DOCSLIB.ORG

HS2 Petition in the House of Lords for Ruislip Residents Association

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
HS2 Petition in the House of Lords for Ruislip Residents Association Ruislip Residents’ Association Petition in the House of Lords Against the High Speed Rail (London – West Midlands Bill) To the House of Lords Session 2015–16 PETITION against the High Speed Rail (London – West Midlands) Bill THE PETITION OF RUISLIP RESIDENTS’ ASSOCIATION Declares that: 1. The petitioners are specially and directly adversely affected by the whole Bill. 2. Your petitioners Your petitioners are the Ruislip Residents’ Association, founded in 1919 as a non- political organization to represent the community of Ruislip, in the county of Middlesex. Your petitioners have a subscribed membership of over 3,000 households in Ruislip. Your petitioners have taken every opportunity to engage with HS2 Ltd and have been active members of the South Ruislip to Ickenham Community Forum. Your petitioners also petitioned against the Bill in the House of Commons. 3. Your petitioners’ concerns 3.1 Extending the Old Oak Common / Ruislip Tunnel Your petitioners are aware that the Old Oak Common / Ruislip tunnel, as planned, ends at Ruislip Public Golf Course, and the route then continues overland, across the Colne Valley Regional Park to another tunnel under the M25. This will involve damaging Ruislip Public Golf Course, building a tunnel portal directly behind a residential street, bridging the River Pinn and an important local road, Breakspear Road South, demolition of several houses and part of the MSD Animal Health labs, one of the local employers, and may cause disruption to the Chiltern Line. At the time of petitioning the House of Commons there was a requirement to provide provision for junctions to and from the Heathrow Spur on this section of the line and these junctions were one of the major reasons HS2 Ltd gave for not extending the tunnel, claiming that building underground junctions would be unnecessarily expensive. The Heathrow Spur provision has now been dropped from the bill and so these objections no longer stand. The location of the tunnel portal at West Ruislip has also led to the tunnel under the residential areas of Ruislip between West End Road and West Ruislip Bridge (the western tunnel portal) is shallower than your petitioners - 1 - Ruislip Residents’ Association Petition in the House of Lords Against the High Speed Rail (London – West Midlands Bill) were led to believe by HS2 Ltd by up to 5m. This has led to considerable concern to homeowners in the area. Your petitioners request your Honourable House to require the nominated undertaker to ensure that the tunnel is extended to meet up with the M25 tunnel, or alternatively, the start of the Colne Valley Viaduct. This will allow the tunnel portal to be built away from residential properties, avoiding up to seven years of 24-hours-a- day noise and disruption to the houses in The Greenway. It will also mean that no bridge works, are needed to cross the River Pinn and Breakspear Road South, and this will reduce the damage to community facilities. Your petitioners also request that the nominated undertaker be required to use the resulting longer length of tunnel to increase the depth of the tunnel beneath the residential areas of Ruislip between West End Road and West Ruislip Bridge (the western tunnel portal). 3.2 Closure or Suspension of Hillingdon Outdoors Activity Centre (HOAC) Your petitioners are concerned that the construction of the Colne Valley Viaduct, through the middle of HOAC, will force the Centre to close or relocate. This is an important local facility providing services to the youth of the London Borough of Hillingdon, and beyond, and especially disabled youngsters. It is a jewel in the community’s crown. Your petitioners request your Honourable House to require the nominated undertaker to ensure that this important local facility is preserved, without any lengthy period of non-operation. This will require a new site and full relocation. Your petitioners consider it important that the new HOAC should have all the facilities of the previous one (including high wire climbing, cave simulator, etc.) but in a purpose designed setting with full disabled facilities. Your Petitioners request your Honourable House to require that relocation should take place before the old site is forced to close so that service can be continuous. 3.3 Removal of Two/Three Holes at Ruislip Public Golf Course Your petitioners are concerned that the taking of land for the Ruislip Tunnel Portal from Ruislip Public Golf Course will leave it with only 15 or 16 holes and that the proximity of the large tunnel head house to the existing Golf Centre will damage its use as a recreational amenity. Your Petitioners request your Honourable House to require the nominated undertaker to ensure that the golf course be reconfigured before work begins on the tunnel and head house. There is additional land to the north of the existing course that could be incorporated into it and the whole course could then be professionally - 2 - Ruislip Residents’ Association Petition in the House of Lords Against the High Speed Rail (London – West Midlands Bill) redesigned so that the land needed by HS2 Ltd is freed up and the course can continue in full use whilst HS2 is being constructed. Your petitioners request your Honourable House to require the nominated undertaker to ensure that the tunnel head house be redesigned so that it does not dominate the Golf Centre, or that the Golf Centre be re-sited elsewhere in the course as part of the reconfiguration. 3.4 Construction Traffic Your petitioners are concerned about the very high levels of construction traffic mentioned in the Environmental Statement and later plans, including running lorries through already congested residential and shopping streets, passing several schools, without any plans as to how the roads will cope with the added traffic, and very few plans to improve the road system to cope with at least seven years of construction. Since the Environmental Statement was written a large new housing estate has been constructed adjacent to the Ickenham High Road (a construction route for the tunnel portal site) and another is in the process of being built next to it. These are both on the site of the former RAF West Ruislip. A recent murder on Ickenham High Road led to its total closure for a day. Within an hour of the closure the entire north of the Borough of Hillingdon was gridlocked. This demonstrated just how sensitive the local road system is to any obstruction or delay. Your Petitioners have been informed by their police liaison officer that the Metropolitan Police are not meeting their response time targets in the north of the London Borough of Hillingdon, and that they fear that the congestion caused by large quantities of HS2 construction traffic will exacerbate the problem. The inference of this is that the same problem will apply to other emergency services, but your petitioners do not have direct contact with them. Your petitioners request your Honourable House to require the nominated undertaker to produce and operate properly designed traffic plans that take into account the current and growing level of traffic in your Petitioners’ community, and, if necessary, propose and fund suitable road improvements and/or relief roads to ensure the smooth flow of traffic at all times. Your petitioners request that the communities of Ruislip, Harefield and Ickenham should be able to carry on their lives with the minimum of traffic problems whilst HS2 is being constructed. - 3 - Ruislip Residents’ Association Petition in the House of Lords Against the High Speed Rail (London – West Midlands Bill) 3.5 Disposal of Tunnelling Spoil Your petitioners are appalled at the plan to dispose of the tunnelling and earthwork spoil on the green fields of Ickenham and Harefield. At the very last Community Forum meeting, HS2 Ltd announced that instead of removing the tunnelling spoil to use in building other parts of the line, they would now dump it on the rare green fields of Ickenham and Harefield, some of the few fields in Greater London. Your petitioners had no opportunity to discuss this development. Your petitioners are concerned over the safety of this proposal and the appalling effect it will have on the landscape of the area, destroying existing views across London. From what your petitioners can deduce from the information provided by HS2 Ltd this will lead to the destruction of many mature trees including a large number of lone “focus” trees that help create the traditional English landscape look. Your Petitioners request your Honourable House to require the nominated undertaker to ensure that this plan is abandoned and for the tunnelling spoil to be re- used as earlier planned, or disposed of in a more environmentally-sound manner, such as backfilling open mine workings, etc. It could be transported from the railhead that HS2 Ltd plan to build between Ickenham and Harefield. 4. The prayer The petitioners therefore ask the House of Lords that they, or someone representing them in accordance with the rules and Standing Orders of the House, be given an opportunity to give evidence on some or all of the issues raised in this petition to the Select Committee which considers this Bill. AND the petitioners remain, etc. GRAHAM BARTRAM, Chairman & Roll B Agent, Ruislip Residents’ Association For and on behalf of Ruislip Residents’ Association 17 April 2016 - 4 - Ruislip Residents’ Association Petition in the House of Lords Against the High Speed Rail (London – West Midlands Bill) HOUSE OF LORDS SESSION 2015-16 HIGH SPEED RAIL (LONDON - WEST MIDLANDS) BILL _______________________________ PETITION OF RUISLIP RESIDENTS’ ASSOCIATION ______________________________ AGAINST, BY COUNSEL, & c. Graham Bartram Chairman & Roll B Agent Ruislip Residents’ Association 14 Bell View Manor Ruislip Middlesex HA4 7LH 01895 673310 (Home) 07941 295248 (Mobile) [email protected] - 5 - .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Ickenham HCA FINAL 2018
    Ickenham Heritage and Character Assessment November 2018 Ickenham Heritage and Character Assessment Quality information Prepared by Checked by Approved by Sam Griffiths Richard Hammond Mary Kucharska Landscape Architect, AECOM Associate Landscape Architect, Senior Consultant, AECOM AECOM Joe Critchley Built Heritage Consultant, AECOM Revision History Revision Revision date Details Name Position A 03/10/18 Incorporation of Sam Griffiths Landscape Architect Ickenham Neighbourhood Group Comments B 15/11/18 Incorporation of Sam Griffiths Landscape Architect Locality’s comments Prepared for: Locality AECOM 2 Ickenham Heritage and Character Assessment Prepared for: Ickenham Neighbourhood Forum Prepared by: AECOM Infrastructure & Environment UK Limited 36 Storey's Way Cambridgeshire Cambridge CB3 0DT UK T: +44 1223 488 000 aecom.com © 2018 AECOM Limited. All Rights Reserved. This document has been prepared by AECOM Limited (“AECOM”) in accordance with its contract with Locality (the “Client”) and in accordance with generally accepted consultancy principles, the budget for fees and the terms of reference agreed between AECOM and the Client. Any information provided by third parties and referred to herein has not been checked or verified by AECOM, unless otherwise expressly stated in the document. AECOM shall have no liability to any third party that makes use of or relies upon this document Prepared for: Locality AECOM 3 Ickenham Heritage and Character Assessment Table of Contents 1. Introduction ..............................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix to Item 8 on the Cabinet Agenda That Has Been Circulated Separately
    Cabinet 14th October 2010 To: Members of the Cabinet cc: All Councillors, Chief Officers Due to size, please find attached the appendix to Item 8 on the Cabinet agenda that has been circulated separately: Item 8 The Single Conversation – Draft Borough Investment Plan Mark Braddock Democratic Services Draft Borough Investment Plan for Hillingdon 2010 – 2014 www.hillingdon.gov.uk Contents Introduction ..............................................................................................................4 Executive summary..................................................................................................6 Background ..............................................................................................................6 1.0 This is Hillingdon .....................................................................................10 1.1 Why invest in Hillingdon?....................................................................14 2.0 People .......................................................................................................21 2.1 Priority one: Improving health and wellbeing....................................21 2.2 What we will do: ...................................................................................31 2.3 What we have done ..............................................................................31 2.4 Priority two: Strong and active communities ....................................33 2.5 What we will do: ...................................................................................33
    [Show full text]
  • London Borough of Hillingdon Local Development
    London Borough of Hillingdon Local Development Framework Submission Core Strategy October 2011 Consultation Statement - Regulation 30 (1) (d) Part 1: Issues and Options (Spring 2005) Consultation Statement Regulation 30 (1) (d) Part 1: Issues and Options (Spring 2005) Introduction 1.1 The Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, whose relevant provisions came into force on 28 September 2004, introduced a new development plans system requiring the creation of Local Development Frameworks (LDFs). The LDF will replace the existing Hillingdon Unitary Development Plan (UDP) adopted in 1998 and subsequent Saved Policies UDP (September 2007). Unlike the UDP, the LDF will comprise a series of planning documents, both statutory and non-statutory that will set out Hillingdon’s policies and spatial strategy for meeting the economic, environmental and social aims and aspirations of the existing and future communities of the Borough. 1.2 The Town and Country Planning (Local Development) (England) Regulations 2004 set out the consultation requirements in preparing a Core Strategy. Amendments to the Regulations in 2008 and 2009 have since been adopted. It requires: • that we consult with key bodies as well as local people and businesses and take their comments into account (Regulation 25) • that we produce a statement setting out who was consulted, how they were consulted, what the main issues were and how the representations were taken into account (Regulation 30) 1.3 This statement has been prepared in accordance with Regulation 30 (1)(d) and sets out: • Who the Borough Council consulted on its Core Strategy DPD under Regulation 25; • how they were consulted; • a summary of the main issues raised as a result of the consultation; and • how those main issues have been addressed in the Core Strategy DPD.
    [Show full text]
  • (Public Pack)Agenda Document for Cabinet, 21/06/2018 19:00
    Public Document Pack Cabinet Date: THURSDAY, 21 JUNE 2018 To all Members of the Cabinet: Time: 7.00 PM Ray Puddifoot MBE (Chairman) Leader of the Council Venue: COMMITTEE ROOM 6 - David Simmonds CBE (Vice-Chairman) CIVIC CENTRE, HIGH Deputy Leader / Education & Children’s Services STREET, UXBRIDGE Jonathan Bianco Finance, Property & Business Services Keith Burrows Meeting Members of the Public and Planning, Transportation & Recycling Details: Media are welcome to attend this meeting and observe the Philip Corthorne public business discussed. Social Services, Housing, Health & Wellbeing Douglas Mills This meeting will also be Community, Commerce & Regeneration broadcast live on the Richard Lewis Council’s YouTube Channel. Central Services, Culture & Heritage Published: Wednesday, 13 June 2018 Contact: Mark Braddock Tel: 01895 250470 Email: [email protected] This Agenda is available online at: www.hillingdon.gov.uk Lloyd White Putting our residents first Head of Democratic Services London Borough of Hillingdon, 3E/05, Civic Centre, High Street, Uxbridge, UB8 1UW www.hillingdon.gov.uk Putting our residents first Useful information for residents and visitors Watching & recording this meeting You can watch the public part of this meeting on the Council's YouTube channel, live or archived after the meeting. Residents and the media are also welcome to attend in person, and if they wish, report on the public part of the meeting. Any individual or organisation may record or film proceedings as long as it does not disrupt proceedings. It is recommended to give advance notice of filming to ensure any particular requirements can be met. The Council will provide seating areas for residents/public, high speed WiFi access to all attending and an area for the media to report.
    [Show full text]
  • 6 | South Ruislip to Ickenham HS2 London-West Midlands May 2013
    PHASE ONE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT Community Forum Area Report 6 | South Ruislip to Ickenham HS2 London-West Midlands May 2013 ENGINE FOR GROWTH DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT Community Forum Area Report ENGINE FOR GROWTH 6 I South Ruislip to Ickenham High Speed Two (HS2) Limited, 2nd Floor, Eland House, Bressenden Place, London SW1E 5DU Telephone 020 7944 4908 General email enquiries: [email protected] Website: www.hs2.org.uk © Crown copyright, 2013, except where otherwise stated Copyright in the typographical arrangement rests with the Crown. You may re-use this information (not including logos or third-party material) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence. To view this licence, visit www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/ or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or e-mail: [email protected]. Where we have identified any third-party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. To order further copies contact: DfT Publications Tel: 0300 123 1102 Web: www.dft.gov.uk/orderingpublications Product code: ES/25 Printed in Great Britain on paper containing at least 75% recycled fibre. CFA Report – South Ruislip to Ickenham/No 6 I Contents Contents Draft Volume 2: Community Forum Area Report – South Ruislip to Ickenham/No 6 5 Part A: Introduction 6 1 Introduction 7 1.1 Introduction to HS2 7 1.2 Purpose of this report 7 1.3 Structure of this report 9 Part B: South
    [Show full text]
  • United States Military and Intelligence Bases in Britain – a Briefing
    Quaker Peace & Social Witness Peace Campaigning and Networking Group United States military and intelligence bases in Britain – a briefing The US eavesdropping station at Menwith Hill, North Yorkshire. (Photo - Ian Prichard). David Gee, June 2004 United States military and intelligence bases in Britain – a briefing..............................................3 Appendix I: Major US bases on British territory ...................................................................... 14 Appendix II: Spotlight on Lakenheath, Menwith Hill and Fylingdales .......................................... 17 Appendix III: Resources...................................................................................................... 20 References........................................................................................................................ 21 A protester’s encounter with the US military presence in Britain1 The US base at Croughton in Northamptonshire was one of several on British territory involved with supporting the invasion and military occupation of Iraq from 2003. In March 2003, Lindis Percy entered the base in a nonviolent protest against the war, which she believed to be immoral and contrary to international law. When apprehended by US security officers, she was thrown to the ground and restrained using handcuffs and leg shackles while a woman US military police officer conducted a full body search in a degrading way. Lindis was then forced to lie face-down in a truck to be taken into detention while British police were called to make an arrest. She was known to those detaining her, in the words of one, as ‘a peaceful, nonviolent Quaker’ and had not resisted their intervention. Lindis was charged with Aggravated Trespass (Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994), which applies to a person who trespasses with intent to intimidate, obstruct or disrupt a lawful activity.2 She was refused bail, remanded in custody for one week at Holloway Prison and then granted bail with strict conditions.
    [Show full text]
  • RAF WEST RUISLIP, HIGH ROAD ICKENHAM Development
    Report of the Head of Planning and Enforcement Address: RAF WEST RUISLIP, HIGH ROAD ICKENHAM Development: REDEVELOPMENT OF SITE FOR A MIXED USE COMPRISING 415 DWELLINGS (CLASS C3), AN 80-UNIT ELDERLY CARE HOME (CLASS C2), PLAYING FIELD AND OPEN SPACE WITH ASSOCIATED CAR PARKING (468 SPACES) AND ACCESS ARRANGEMENTS (INCORPORATING JUNCTION IMPROVEMENTS TO EXISTING HIGHWAYS) (OUTLINE APPLICATION). LBH Ref Nos: 38402/APP/2007/1072 Drawing Nos: None Date North Committee 09 July 2007 applications approved at Committee 1.0 CONSULTATIONS 1.1 Internal Consultees Legal A draft Deed of Variation to the existing S106 and S278 Agreements is currently under negation and is close to completion, subject to Committee Approval. Highways Engineer The occupation of no more than 30 residential units on the development site prior to substantial completion of highways works will not have a material impact on the operation of the highway network. 2.0 RECOMMENDATION 2.1 To proceed with a Deed of Variation to the Section 106 Agreement, namely: That delegated authority be granted to the Head of Planning and Enforcement to negotiate and accept a Deed of Variation to the S106 Agreement dated 10 July 2007 and S278 Agreement dated 5 January for RAF West Ruislip, High Road Ickenham, to require the owner: 'To carry out the Works at its own expense in accordance with the approved Works Scheme employing a contractor approved by the North Planning Committee - 26 h August 2010 PART I – MEMBERS, PUBLIC AND PRESS Council and to ensure the Works and the TRO Works are Substantially Completed prior to the Occupation of thirty (30) or more residential units on the land outlined in red on the plan attached to this Deed and marked completions plan' 3.0 KEY PLANNING ISSUES 3.1 Outline planning permission was granted for the redevelopment of the site on the 10 th July 2007 following determination by the North Planning Committee on 9th July 2007.
    [Show full text]
  • Electoral Review of the London Borough of Hillingdon
    Electoral Review of the London Borough of Hillingdon 1. Introduction The Local Government Boundary Commission for England (LGBCE) is undertaking a review of the London Borough of Hillingdon's local government electoral arrangements. The outcome of the review will be implemented for the May 2022 Council elections. 2. Scope 2.1 The review will cover the entire Borough. The statutory criteria that the LGBCE will apply when making its proposals are:- The need to secure electoral equality (a consistent number of electors per Councillor) Community identity (strong ward boundaries that reflect communities); and Securing effective and convenient local government (coherent wards) 2.2 The review was initiated in January 2018 and the preliminary stage will determine future Council size; i.e. the number of elected Councillors. The provisional decision on Council size by the LGBCE will inform the next stage of the review, which will consider size and number of wards, ward names, ward boundaries and the number of councillors to represent each ward. 2.3 The LGBCE will form its view about the right Council size by considering the following three areas: The governance arrangements of the Council and how it takes decisions across the broad range of its responsibilities; The Council's scrutiny functions relating to its own decision making and the Council's responsibilities to outside bodies; and The representational role of Members in the local community and how they engage with electors, conduct casework and represent the Council on local partner
    [Show full text]
  • Public Land for Housing Programme 2015-20 Progress Report Annex E
    Public Land for Housing Programme 2015-20 Progress Report Annex E: Data on progress of 90% of sites sold through both the previous (2011-15) and current (2015-20) Public Land for Housing Programmes up to the end of March 2018. Number of homes Forecast housing Date planning Date planning Part of larger Housing capacity in Number of homes Number of homes completed by March Tenure no. of Tenure no. of Type no. of semi- Unique ref Sold by dept Site name Site address Site postcode Local authority Disposal year capacity Planning Status Planning reference application submitted permission secured Nature of plan for site application planning application Date started on site started not completed completed to date 2017 Tenure no. of freehold leasehold unknown Type no. of detached detached Type no. of terrace Type no. of flats Type no. of unknown ACIO Barnstable 2 Yet to reach planning PSLR0001 MoD Litchdon Street Barnstaple EX32 8ND North Devon 2013/14 1 stage x x x Not available Unknown x x x x 0 x x x x x x x x ACIO Torquay 180 Yet to reach planning PSLR0002 MoD Union Street Torquay TQ2 5QP Torbay 2013/14 1 stage x x x Not available Unknown x x x x 0 x x x x x x x x Development PSLR0003 MoD ACIO Wembley High Road London HA0 2AF Brent 2013/14 1 completed 13/2916 41556 04/12/2013 Residential N 2 09/03/2016 0 2 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 AHL Residential sales/ built surrender/freehold Development residential PSLR0004 MoD sales Various locations Various Unknown 2011/12 143 completed x x x development N/A 143 x x 143 143 x x 143 x x x x 143 Aldershot Urban
    [Show full text]
  • 5 Year Supply of Deliverable Housing Sites 2014/2015 - 2019/2020
    5 YEAR SUPPLY OF DELIVERABLE HOUSING SITES 2014/2015 - 2019/2020 March 2015 Executive Summary • The current monitoring target for Hillingdon is 425 residential units per annum. Following the adoption of the Further Alterations to the London Plan 2011, the annualised target for Hillingdon will increase to 559 residential units. • Including a 5% buffer and taking account of 3010 dwellings already delivered, the 5 year housing provision target for Hillingdon amounts to 1,810 dwellings from 1st April 2014 to 31st March 2020. • The Council has identified a healthy supply of specific deliverable sites that have the capacity to deliver 2,781 net additional dwellings over the next 5 years. • This represents 153% of the minimum 5 year supply target (1,810) dwellings) or a surplus of 1,061 residential dwellings against the target • Hillingdon can demonstrate a 5 year supply of deliverable housing sites, meeting and exceeding the requirements of paragraph 47 of the National Planning Policy Framework. 1 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Purpose This report considers the supply of housing land in the London Borough of Hillingdon that is available and deliverable for future residential development over the next 5 years. It demonstrates the extent to which commitments and future development sites identified in the London Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment 2013 and the Council's emerging Local Plan contribute to a rolling 5 year supply of housing land in Hillingdon. 1.2 The 5 year period The 5 year supply period must be measured from the end of the current financial year. Therefore, this report assesses housing land supply for the 5 year period, starting 1st of April 2014 to 31st March 2020.
    [Show full text]
  • North Planning Committee Area up to 31 December 2015 Where the Council Has Received and Holds Funds
    Report of the Head of Planning and Enforcement S.106/278 PLANNING AGREEMENTS - QUARTERLY FINANCIAL MONITORING REPORT SUMMARY This report provides financial information on s106 and s278 agreements in the North Planning Committee area up to 31 December 2015 where the Council has received and holds funds. RECOMMENDATION That Members note the contents of this report. INFORMATION 1. Paragraph 24 of the Government's Planning Practice Guidance, encourages local planning authorities to make publically available information with regard to what planning obligation contributions are received by the Council and how these contributions are used. This ensures transparency and is therefore considered to be good practice. Details of the financial obligations held by the Council are reported to Cabinet on a quarterly basis through the "Planning Obligations Financial Monitoring Report". The report informs members and the public of the progress being made in the allocation of financial obligations and their implementation. 2. The information contained in this report was reported to Cabinet on 17 March 2016 and updates the information received by Cabinet in December 2015. The attached Appendix 1 provides updated financial information on s106 and s278 agreements in the North Planning Committee area up to 31 December 2015, where the Council has received and holds funds. 3. Appendix 1 shows the movement of income and expenditure taking place during the financial year. The agreements are listed under Cabinet portfolio headings. Text that is highlighted in bold indicates key changes since the previous report of January 2016 to the Planning Committee. Figures shown in bold under the column headed ‘Total income as at 31/12/15’ indicate new income received.
    [Show full text]
  • TC Sept 2009 V1.0 Issue.Pub
    SUMMER A ROUND R UISLIP Mayor Shirley Harper- tion ents’ Associa O’Neill is congratulated Ruislip Resid for winning the standing ier on a skateboard medal Town Cr during the skateboard park’s 5th anniversary “jam”. (see p 5) The Voice of Ruislip Residents September 2009 Sunday, 6th September, was the day to Help the Heroes . All sorts com- pleted sponsored laps around Ruislip Lido and, with other attractions on Willow Lawn, including a bouncy castle and a display of military vehicles, Inside this issue: more than £13,000 was raised for the charity. Well done everybody! Despite the very serious intent behind the event, a good time was had by all. And when someone shouted “the pub’s open”, General Meeting well, the race was on! Community Notice Board Chairman’s Round-up Harrumph!...why didn’t anyone tell me I had to do running? Better take my tie off... Warrender School Reports Top Marks It may have only been a day or two, but when the History: summer appeared, didn’t we make the most of it! The Ruislip Residents’ Associa- Lido, the beach and its water playground (pictured) tion 1919-2009 could easily have been mistaken for a coastal resort! And there were visitors from all over, not just Ruislip. Planning Matters How wonderful it would be to bring the lake back into safe leisure use. Mr Health Matters ...you wait years for Take a look at the back cover for more of what went os- Right, then two prop on around Ruislip this summer. Ah well! It’ll soon nce! enough be next year….
    [Show full text]