23
OOO4O Of our complement of staff all live reasonably locally. Many walk to work and a large percentage of the younger employees cycle or use scooters. I mention this aspect as we are aware of your Council1s concern with regard to possible parking problems. However, in our specific case, due to the nature of the work, a large percentage of our employees do not require cars. Parking is thus not a problem and it is not engisaged that it will become one. Whilst it would be unreasonable to deny that the company will benefit from a quick and successful planning application, it is also pertinent to consider the opportunities for our current and future employees. We are proudly able to boast that we are the sole suppliers of fabricated Sony T.V. Stands for all of Europe. We urge that your Council's planning Committee consider this application at the earliest possible date and issue a favourable decision in respect thereof."
The proposal complies with the Council's car parking standards • and is considered a reasonable development within the Industrial Estate.
Consultations:
Environmental Services — no adverse comments. Essex County Council - Fire Officer - no observations to make in principle against the proposal. I - County Highways - no objection.
19. ROC/247J86 RAYLEIGH LAND ADJACENT TO THE BAILEY, RAYLEIGH
Outline application to erect a detached bungalow.
J.R.., L.t4. & R.D. Graham, do R.D. Graham, 32, Crown Hill, Rayleigh, Essex. Frontage: 2Om.; Depth: 77m.approx; Density: 10 d.p.h.
24
000541 RECOMMENDATION: REFUSAL, FOR THE_FOLLOWING REASONS:
1. The proposed development would appear unduly cramped and its proximity to existing curtilages in Mount Close would result in an unacceptable loss of amenity to the adjacent occupiers. This could be amplified by the difference in ground levels.
2. The proposed development by reason of its narrow frontage would be out of keeping with the form and character of the existing dwellings in The Bailey.
3. The site is an important foraging ground for badgers from setts on adjacent land and the loss of this foraging ground will be detrimental to1 the badger population.
REPORT: The site is within an area of residential notation on the Approved Review Development Plan. Three previous applications • for residential development have been refused, one of which was dismissed on appeal. The most recent application (ROC/395/85) was for a detached house fronting the turning head at the end of The Bailey and which was refused on the grounds of overlooking of properties in Mount Close and removal of established hedgerow. At that time the Committee indicated that assistance would be given in an attempt to overcome the problems. As submitted, the current application proposed a bungalow facing the turning head to reduce the overlooking problem, but which transgressed the Rayleigh Mount Ancient Monument and proposed private open space. The application was submitted in April, 1986 but held in abeyance at the applicants request pending the outcome of Rochford District Local Plan process, during which time the appellent objected to the proposed private open space notation. Consequently, the Council have resolved to give the area on the north side of The Bailey a public open space notation and the proposal has been amended to a house located in line with existing properties in The Bailey. The earlier application which was rejected on appeal (ROC/374f79) was for a split level bungalow on the same site as the amended application, with detached garages near the turning head of The Bailey. The grounds for refusal were the restricted plot width making the dwelling incompatible with the form and character of The Bailey, the overlooking of Mount Close properties and the removal of established hedgerows. The Inspector considered that the development proposed was not in harmony with existing properties in The Bailey and that an effort was being made to squeeze a dwelling onto a small site as an afterthought. This proposal is similar and is probably the best solution available to the applicant, but the reasoning behind the Inspector's decision is still valid and there are no changes in circumstances to justify a different decision.
25
4 000542 The applicant has made representation in support of the application contesting the objections raised and this will be available at the meeting.
Consultations: Rayleigh Civic Society - development will detract from the existing visual amenity of the area; the garage and its access would be unduly obtrusive. National Trust - no objection to the revised proposal. Essex Badger Patrol - objected to the original proposal because of its affect on. the badgers' foraging ground. Anglian Water - objected to the submitted application which was received prior to the embargo being endorsed by this Council.
Neibour Rpçes entations on Revised Prposa 1 s: Number Consulted - 10; Number of Replies - 8.
- overlooking of properties in Mount Close and loss of privacy; - not in keeping with the neighbouring dwellings; removal of several trees (mostly fruit);
- obtrusive siting of garage; - affect on badgers' foraging ground; - undesirable traffic and parking implications.
Addresses — 1-11 (odd), Mount Close and 3, The Bailey. I
Number Not Objecting - One.
20. ROC/327/B8 RAYLEIGH' OUR_LADY OF RANSOME_SCHOOL, LITTLE WHEATLEY CHASE, RAYLEIGH
Demountable classroom.
26 S
000543 • The 9overners of Our Lady of Ransome School, c/c Stanley Bragg Partnership, 140, New London Road, Chelmsford, Essex.
RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO: Permission is hereby granted for a limited period expiring on 18th May, 1993 and the use authorised by this consent shall cease on or before 18th May, 1993 unless a renewal of this consent has been sought and obtained and the premises shall be restored to its former condition.
REPORT: This is an existing school site on the west side of L.tttle Wheatley Chase. The application relates to the siting of two demountable classrooms, one of which has already been erected. Both classrooms will be sited between the infants school building and the existing playground and therefore not particularly visible from the road.
Consultations:
County Surveyor — no objections.
Uehbour_Representations: Number Notified — 4; Number of Replies - Nil.
21. ROC/19l/2BHOCKLEY LAND AT JUNCTION OF CHURCH ROAD AND LOWER ROAD, HOCKLEY
Retention of existing field shelter.
P.A. Alexandroff, 234A, Eastwood Road, Rayleigh, Essex.
RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL,_SUBJECT TO:
1. The permission hereby granted shall be for a temporary period of two years only, expiring on 31st May, 1990. On or before this date, the building shall be removed and the site returned to its original condition, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
27
000544 2. The building hereby permitted shall be used for the shelter of animals only and shall not be used for any commercial/storage use without the prior consent in writing of the Local Planning P.uthority.
REPORT: This application has been submitted as the result of an investigation carried out when the- structure was first erected earlier this year. The site is an open field on the south west corner area of the junction of Church Road and Lower Road, having a total of 2.12 hectares (5.25 acres). The structure comprises a timber shelter, some 32sq.m. in floor area in the north east corner of the site.
The applicant states that the shelter is required for the shelter of four or five horses, although he may decide to graze cattle on the land instead. He states that the land has previously been used for summer grazing purpothes, but has not been suitable for grazing during the winter months because of the lack of adequate shelter. There is an existing tree and hedge screen on the northern and eastern boundaries of the site, which affords some screening of the structure, although the effectiveness of the screen would not be so great during the winter months. It is considered that a temporary permission for a period of two years would be appropriate, to enable the Council to monitor and control the future use of the building.
Consultations: Environmental Services — no adverse comments. Hockley Parish Council - objects on grounds of highway safety and unspecific use of the shelter.
County Highways — leaves determination of the application to the discretion of the Council.
NeqrRepre sentat ions: Number Notified - 2; Number of Replies 1.
I
Material Planning Objections - Green Belt siting.
28
000545 k 22. ROC/2020/87/LE GREAT WAKERING COTTAWIGHT,_COMMON_ROAD, GREAT WAKERING
Demolition of existing stable block/wall and erection of extensions to form new dwelling, two stores, study and workroom. I. W. Trenaman, Esg., do J.P. Lockhart, 19, Henry Drive, Leigh—on-Sea, Essex.
RECOMMENDATION: Delegate to the Director of Development to approve on completion of any outstanding consultations and after the necessary notification priod given to the Secretary of State.
1. The works hereby being approved shall be begun not later than the expiration of five years beginning with the date of this consent.
2. The works hereby allowed shall be finished as follows (a) all roofs in natural Welsh slates; (b) all exterior brickwork in mild yellow stocks laid in Flemish bond. (c) all external joinery to be softwood painted; and (d) all new rainwater goods to be cast iron or aluminium painted black.
3. Notwithstanding the submitted plans, the brick arches over the windows in the south facing gable and east elevation shall be segmentally arched and not "soldier" arches as indicated on these plans.
4. The demolition hereby permitted shall not be undertaken before a contract for the carrying out of the works of redevelopment of the site has been made and planning permission has been granted for the redevelopment for which the contract provides.
REPORT: It is suggested that this and the following item be dealt with together. The proposal involves the demolition of an existing dilapidated stable block which was, until recently, in the ownership of Home Farm adjacent. Members may recall granting permission for the re-development of Home Farm for 16 dwellings under ROC/75l/87 when it was anticipated that the stables could be retained and
29
000546 refurbished. On closer inspection, however, it was found that the buildings were structurally unsound and the applicant, who has the experience of successfully restoring Cottawight (a Grade II Listed Building) is willing to replace this stable complex with a building of similar scale and massing, albeit with a two storey addition. Following a site meeting with the Agent/applicants, the County Planner's Specialist Architect on Conservation and Listed Buildings takes the view that the building cannot be retained and replacement as indicated in the latest revised plans is acceptable. Although this stable block was not within the curtilage of Cottawight when the latter was' listed, it is physically joined to it and is now within Cottawight's ownership. Consequently it has been decided that Listed Building consent will be required. As this involves demolition various national organisations have to be notified, as required by Department of the Environment Circular 8/87 and, if the Authority are minded to grant consent, the Secretary of State will have to be notified before formal decision is issued to allow him the opportunity of deciding the application. Due to the minor changes in the latest set of submitted drawings, there is an area of doubt concerning the precise boundary of the proposed garden to the dwelling. To ensure the Green Belt is not encroached upon, the Director of Development will undertake a further site meeting/inspection to determine the boundary on the ground.
Consultations: Rochford Hundred Amenities Society - wish this "picturesque corner" to be maintained. However, proposal will be immaterial and use of buildings' for stables seems impossible now Home Farm is being developed. County Planner's Listed Building and Conservation Specialist - suggests that consent be given subject to Conditions 2 and 3. Anglian Water - no objections. Ancient Monuments Society — no adverse observations but presume County Planning Specialist's conditions will be imposed.. (Any other comments received from other national organisations will be reported to the Meeting.) Great Wakering Parish Council — "objects most strongly" — site within Conservation Area where buildings should be preserved.
30 .
000547 k our_Representations: Number Notified - 1 (in addition to Site Notices and newspaper advertisements. Number of Replies - Nil.
23. ROC/959/87 GREAT WAKERING COTTAWIGHT, COMMON ROAD, GREAT WAKERING
Demolition of existing stable block/wall and erection of extensions to form new dwelling, two stores, study and workroom.
I.W. Trenaman, Esq., do J.P. Lockhart, 19, Henry Drive, Leigh-on-Sea, Essex.
RECOMMENDATION: Delegate to the Director of Development to approve after negotiations to bring site garden out of the Green Belt.
I. Std. Cond. 3 - Commence in five years.
2. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted provision shall be made, within the curtilage of the new dwelling and in accordance with details previously submitted and approved in writing with the Local Planning Authority, for the construction of two car parking spaces. Each hardstanding shall be a minimum of 2.5m. x 5in. and shall be used for no other purpose incidental to the enjoyment of the dwelling.
3. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning General Development Order, 1977 (or any arder revoking and re-enacting that Order), no windows or other openings other than those expressly authorised by this permission shall be inserted in the walls and roof of the building hereby permitted and no extensions or other alterations shall be carried out to the dwelling.
4. Std. Cond. 10 - Details of screening.
5. Std. Cond. 9 Materials to match existing.
6. Notwithstanding the submstted plans, the brick arches over the windows in the south facing gable and east elevation shall be segmentally arched and not "soldier" arches as indicated on these plans.
31
4 000548 7. The workshop, study and store rooms indicated on the submitted drawing No. IWT:/6A shall be used for ancillary purposes only and not as additional living accommodation for the dwelling hereby permitted.
8. The garden area to the dwelling hereby permitted and hatched on the submitted drawing No. IWT:6A shall at all times be retained for enjoyment of the occupants of that dwelling.
REPORT:
- (Please see previous item).
Consu ltat ions:
(Please see previous item).
WhbourRepres en tations:
(Please see previous item).
24. ROC/26ft88 RAYLEIGH DIJLCE DOMUN, NORE ROAD, RAYLEIGH
Erect detached bungalow and attached garage. Mr. & Mrs. B.W. Courquin, do Laurence E. Brown & Co., 3313, Elm Road, Leigh-on-Sea, Essex.
RECOMMENDATION: REFUSAL, FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS:
1. Policy HG of the Rochford District Local Plan states that within the areas reserved for long term development need and identified on the proposals map as "areas of special restrant", the open character of the land shall be conserved and the existing uses shall remain for the most part undisturbed until such time as the land is shown to be needed for development by the Rochford District Local Plan 1991—2001. Consideration may be given to temporary uses provided they do not prejudice the primary objectives of providing for long term development. The land the subject of the application is within the area identified as the Eastwood Rise/Rayleigh Avenue area of Special Restraint and, therefore, the proposed development would be premature to the objectives of the Local Plan.
32
000549 2. In the opinion of the Local Planning Authority, the proposed means of foul drainage is not appropriate to this location as the impermeable nature of the subsoil results in poor secondary treatment and disposal of effluent and there is potential for pollution and nuisance from odours.
REPORT: An identical application was refused permission on 26th February, 1988 for the above reasons (ROC/993/37 refers). A letter has been submitted in support of the application claiming precedents in respect of three examples in the locality. The first example quoted was allowed prior to confirmation of the restraint policy, the second is within the residential notation and the third relates to extensions to a property not a rebuild. The applicants also put forward personal circumstances and • alternative means of foul drainage as justification for the proposal. The penultimate paragraph of the letter reads as follows
"My clients have instructed me to lodge an appeal against the refusal of Planning permission and I can confirm that an appeal is now being lodged with the D.O.E. I trust, however, that the Council will see fit to reverse their decision and thus avoid the necessity to proceed with this appeal. I
The site is located within an area of restraint — Policy ES applies. This Policy has been defended successfully in a recent appeal decision dated 22nd January, 1988 in respect of application ROC/278/87 for four houses on land adjoining Sylvania, Rayleigh Avenue. It should be noted that the existing bungalow is a substantial property in a reasonable state of repair, therefore the need for a new bungalow is questionable. Notwithstanding the designation of this area to meet long term development needs post 1991 to 2001, at which time the land is shown to be needed, there is no justification for one for one replacement at present. Furthermore, the siting of the proposed dwelling is not in the saute position as the present bungalow. It ..s understandably from the applicant's viewpoint, sited to maximise the potential of the site for further development. However, if planning permission is allowed for this dwelling, it will create a precedent for additional dwellings on the remainder of the site and elsewhere in the restraint area which may prove difficult to resist.
000550 Whilst Members may sympathasise with the applicant's proposals having regard to the possibly short timescale involved, this is equally good justification for refusing permission until such tine as the Council makes a positive decision to release this restraint area as a whole for development. Development could then be organised in a comprehensive integrated manner. Furthermore, to grant permission on this area of restraint could have a knock—on effect throughout the District with respect to land availability. In relationship to the existing Structure Plan housing allocation, current land availability shows an over provision of several hundred units. There is no justification for adding to this by providing new dwellings in the long term development areas.
Consultations:
County Surveyor - No objection in principle. Environemental Services - reports that the proposed use of the existing foul drainage installation is unacceptable in this location. The impermeable nature of the subsoil results in poor secondary treatment and disposal of effluent, and there is potential for pollution and nuisance from odours.
Nei yhbourRepçsentations: Number Consulted - 3; Number of- Replies - Nil.
25. ROC/1052/87 UOCKLEY 121, MAIN ROAD, HOCKLEY
Demolition of existing, erection of stables and barn, and use of land for paddock purposes. S. Balaam, Esq., do Architectural Design Associates, 25/29, West Street, Rochford, Essex.
RECOMMENDATION; Delegate to the Director of Development to approve on the completion of a Legal Agreement requiring the retention of adjacent ficlds for paddock purposes; stipulating maximum number of horses on site; and no commercial use of the site, including gymkhanas, etc.
1. Std. Cond. 3 - Commence in five years.
2. Std. Cond. 8 — Submit materials schedule.
34 S
000551 The use of the buildings hereby permitted shall be restricted to the private use of the occupants of No. 121, Main Road and not for any commercial or business use, including a riding school.
4. Details of a suitable planting and/or fencing scheme to screen the building from No. 1, Aldermans Hill shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted.
REPORT; The proposal involves the use of approximately 8 acres of Green Belt land close to Hockley Woods. The number of stables (4) would be well within the Authority's adopted policy of one horse per 1.2 acres. There are currently a range of stables on the site which are closer to the dwellings fronting Aldermans Hill/Main Road and are of poor appearance. It is intended that these be demolished along with the wind damaged barn on the site of the proposed development.
Consultations: Environmental Health — no adverse comments.
We ghb our p2eptat ions Number Notified - 4; Number of Replies — Nil - although a verbal objection has been raised and a wr±tten response maj be received before the Meeting.
26. ROC/022/8U HAWKWELL SITE OF' 7, 9, 9A & 11, WHITE HART LANE, HAWKWELL AND 1, 5 and 77HIGHAMS ROAD, HAWKWELL
Demolish seven houses and erect sheltered accommodation units with wardens flats, lay out parking with access from Highams Road.
Mr. D. Bysouth, c/o John Cotton, 185, London Road, Southend-on—Sea, Essex.
35
J OOOi52 Frontage: White hart Lane — SBrn.(l9Oft.); Higharns Road — 116m.(380ftj; Site Area: O.8ha.(1.976acres.).
REPORT: This application has been included on the Schedule following requests by Members that it be reported to Committee. However, rio recommendation is made, having regard to the Committee's decision to defer determination at the last meeting of ROC/1049/87 - 12 Sheltered units at 282, Eastwood Road, Rayleigh pending the formulation by D.S.C. of a policy on the provision of sheltered housing units. Furthermore, Members should be aware that the applicant has now asked that the appliction be placed before the Committee for decision. The application is submitted in outline form for 80 units plus 2 Wardens flats. The applicant's Agent by letter dated 9th May, 1988 has confirmed that all matters other than access are to be reserved and that the only plans forming part of the application are site plans indicating the access arrangements. For Members clarification, the originally submitted indicative plans were purely "illustrative" and did not form part of the formal application and have now, in any event, been superseded as detailed above. The site is currently occupied by seven dwellings set in mature grounds, having road frontages to both Whi.te Hart Lane and Highams Road. The land rises relative to White Hart Lane, therfore, it occupies a prominent elevated position facing onto Hawk*ell Common and open to views from Main Road to the south. The site is situated within a residential area comprising a mix of bungalows, chalets and houses, some like those on the application site having fairy substantial grounds. Close to the site is a Public House, two shops and the British Legion Club. Also nearby in Main Road are bus stops serving both directions, the facilities of Hockley Centre is some four tenths of a mile away and the British Rail Station some seven tenths of a mile. The applicant has been requested to consider scaling down the size of the sheltered housing scheme which would leave part of the site available for conventional housing. Furthermore, also to supply illustrative elevational details of the proposals for Members consideration and that these should reflect the scale and massing of conventional housing in the area. However, as detailed above, the applicant has opted for a purely outline submission. The primary issues having regard to all the circumstances are whether this site is considered suitable for sheltered housing as a matter of principle, and secondly, if a scheme of the size and scale is acceptable.
36
090553 • With regard to the technical standards of private amenity space and car parking provision, the original "indicative" plan demonstrated that this could be satisfactorily achieved, albeit that the car parking indicated thereon was somewhat remote from a significant number of the units (a matter that could be negotiated). This application has generated considerable unrest and opposition from local residents and a few further afield, with a total of 63 households objecting to the proposal as detailed below, together with the strong concern expressed by the Parish Councils of Hockley and Hawlcwell and the Hockley Ratepayers Association. All the consultation replies and other representations will be available for Members perusal in the Members Rookm at 'the Rayleigh Civic Suite. One further matter that Members attention should be drawn to is the firm view of the County Surveyor that no objection is raised • to this proposal from a highways point of view. In a letter to a local resident he comments
"From experience of similar proposals, the development is likely to generate only small numbers of vehicle movements and these will take place outside of normal peak hours. Therefore, I cannot accept your view that there will be any adverse impact (attributable to this development) on the adjacent road network or junctions thereto. On the positive side, you should note that the development will enable the provision of improved visibility at the Highams Road/White Hart Lane junction and it will also result in the formation of a footway along the full site frontage to White Hart Lane.
To summarise, I conclude that this outline application cannot be opposed on highway grounds." -
The County Surveyor also comments that the car parking provision in terms of numbers complies with the Countywide recommendations for this type of development. It should be clear in Members minds that the County Surveyor would not support refusal on highway grounds. Therefore, this Authority would not be able to call an expert witnessin the event of an appeal against a refusal on such grounds. In such circumstances, at a Public Inquiry, costs could well be awarded against the Authority.
37
000554 . County Surveyor — no objection in principle subject to a number of conditions covering details of pedestrian and vehicular access and visibility splays in addition to the improvement of visibility at the junction of White Hart Lane with Highams Road and footpath provision along the entire White Hart Lane site frontaqe as referred to above. Anglian Water — no objection in principle, although inadequate surface water sewer capacity exists to serve the proposal. Therefore, this would have to be provided by the applicant either by on site storage or construction of an off—site sewer. Environmental Services — no adverse comments.
Hockley Parish Council — make observations and objections relating to the traffic problems that they consider are being experienced in particular in the first section of White Hart Lane from Main Road to Highams Road. The problem being compounded by vehicles parked along the stretch of road by visitors to the British Legion and shops which could hamper access for emergency vehicles. The peak evening and weekend parking in association with the British Legion would coincide with the most popular time for visitors to the proposed development.
The Council consider that a case exists for substantial improvements to White Hart Lane, using part of the proposal site as may be needed, prior to any further development in the area (noting the Glencroft Nurseries development). Reference is also made to the lack of a footway connection between the north side of White Hart Lane and Main Road. Hockley Ratepayers Association — share the Parish Council's concern in respect of the related highway matters and conclude :-
"The Committee would oppose both developments until assured that action taken as follows. Cease parking on the road by those using the British Legion Club arid those using Hockley Bowling Club. Rearrangement of the junction of White Hart Lane, Main Road, Hawkwell to provide a footpath outside the White Hart Public House, increase in road width outside the shops in White Hart Lane and the provision of either traffic lights or mini roundabout at this junction. The Committee do not wish to appear obstructive to development but consider that the highway infrastructure is totally insufficient to carry the increased loads being generated by continuous building without due attention being paid either by Planning Authorities at local and County Level.
38
000555 Hawlcwell Parish Council — endorse the views expressed by Hockley Parish Council, adding that the appearance of such a proposal from Hawkwell Common would be like a hospital rather than residential.
Nei9hbour Representations: Number Consulted - 42 - in addition to Site Notices displayed to both road frontages.
Letters have been received from 63 households.
Material Piarininy_Objecticnis (in decending ordr of frequency of complaint7Y — unacceptable increase in traffic effect on nearby road junctions, particularly having regard to traffic and car parking associated with pub and British Legion (in addition to that connected with Glencroft); — proposed type of development out of character with rural nature of area and aspect onto Hawkwell Common, and loss of seven good dwellings and open nature of site; - foul and surface water sewrage systems unable to cope with additional load; - unacceptable strain on existing medical (Doctors, Dentists,, etc.) and Social Services; - lack of pavement along White Hart Lane frontage which would be needed for the elderly; - overdeveloputent of the site at too high a density; — inadequate car parking provision within the scheme; — loss of trees and wildlife; — unacceptable noise and inconvenience during construction; — backland development; - road infrastructure in the Hockley area generally unable to cope with such further significant development and lack of parking in Hockley Centre; - vehicular access to site in poor position; - roadside parking, which will be increased by this proposal restricts access for emergency vehicles;
39
000556 - precedent for further redevelopment in the area; - already adequate number of OAP developments in area and excessive concentration of elderly people; - overlooking. Addresses:
Southend Road, Hockley 8, 6;
Pargetters Hyam, Hockley 5;
Hill Lane, Hawkwell 15;
Hawkwell Road, Hockley 27;
Main Road, Hawkwell 263;
- Victor Gardens, Hawkwell 25, 60;
Park Gardens, Hawkwell 16;
Hawkwell Chase, Elockley 39; - White Hart Lane, Hawkwell 6, 8, 3, 10, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 21, 21a, 23, 23a, 25, 27, 27a, 33, 35, 36;
Highains Road, Hockley 6, 9, 10, lla, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 23a, 23b, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 34, 38, 42, 45, 48, 49, 53, 54, 56, 57, 60, 65. A petition in the form of a list of some 87 signatures to a "protest" meeting held to oppose the development has also been received.
Letters of Support - 1 -from a nearby OAP resident who points out the difficulty in finding such sheltered accommodation and the convenient position of this site only a short walk from local shops and Post Office (for pension) without having to cross Main Road.
Other presen tat ions: Letters have also been received on behalf of the Royal British Legion, who point out such a proposal is consistent with other aims of the Royal British Legion Housing Society but also point out some of the difficulties being experienced in the area as covered by the letters of objection referred to above. They do point out that the vehicular access/car parking for the site adjacent to the bowling green is in the best position from their point of view, thus, it should avoid misuse by their members.
40
000557 • 27. ______THE CHEQUERS PUBLIC HOUSE, HIGH STREET,_CA.NEWDON
Erect single storey and two storey side extensions. Mr. R.J. Lyon, do The Jarvis Gunning Partnership, 663, High Road, Benfleet, Essex.
RECOMMENDATION: Delegate to Director, subject to satisfactory alteration and detail of proposed rear extension on the east s ide.
1. Std. Cond. 3 - Commence in five years.
2. Std. Cond. 8 - Submit material schedule.
3. There shall be no amplified speech or noise broadcast on the open areas of the site.
4. Details of any extract ventilation system shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority and agreed in writing prior to installation.
5. Details of any externally sited refrigerator or cellar compressor installation shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority and agreed in writing prior to installation.
6. Std. Cond. 33 - Car parking spaces to be marked on parking area.
7. Std. Cond. 20 — No obstruction to visibility within areas of sight splays.
8. A 2.lm. x 2.lm. pedestrian visibility splay, relative to back of footway/highway, should be provided on both sides of • all vehicular accesses and no obstruction above 600mm. in height should be permitted within the area of the splays. 9. Where the surface finish of private drives are intended to remain in unbound materials, the first 6m., as measured from the back of the highway, should be treated with an approved surface dressing to avoid the displacement of Loose utaterial onto the highway.
REPORT: This is an existing Public House, on the south side of High Street, within the Canewdon Conservation area.
41
-lit 000558 The proposal involves a part single storey, part first floor rear extension on the west side of the building, and single storey rear extension on the east side. The ground floor extensions will provide additional restaurant and bar area, storage and toilet facilities and a conservatory and the first floor extension will provide an additional bedroom to the staff accommodation. 16 Parking spaces are proposed at the rear of the site with access via a 4.Bm. wide access from High Street, which will also serve three residential properties which have recently been granted planning permission. Consideration of the use of the adjoining land for residential purposes has been on the basis of the remaining 16 parking spaces being sufficient for what is a relatively quiet public house serving the local population. Using the appropriate floorspace standard, there would be a requirement for 35 spacces to be provided in connection with the public house use, which cannot be satisfied. Members may consider that the proposed extensions will change the character of the public house, and result in a more intensive use of the premises, in which case, this shortfall in parking provision may present parking problems. The adjoining property to the east is a Grade II Listed Building, the occupant of which is concerned regarding increased noise and disturbance, loss of privacy and obtrusiveness. The alteration to the proposed extension on the east side of the public house, which the Council is seeking to achieve, will significantly reduce the effect on the adjoining property and the relationship would then be considered acceptable. In all the circumstances, the proposal, subject to the amendment as requested, is considered reasonable.
Consultations:
County Surveyor - no objections, subject to Conditions S and 9 as set out above.
Environmental Services — no objections subject to Conditions 3, 4, and 5, as set out above.
Fire Service — no objections in principle.
fleighbour Representations: Number Notified - 11; Number of Replies - 4.
42 •
000559 Consultat±ons: County Pianner - no objection to the demoiLtion of the wash room or to the proposed openings to be made in the internal walls. Has reservatons about the removal of partition walls, some of which may be structural, and the seemingly unnecessary rearrangement of rooms.
Rochford Hundred Amenities Society — no adverse comments. Replies awaited from the statutory consultees and the Parish Council.
29. ROC/193/88 STAMBRIDGE GREAT STAMBRIDGE_HALL FARM, STMIBRIDGE ROAD, GREAT STAMBRIDGE
Erection of agricultural storage building. Postel Properties Ltd., do Bernard Thorpe & Partners, 7OA, High Street, Huntingdon, Cambridge, PE1S 6DJ.
RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO:
1. Std. Cond. 3 — Coimnence in ive years.
2. The external walis of the developiaent hereby permtted shall be of a colour which shall previously be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of the development.
REPORT:
This proposal seeks to replace buldings substantially demolished in last October's storm. The site is situated amongst other simslar farm buildings and the applicant proposes to use weathered second—hand asbestos sheeting on the roof of the bui ldng.
Consultations: Environmental Services — no advere comments.
No neighbours affected.
44
000560 30. 9SL2.2LLQ [IAWKWELL 154-156, MAIN ROAD, UAWKWELL
Outisne application to erect three houses and three bungalows with garages and private drive. Mr. A. Hayward, do John Cotton, 185, London Road, Southend-on--Sea, Essex.
RECO?4MENDATIOL4: REFUSAL, FOR TUE FOLLOWING REASONS:
1. The proposal represents overdevelopment of the site in comparison with the pattern and character of the existing housng abutting the site in Main Road. Furthermore, the proposal as indicated on the submitted plan would result in the dwelflngs fronting Man Road being unduly overpowering in the street due to their number and siting relative to the street and adjoining dwell±ngs..
2. The proposal would produce a tandem relatsonship between dwellings which iS considered to be an unsatisfactory form oi development and a poor settng and levels of privacy to the proposed bungalows. 3. The erection of three bungalowb to the rear of the site would produce a cramped development and the erection of buildings in close proximity to exsting residential curtilages which would inreasonably intrude into the aspect and amenity of the ad]acent properties.
REPORT: This proposal involves the demolition of a petrol filling station/garage with workshops within a residential area. Members may recall refusng permission in March, 1987 for three houses on the rear of this site and the retention of the existing garage. It was consdered that this would result in serious overlooking of adjacent residential properties and loss of privacy thereto. The current proposal involves the erection of three bungalows to the rear of the site to lessen any such privacy loss/overlooking. Furthermore, the total removal ot a non-conforming use, i.e. the garage/workshops, is achieved with this scheme. It should be noted that the original submitted drawings for this application showing six houses have been revised to three bungalows and three houses. The following summary of comments from neighbours takes account of these factors
45 .
000561 a Whilst LusnijaUm space standards can be acheved, the scheme would result in a tandem relationship between dwellings which is a form of backland development which iS normally resisted. It s felt on balance that comparing this proposal with the development of three houses which recently took place on a similar area of land almost adjacent that the proposal iS excessive and should be resisted.
Consultations;
County Surveyor — directs the imposition of several conditions.
Anglian Water - no objections. I
Neighbour Representations: (Comments on original scheme in brackets). ______Number Notified — 11 — in addition to Site Notice. Number of Reples — 4 from three addresses.
Material P1ann inObj ec tions: - (loss of privacy and overlooking from houses); — (loss of sunlight); — (Number of properties is excessive); — (road hazard at access); — (loss of trees/bushes); - trees ought to be retained.
Number Not Objecting to revised proposal — 1.
31. ROC/054/88 GREAT WAKERING 14, HIGH STREET, GREAT WAKERING
Change of use to restaurant. Mr. Abul Hussain, c/o Mr. A. Upjohn, Wakering Insurances, 28, High Street, Great Wakering, Essex.
46
000562 RECOMMENDATION: REFUSAL, FOR TIlE FOLLOWING REASONS:
1. Adequate on—site car parking and servicing areas cannot be provided within the site boundaries and, as such, the traffic movement generated by the proposed use will result in additional on—street car parking and servicing to that already resulting from adjacent retail and other commercial properties. Due to the limited width of the High Street and the close proximity of a bend/road junction at this point the proposal could lead to further congestion to the detriment of road safety.
2. The proposed use Will cause considerable disturbance and inconvenience to residents in nearjy properties by reason of noise from customers and their vehicles, traffic congestion and odours from food.
REPORT; Plann±ng perm±ss±on was refused for a sim1ar proposal in February, 1982 for similar reasons.
Although the site is within an area allocated for shopping/retail purposes and there are take-away food shops and pubs nearby, space for parking/servicing is very limited and a residential flat is situated above the proposed restaurant. The site iS also within the Great Wakering Conservation Area.
Single yellow line waiting restrictions (8.00 a.m. - 6.00 p.m. have applied to the area immediately to the east of the site although, as Members of the Development Services Committee were informed in February this year, the Highways Authority have proposed to sncrease this to double yellow lines and thereby prohibit waiting at any time.
Consultations: Environmental Services — reports that having regard to the location there is potential for nuisance from odours greater than exists at present. No objections are raised subject to the imposition of a condition regarding a suitable ventilation system.
County Planners Specialist on Listed Buildings/Conservation Areas - no objections in terms of the Conservation Area. Great Walcering Parish Council - objects; insufficient parking and possible obnoxious aromas.
47 . 000563 ' I •I. InhI!u!I LWI!lI!II! FW' PI I1u,t4YheP' I9W
9our Responses: Number Notified — 23 - ifi addition to Site Notice and newspaper advertisement.
NuLuber of Replies - 9 from 8 addresses in addition to a petition signed by 21 persons from 16 addresses (6 of whom are included in the 8 above).
Material_Plann9jcions: — inadequate parking provision; - odours from cooking; - vermin, etc. attracted; — out ot keeping with character of village; — late flight disturbance from customers.
Addresses__(letters): 17, Little Wakering Road; 211, 8, 10/12, 1611, High Street; 4 and 5, Roding Close: 1411, Whitehall Road.
Add re sses( et it ion ) : of the above, plus
126, Conway Avenue; 2, 9, 16, 18, 20 and Anchor Cottage, High Street; 36, Kimberley Road; 20, St. Johns Close; 14b, Whitehall Road.
32. ROC/947/87 ROCUFORD TUE COCK INN PUBLIC HOUSE, HALL ROAD, ROCUFORD
Revised change of use of part of field to provide an extension to public house garden for use by public and car parking extension to north east of building (22 spaces).
Anglia Hosts, c/c Lloyd Morgan Design Association Ltd., The production Village, 100, Cricklewood Lane, London, NW2 2DS.
RECOMMEMDATION: Delegate to Director of Development to approve
48
000584 following appropriate additional neighbour consultations.
1. Std. Cond. 3 - Commence in five years.
2. Std. Cond. 4 - Hedgerows to be retained.
3. Std. Conch. S - A scheme of tree and/or shrub planting to be approved.
4. Std. Conch 6 - A scheme of landscaping to be approved.
5. Std. Conch 10 - Details of screening.
6. The additional parking bays to be provided adjacent to the public house immediately to the south and east as indicated on the submitted plan No. 136/8/2 shall be hardsurfaced to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority prior to the proposed garden extension hereby permitted being first used. Furtherwore, the cat parking spaces shall be defined on the finished surface to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority prior to the additional garden area being first use.
7. The western and eastern boundaries of the site indicated by the letters A—C and 13-C-D-F shall be defined and enclosed by suitable means of screening and thereafter retained and maintained to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.
8. Details of the fencing to the area for children shall be submitted for approval by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of the development and shall be erected prior to the use of the proposed garden extension and children's area.
9. Details of the family area uses and furniture within the proposed garden extension shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to the proposed garden extension being first used. 10. Details of the appearance, number and siting of any childrens play equipment shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to the use of the fenced off area for children indicated on the submitted drawing No. 136/8/2 hereby approved. 11. There shall be no amplified speech or music broadcast on the open areas of the site. 12. There shall be no barbecues on the open areas of the site without the prior written agreement of the Local Planning Authorsty.
49 .
000565 i,i IT'l!F"
13. No floodlighting shall be implemented within the additional • parking bay areas and garden extension indicated on the submitted Plan No. 136/8/2 without such floodlighting proposals having first been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. 14. The garden extension and additional parking as defined on the approved plan No. 136/8/2 shall not be extended in any direction without the prior approval n writing of the Local Planning Authority.
REPORT: An application to extend the public house (ROC/1029/87) was approved on 11th February1 1988 subject to a condition that 15 addtiona1 car parking spaces be provided. The present proposal incorporates the above plus an additional 13 spaces for the garden extension. 22 of the proposed spaces are sited adjacent the public house next to the eastern boundary and extending • tonorthwards beyond the northern rear wall of the building. This represents an amendment to the original submitted plan and neighbouring residential occupiers have been notified and invited to make representations. The proposed garden area extension has also been reduced since the original plan was submitted to provide a buffer strip with residential properties to the west. The applicants are seeking to extend a sitting out area for customers with ancillary parking for customers consistent with similar schemes approved elsewhere wthn the District (e.g. The Bull Public House, Hockley; Castle Inn Public House, Little Wakering; Silver Jubilee Public House, Eastwood Road) and iS related to the activities of the public house.
Consultations: Environmental Services - reports that having regard to the location of this proposed development, there is potential for nuisance train noise and odours greater than exists at present. No objections are raised against this proposal subject to suggested conditions 11 and 12.
County Surveyor - no objection.
Rochford Patish Council - no objections.
Neighbour Representations on original submission for garden extension only (excludinar_parkj1 ____—______Number Notified - 16; Number of Reples - 1.
SO
—1 000566 Material Planning_Objt ions: • objects to extensson of garden up to residential boundary;. - increased noise and dsturbance.
Address - Shangri-La, Hall Road.
Neighbour Representations on revised submission reducing garden area and provi tional car park saces ______Number Notified — 16; Number of Replies — to be advised.
Material Planning Objections: To be advised. . 33. ROC/129/S8 1-JOCKLEY SQUIRRELS, HILLSIDE ROAD, HOCKLEY
Demolition of existing house and erection of two chalets and garages. Knolicray Developments, do Ron Hudson Designs Ltd., 309, London Road, Hadleigh, Benfleet, Essex.
RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO:
1. Std. Cond. 3 — Commence in five years.
2. Std. Cond. S — Submit materials schedule.
3. Std. Cond. 10 — Details of screening.
4. Notwithstanding the submitted plans, provision shall be made within the curtilage of each dwelling for a minimum of three parking spaces, such spaces to be available for use prior to the occupation of the dwellings. This requirement includes parking spaces within garages. Each hardstanding shall be a minimum of 2.5m. x Sm.
5.. Std. Cond. 12A - Garage to be incidental to enjoyment of dwelling.
51
000567 6. Notwithstanding the submitted plan, the landing window on the eastern flank wall of the dwelling on plot 2 shall be of a high level design with a depth not exceeding 450mm. and shall be permanently obscure glazed..
REPORT: This proposal has been the subject of strong opposition and objection from residents and the main points of concern are set out below. The application follows a previous submssion ROC/875/87 which sought permission for two detached houses and was refused on the grounds that the houses by reason of their size, form and massing, would be out of character, and the proposal would set a precedent. Members, however, indicated that two dwellings of more appropriate design would be considered. The proposed dwellsngs are now chalet design of reduced mass compared with the previous house designs, although the ridge height is slightly higher. Drainage has been raised as an issue as in the previous scheme, as the site currently drains to a private system. The adequacy of this system is a matter which will be considered under the Building Regulations and any other restrictions regarding any right to connect additional properties is a private matter between the developer and those responsible for the private drain.
Consultations: Hockley Ratepayera — very strong objections; bulk has not been reduced/roof levels increased; chalets out of character; overdevelopment intrusion on surroundings; private road maintenance problems; foul water disposal problems; loss of good quality dwelling. Hockley Parish Council - object; would increase traffic problems onto Main Road; drainage insufficient; out of keeping; loss of light/privacy to adjoining properties; no details re tree felling; strong public opinion against this development.
Neighbour Representations; Number Notified - 12; Number of Replies — 15 from 12 separate addresses in addition to 39 identical letters from a further 36 addresses. Petition also received signed by SO peoople although only 2 are not included in the above figures.
52
000568 Material Planning_jpp: out of character with surrounding properties; — precedent for ssmilar development; — inadequate foul sewage arrangements/overlooking;. — loss of light/overshadowing; - cramped appearance/overdevelopment; — loss of trees; -
- Increase' ifl traffLc/trafflc problecas; — loss of visual amenity; - overlooking/loss of privacy; - damage to road maintained by residents.
Addresses:
I3ullwood Approach: 2, Caprice, Uoriaers, Far Vista, Form, Greenhays, Lapad, Qaklands, Santis, Treetops, Woodside. Hillside Road:
1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, i2, 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 21, 23, 25, 27, 29, 31, Foxlea. High Road — 29, 31, 33. VJoodside Road:
2, 3, 5, Goodwood, Hillgarth, Levante, Holly House, Newlands, Squirrels, Wedgewood, Windrush.
53 .
0005139 Mat er al P lann in Gb J!ct ions :
— loss of light; - development out of keeping with Conservaton Area; — loss of outlook; — increased nosse and disturbance; — increased traffic problems; — loss of a local village pubflc house.
28. ROC/359/88/GD ROACH GROUP MONKTON BARN FARM, FOULNESS_ISLAND
Internal alterations and demolition of single storey washroom.
Property Services Agency, Block D, Brooklands Avenue, Cambridge, C82 2DZ.
RECOMMENDATION: NO OBJECTION. The Ministry of Defence be ntormed that the Local Planning Authority does not object to the internal alterations and demoltion of the single storey washroom extension at Monkton Barn Farm, Foulness, provided that no structural wall iS to be removed. It is consdered, however, that the lower parts of the east gable wall to be exposed should be reinstated after the demolition and that a new external door appropriate for the building should be hung in the existing opening.
REPORT: Notice of ths proposal has been received from the Property Services Agency under the provisions of Circular 18/84 seeking the Council's comments on works which odirmarily would require Listed Building consent. The Ministry of Defence propose to demolish a later single storey washroom extension and remove certain internal partition walls in the rear range of Monkton Barn Farm, a Grade II Listed Building. The internal alterations are at the occupier's request and will provide enlarged bedrooms at ground and first floor level. The main frame of the building is not affected.
43
000570 DElEGATED PLANNING DECISIONS —19th MAY, 1988
I have decided the following applications in accordance with the policy of delegation and subject to conditions :—
APPROVALS
ROC/3028/87/AI) Externally illuminated hanging sign and externally illuminated fascia sign at The Kings Head Public House, West Street, Rochford - md Coope Taylor Walker.
ROC/2015/87/LB Insert new windows in rear elevation and in toilet block and internal alterations at The Kings Head Public House, West Street, Rochford — Ind Coope Taylor Walker.
ROC/762/87 Outline application to demolish existing house and erect two detached houses with garages at 50, Helena Road, Rayleigh — Mr. D. 11. Seymour.
ROC/795/87 Alterations of roof to form gable and rooms In roof at 17, Sweyne Avenue, Hawkwell - N.J. Sparrow.
ROC/8l8/87 Incorporate additional land into garden and reconstruct side addition with pitched roof to form garage and utility room at 27, Pevensey Gardens, Hullbridge - Mr. Fidgeon.
ROC/903/87 Insert new windows in rear elevation and in ground floor toilet block at The Kings Head Public House, West Street, RoohIord - md Coope Taylor Walker.
1100/929/87 Erect detached double garage at La Vallee Farm, WacTham Park Avenue, Hockley — Mr. B. Wilson.
ROC/971/87 Erect garage at side at 1, Wimaro Crescent, Rayleigh — Mr. P. Copland.
1100/1014/87 Add two storey side and rear extensions and single storey rear extension and two storey rear extension at 48, Hawkwell Chase, Hawkwell - Mr. & Mrs. D. Clifford.
R00/1044/87 First floor side extension balcony and balustrade at Holly House, Woodside Road, Hockley — Mr. P.L. Taylor.
1100/009/88 Convert existing garage to dining room and provide new garage and pitched roof to existing canopy at 31, Victoria Avenue, Rayleigh - Mr. & Mrs. Neep.
1100/019/86 Erect single storey side extension and two storey rear extension at 30, Buraham Road, Hullbridge — Robert James Cross.
1100/021/86 Erect two storey side extension at 1, Vine Cottage, East Hall Road, Pagleshsm - Miss S. Chapman.
RQ0/03O/88 Add two storey side and front extension at 36, Westminster Drive, Hookley - B.G. Hardwick, Esq..
1100/035/88 Add ground floor extension to provide utility room at 171, Daws Heath Road, Rayleigh - Mrs. A. Davis.
ROC/053/88 Two storey side and single storey rear extensions at 215, Warwick Road, Rayleigh — Mr. P. Bertorelli.
000571 ROO/062/88 Add single storey side extension at Great Oaks, Goldsmith Drive, Rayleigh — Mr. Shoesmith.
ROC/075/88 Construct single storey side extension at The Spinney, Rayleigh Downs Road, Rayleigh - Mr. R.W. Catchpole.
ROC/OBO/88 Construct new garage with pitched roof at 10, Tudor Way, Hawkwell - B. Living, Esq.
ROC/090/86 Add two storey rear extension at 60, Folly Lane, Hockley — Mr. 14.2. Terry.
ROC/093/88 Erect single storey rear extension and first floor side extension with dormer at front at 5, Copeland, Ashingdon — Paul Soltys, Esq. ROC/094/88 Add ground floor rear extension at 18, Hawkwell Chase, Hawkwell - Mr. & Mrs. D. Jones.
R0C/095/88 Construct room in roofspace with dormer at rear at 17, Oak Road, Rochford - B. Vaughan.
R0C/096/88 Single storey side extension at 8, Weir Gardens, Rayleigh — S L. Snow, Esq.
ROC/l04/88 Add two storey rear extension at 1, Patricia Villas, Hall Road, Rochford - David Houghton.
ROC/109/88 Construct ground floor side extension at 1, Orchard Close, ilockley - Mr. B. :&itwlnstle. I
ROC/llo/88 Construct ground floor rear extension at The Bays, Stanibridge Road, Little Stambridge — Mr. Stuckland.
ROC/lll/88 Add ground floor side extension at 12, Elizabeth Avenue, Rayleigh — Mr. Barnes.
ROC/121/88/CC Continued use of relocatable classrooms and toilet block at Grove County Primary School, Grove Road, Rayleigh - Essex County Council.
ROC/124/88 Construct first floor front extension at Oaklands, Bullwood Approach, Hockley - Mr. & Mrs. D.T. Bowers.
ROe/i 31/88 Construct garage, porch and first floor side extension at 1, Stanley Road, Ashingdon — Mr. tJ. Popkin. ROO/132/88 Extend roof to provide rooms n roofspaoe with dormers front and rear at 32, High Road, Hockley — Mr. & Mrs. W. Jones.
ROO/134/88 Erect two storey side and single storey rear extensions at 43, Highaans Road, Hockley - Mr. H.R. Eadon.
ROC/144/88 Construct detached garage at 61, Havens ide, Little Wakering Mr. C.L. Etherington.
ROC/147/88 Construct side extension to form garage and utility room at 38, Cagefield Road, Stambridge - 1C.J. Whitbreacl. ROC/l50/88 Erect single storey rear extension at 2, Vine Cottages, 5 Paglesham Road, Paglesham.
000572 cE;L. 1100/156/88 Add garage to side and ground floor extension to front at 45, Woodlands Road, Hockloy - Mr. W. Derek Marsh.
1100/157/88 Construct two storey rear extension at 34, Westminster Drive, Hockley - H. Jones.
R00/160/88 Add side and. rear ground floor extensions incorporating garage, study, kitchen and add poroh at 4, Grove Road, Rayleigh - Mr. S.J. King.
1100/172/88 Add front porch at 25, Elizabeth Close, Hawkwell — Mr. & Mrs. Mills.
1100/176/88 Add single storey side extension at "Foui Seasons't, Chapel Lane, Great Wakering - R. A. Paakins.
R00/179/88 Extend existing dormer window at side at 12, York Road, Rawkwell - Mr. 11.0. Wright.
ROC/lSl/88/C0 Replace existing relocatable classroom with a new R.L.4(T) type relocatable classroom at Glebe County Infants School, Thilbnok Crescent, Rayleigh — Essex County Council.
1100/188/88 Extend existing garage to the front and rear and provide canopy and bay to front at 36, Spring Gardens, Rayleigh - D.N. Oaldwell.
1100/192/88 Garage and. single storey side and rear extension at 39, Albany Road, Rayleigh - M. Cockrnan. R0C/195/88 Erect garage at side at 19, Leonard Drive, Rayleigh — Mr. R. Jefferies.
1100/196/SO Garage and single storey side extension at 37, Albany Road, Rayleigh - Mr. & Mrs. A. Wilson.
1100/197/88 Erect single storey rear extension at 20, Harrison Gardens, Hockley - Mr. Bransgrove.
1100/203/88 Add ground floor rear extension to lounge and kitchen at 16, Bramfield Road East, Rayleigh — Kr. & Mrs. Legg.
1100/207/88 Demolish existing garage and erect single storey side extension with pitched roof over at Hunters Lodge, Lark Hill Road, Oanewdon - Mr. & Mrs. Oke.
1100/217/88 Add two storey side extension for dining room and study at 3, ConJ.ston Clcse, Rayleigh — Mr. H. Sayer.
1100/219/88 Form vehicular crossing to Rectory Road at 270, Rectory Road, Hawkwell - Mr. P. Clary.
1100/237/88 Single storey rear extension at 43, Purleigh Road, Rayleigh — Mr. H. Ash.
1100/244/88 Erect single storey front extension at 3, Wirnhurst Close, llookley - Mr. & Mrs. D.W. Sawyer.
1100/255/88 Formation of vehicular crossing to Hullbridge Road at 2, Hullbridge Road, Rayleigh - Paula Jane Meyer.
1100/257/es Formation of vehicular crossing to Stambridge Road at 4, Cagefield Cottages, Stanbridgef)ioad, Stambridge — K.L. Rodson. Cl R00/289/88 Two storey side extension at 41, ileycroft Road, Hawkwell - K. James.
ROC/290/88 Single storey rear extension at 36, Queen Elizabeth Chase, Rochford. - Mr. Maclean.
1100/299/88 Porch and canopy to front of dwelling at 2, ShakespearL Avenue, Rayleigh - Mr. N. Commersall.
ROC/241/S8 Add ground floor rear extension at 122, Grove Road, Rayleigh — Mr. & Mrs. W. Harold.
ROC/246/88 Add ground floor side and rear extension for garage, study and lounge at 26, Station Road, Hockley — M.P. Thcmias.
ROC/307/80 Single storey rear and side extension at 39, Shannon Avenue, I Rayleigh — Mrs. Blackwood.
R0O/309/SS Ebctend roof, and bay window and new chimney at 33, Rollytree Gardens, Rayleigh — J. Browning, Esq. ROC/200l/88/LB Replace three first floor windows to front of building at Baptist Church, High Road, Rayleigh — Rayleigh Baptist Church.
REFIJSLS
ROC/93l/87 Outline application to erect one detached bungalow on land adjacent Olements Hall, Victor Gardens, Hawkwell — Mr. G. Stone. Reasons: I. Excessive development in the LG.B. 2. Would create a precedent. 3. Wculd appear cramped in relationship to Clements Hall.
ROC/fl2/88 Construct first floor side extension at 31A, Grecnsward Lane, Hockley — S. Cottrell. Reason: Unacceptable appearance, by reason of unbalanced roof form. Contrary to Council's policy of minimum 1st. between two storey development. ROC/1l5/88 Incorporate land within garden area and lay out tennis court at Alexandra Farm, Lark Hill Road, Canewdon - D. Sealey. Reasons: 1. Would involve this part of the open oountryside being macprorated into private garden space. Development in M.G.B. 2. Tennis court and erection of 3m. high fencing would creat an intrusive and incongruous feature.
R00/l20/88 Single storoy side extension, now roof and chimney at Roaming, Kingsway, HiiLlbridge - Mr. & Mrs. E. James. Reasons: 1. Excessive development in the M.G.B. 2. Would be tantamount to the replacement of the dwelling. .
000574 ROC/l53/88 Add acoess/orossover, excavate aM provide retaining wall to new parking space at 27, London Hill, Rayleigh - Mr. P. Ha.yman. Reason: Insufficient land within applicant's control.
ROC/l77/8S Outline application for residential development (Application A) on land off Wellington Road, Rayleigh — Beazer Homes Limited. Reasons: 1. Fbccessive development in the M.G.B. 2. Insufficient visibility. 3. Sewage embargo. 4. Detrimental to wildlift and local amenities. 5. Contrary to ezisting character of the area. ROc/202/es Conversion of car port to garage and first floor side extension at 35, ¶Peignrnouth Drive, Rayleigh — Mr. C. Rattan. Reason: Overdevelopment of the site and would create a terracing effect in the street soene.
ROC/287/88 First floor extension over garage at 20, Sunnyfield Gardens, Hockley - Mr. & Mrs. Cobb. Reasons: I. Would give a oranrped appearance and be detrimental to the street scene. 2. Would croateundesirable precedent and contrary to Council's policy of mflnmum liii. between two storey development.
4 000575 DELECTA'JThTD BUIIfltIG REGULATION DECISIONS
DATE: 19.5.88
PLAN NO. ADDRESS DESCRIPTION
87/1 1OBA Canada Rest' ,9, Kingaman Farm two bedroomeci chalet Road, hulibridge.
88/1 62 Plot A, 41, Lancaster Road, Raylei :h Bungalow. u88/342 14, Ridgeway, Rayleigh. Rouse & Garage.
)riSB/340 3, Gloucester Avenue, Rayleigh. Cavity Wall Insulation.
"!88/3 14 195 Pltmtherow Avenue, Hookley. Rear extension. ri88/31 3 The Willows, Apton Hall Road Roclif rd Detached Garage.
12 14, Blenheim Close, Hockley. 2(ground & first floor) to convert Grsnn flat into a senu.—integral garage.
'xt88/29 6 30, Tillingham Way, Rayleigh Two Storey extension.
'riSS/297 12, Hill Lane, Hawkwell. Two Storey extension. ii p88/343 7, Combes ..Grove, Rochford. Single Storey extension.
88/201 20, Harrison Gardens Hullbridge. Single Storey rear extension.
88/196 64, Lower Road, Hulibridge. oroposed 2 houses. 88/262 Lamorna & St. Gilgen, Rebels Lane, Provision of Pumpset to provide main Great Wakering. drainage.
88/272 Woodbrid,ge, Rebels Lane, Gt. Waker ng. as above. 864 41, Crouch Avenue, Hullbridge. single storey rear extension. 88/159 9, Brooklyn Drive, Rayleigh. Rooms in roof — with roof lights.
88/158 29, york road, Ashingdon. Rear single storey extension with pitched roof.
88/1 54 6, Hanthro Parade, Rawreth Lane, Ground floor extension. Rayleigh.
se/i 34 61, Rayleigh Avenue, Eastwood. Extension to existing buildings.
86/246 42, Central Avenue, Rochford. Single storey rear extension. 88/152 310, Eastwood Road, Rayleigh. Detached house & garage — Plot 14o. 3, with Private drive access. &s/i55 27, London Hill, Rayleigh. Form car parking area. 88/16) Home Farm, Common Road, Great Wakering. House Type I) (Plot 1 and ij).
. Avenue, Internal alterations and extensions. 88/191 2, Shakeeare Rayleigh.
A 00)576 DEIGATE[D BUILDING REGULATION DECISIONS
hPPROVALS1 DATE: 19,5.88 S
PLAN NO. ADNESS DESCRIPTION
- 8 8/2 35 io, number Close, Rayleigh. Side extension. 88/270 Grosvenor House, Southend Road, Great Wakering. Removal of wall.
88/275 41, Downhall Road, Rayleigh. Form opening in structural wall end. install R.S.J.
88/280 15, Wccdstock Crescent, Hockley. Attached garage.
88/282 18, Rettendon Close, Rayleigh. Garage on the side elevation.
88/284 22, The Limes, Rayleigh. Extension and internal alterations/ Study.
87/1064 44, Dawes Heath Road, Rayleigh. Rear single storey extonsion and side garage.
50, Helena Road, Rayleigh. Underpinning.
19, The Westerings, Hockley. Conversion of chalet to house and garage to childrens room.
88/192 3, Coniston Close, Rayleigh. Double storey extension.
88/195 4, Eastern Road, Rayleigh. Two storey extension.
88/204 39, Albany Road, Rayleigh. Attached garage and rear extension.
86/205 78, Waxwell Road, Kullbndge. Rooms in roof. 86/212 112, Grove R0ad, Rayleigh. Extension to existing kitchen. . as/ny 204, High Street, Gt. Wakering. Single stcrey extension to existing building.
68/229 57, Waacwell Road, Hulibridge. Rear extension.
88/239 3, Wimhurst Close, H0ckley. Front extension.
88/255 18, St. Andrews Road, Rochford. Extension to kitchen and other internal alterations.
The Bungalow, Southend Road, Great Wakering. Additions.
23, Park Gardens, Hawkwell. flat roof garage extension on the side elevation,
88/293 8, Sweyne Avenue, Hawkwell. Single storey rear extension. 08/298 The Bungalow HJ.derly Persons Home, Internal alterations to form day care . Roche Close, Rochford. facilities.
OOO 77 DELEGATED BUILI)DG BGIQDqISI0NS
-— DATE: 19th May 1988
PLAN NO. ADDRESS DESCRIPTION
87/8154 Rayleigh Sports & Recreation Club, Alterations & Extensions. Mill site, Bellingham Lane, Raylei
88/724 6, Victor Gardens Hawkwell. Dormers & Rear Extension. 88/364 1, Great Eastern Road, Eookley. Amended Plan Of: Alterations, Ground & First floor Extensions to form Chalet.
88/308 132, Grove Road, Rayleigh. Single Storey rear extension.
88/306 246, Plumber Avenue, Jiockley. Extend Garage & kitchen form. new Kitohen
88/304 123, Grove Road, Rayleigh. Single Storey rear extension.
•1 81 A 1, Dene Close, Rayleigh. Georgian Style Bay Window. nN88/374 30, Canewdon View Road, Ashingdon. Rooms in roof & ground floor alterations
88/107A 36, Westminister Drive, }Iookley. Ground & first floor Extension.
87/978A la, Knivet Close, Rayleigh. Two Storey frnt Extension.
88/1024 31A, Greensward Lane, Rockley. Games Room (first floor)
t88/372 61, Waxwell Road, fl'4lbnulge. Single Storey rear extension & extend dormers.
it488/37 3 24, Bull Lane, Rayleigh. Existing Integral Garage Conversion.
o8/344 21, Stambridge Road, Rochford. Erection of single storey rear extension
inSS/345 56, The Drive, Rochford. Rear extension to existing outbuilding . for Playroom/storage Area ic68/346 59, Waxwell Road, liullbridge extension to bedroom to first floor.
iriO8/347 Northview Farm, Larkhill Road, Can wdon. Rear extension & alterations to existing.
wi88/370 Meadow View, Lover Road, Jiockley. Garage.
•n88/371 R/o 328 Aohingdon Road, Rochford. Single storey extension to rear of enst rig lounge 4.5m x a. approx. 88/288 11 Danbury Road, Rayleigh. Single storey rear extension.
88/277 3, Upway, Rayleigh. Erection of side extension.
88/311 4, Merryfields, Rockley 2 Storey rear addition plus first floor addition 88/214I 16, Bramfield Road, Rayleigh. rear extension of lounge & kitchen. I DA!JLEID BUUiDING R1KWL.AflcTh1 DECISIONS
DAllE: 19th May 1988S
PLAN NO. .______ADTiRHSS DESCRIPTION
87/731k 21, Downhall Road, Rayleigh. Roonis in the Roof, bn88/375 Roohiord flail, Hall Road, Rochfor' Conversion of existing stable block into five Garages & summerhouse.
88/131 '13, Highams Road, Hockley 2 storey extension.
88/147k 192, Main Road, Ilawkwell. New House.
88/274 1, Orchard Close, Hockley Ground floor side extension.
88/215 28, Lingfield Drive, Rooh.Thrd Conversion of existing roof space into 2. no. nedrooms & w.o.
88/216 7, Navestock Close, RayleLgh. Rear dininft room extension. . 87/1i79 100, Clacanoe Road, Rayleigh First floor rear extnnsxon. 88/315 228, main Road, Hawkwell. Conversion of Suinmershouse and New Link Extension.
88/299 10, Picton Glose, Rayleigh. ront & rear extensions.
88/200k 185, Conway Avenue, Gt. Wakerin Single storey rear extension to existing Property.
88/518 20k, Mount Avenue, Rayleigh. Change Garage into Playroom 88/328 120, Clarence Road, Rayleigh. Single Storey rear extension.
88/331 11, Pevensoy Gardens, Hullbridge. Rear Extension. 87/1076k 42, Conway Avenue, Gt. Wakering 2 storey Rear extension . 88/322 21, West Street, Roohford Proposed W. C, & Shower. 88/292 117, Conway Avenue, Gt. Wakerin& Additional Garage. 88/321 38, Conway Avenue, Gt. Wakering Conversion of existing garage to dining 86/227 The Kings Head P. Et. West Street Minor Alterations to bar and toilets. Rochiord.
87/lOOla golden cross site, roohiord new development consisting of flats & sho a. .
00 579 DELEGATED BUILDING REGULATION DECISIONS XXnZRFJECONS DATE: 19.5.88
PLAN NO. ADDRESS DESCRIPTION -__I I Hill House, 84, High Road, Hookley Extension to lounge,bedroom and porch.
10, Louise Road, Rayleigh. Two storey rear extension.
192, Main Road, Hawkwell. New house.
Pisoo Products Ltd., Brook Road, Rayleigh. Workshop extension. Alterations and extensions. 38/161 45, Woodlands Road, Hookley. Side end rear extension. 98/167 La Casita, Mood Avenue, Hoclcley. Two storey side extension. 38 64, Eastwood Road, Rayleigh. 88/181 1 Dene Close, Rayleigh. Georgian style bay window.
88/186 49, Brook Road, Rayleigh. Office development.
98/189 45, High Road, Hockley. Chalet bungalow. Extension to existing house. 190 36, Spring Gardens, Rayleigh. / 194 Plots 30—36, Albert Road & Rectory Erection of 6 detached houses and 1 Avenue, Ashingdon. detached bungalow. Single storey rear extension to existing 38/200 185, Conway Avenue, Great Wakering property.
Demolition of existing buildings, erect 38/203 Essex Manna, Wallasea Island, Canewdon. new toilet block and office unit. 8B6 10, Banyard Way, Roohfurd. Rooms in roof space. 88/207 3,2 icton Close, Rayleigh Two storey side extension & rooms—in—roo conversion.
38/208 20, Sunnyfield Gardens, Rockley. Extension over garage,
J8/209 "temple View", Shopland Road, Sutt fl 4th Bedroom.
8/2 13 5, Broadlands Road, liockley. Dining room extension.
13/220 122 Main Road, Hockley. Demolition/Reoloation of Stables & Barn.
/221 35, Star Lane. kid. Est., Gt. Wake: 1mg Warehouse Building.
s/223 24, Cordelia Cresoent, Rayleigh roof conversion to form Bedroom & 11. C. e/23o 8, Stile Lane, Rayleigh. Single Storey side extension
151, starnbridge Road, Roohford. construction of two bedrooms in roof.
22, Winbrook Road, Rayleigh. Loft Space ConversLon.
Grove ta/241 132, Road, Rayleigh Pormation of ms in roof single sto rear addjtjatlt BAE;l9t}tj4r 1g8 — PLAN NO. ADDRESS DESCRIPTION — I — 11, Kendal Close, Hullbrid.ge. Room in roof. 14, Banyard Way, Rochiord Lmove existing flat felt roof & oonstrucd tiled roof & internal alterations (en—sui. e) 88/226 2, Hillcrest Avenue, Hullbrige rear extension & loft conversion. 88/242 George & Dragon Public Rouse, Alterations and first floor change of us Churchend, Foulness Island. 250, Walcering Road, Great Walcerf ig Porch Double Garage, 2 storey rear ex ension with internal alterations. S ______DATE • 000581 I