Surrey Act 1985
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Children's 76
CHILDREN'S 76 this Committee agree to make provision in revenue estimates for continuing, on a proportionate basis, the financial aid at present being afforded by Middlesex County Council to the extent shown hereunder to the Voluntary Organisations respectively named, viz.: — £ The Middlesex Association for the Blind ... ... 150 approx. The Southern Regional Association for the Blind ... 49 approx. Middlesex and Surrey League for the Hard of Hearing ... 150 approx. 27. Appointment of Deputy Welfare Officer: RESOLVED: That the Com mittee note the appointment by the Establishment Committee (Appointments Sub-Committee) on 16th November, 1964, of Mr. Henry James Vagg to this post (Scales A/B). (The meeting dosed at 9.10 p.m.) c Chairman. CHILDREN'S COMMITTEE: 30th December, 1964. Present: Councillors Mrs. Nott Cock (in the Chair), Cohen, G. Da vies, Mrs. Edwards, Mrs. Haslam, Mrs. Rees, Rouse, Tackley and B. C. A. Turner. PART I.—RECOMMENDATIONS.—NIL. PART n.—MINUTES. 10. Minutes: RESOLVED: That the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 30th September, 1964, having been circulated, be taken as read and signed as a correct record. 11. Appointment of Children's Officer: RESOLVED: That the Committee re ceive the report of the Town Clerk that the London Borough of Harrow Appointments Sub-Committee on 16th November, 1964, appointed Miss C. L. J. S. Boag, at present Area Children's Officer Middlesex County Coun cil, to the post of Children's Officer in the Department of the Medical Officer of Health with effect from 1st April, 1965, at a salary in accordance with lettered Grades C/D. -
Giving Prescriptions Instead ; This Would Bring the Expendi
43 attending the casualty department-, had increased of latt- HOSPITAL REFORM. years with excessive rapidity. while there had also been an increase of out-patients, and that many cases in both departments were of a trivial character which could be dealt A SPEClAL meeting of the Council of the Charity Organisa- with satisfactorily by general practitioners and for which tion Society was held on June 20th at the United Services hospital aid was unnecessary. The practical suggestions Institntiouto discuss suggestions for the reform of the which he submitted as the result of conference with others were that all cases should a casualty and out-patient departments of London hospitals. casualty be seen by medical officer, who should select from them cases which were urgent Sir JOSHUA FITCH was in the chair and there was a large or of value for educational purposes, referring the rest in attendance. general terms to local medical men or an approved provident Mr. T. CLINTON DENT, surgeon to St. George’s Hospital. dispensary. In the out-patient department also the selec- described an experiment which is about tu be made in tion was to be made by a medical officer. but the suggestions connexion with the New Belgrave Hospital for Children. for disposing of them were more complicated, including a It was proposed to guard against the overgrowth of the limitation of the number of new cases to 15 or 20, a prefer- number of out-patients by limitation of new cases and ence for members of friendly societies, provident dispen- selection and at the same time to place a check upon the saries, and others recommended by their own medical undue multiplication of casualty patients. -
Goschen's Assigned Revenues System and the Chiswick High
‘A bad bargain for local authorities’: Goschen’s Assigned Revenues System and the Chiswick High Road, 1902-1911 Tracey Logan, University of Leicester, ([email protected]) Supervisors: Professor Simon Gunn and Professor Rosemary Sweet Figure 1: A quiet lunchtime on Chiswick High Road (circa 1905).1 Considering a short-stretch of strategically-important highway in Greater London, this paper addresses the impact of a post-1888 financial settlement on local government which underfunded main roads in the pre-First World War decade. Chiswick High Road is a one and three-quarter mile (2.8 km) stretch of the ancient London to Bath ‘Great Western Road’, within the county of Middlesex. As a major London artery it had always been busy, but the turn-of-the-century separation of home and work life added commuters to the High Road’s business and pleasure traffic. This was especially true after 1900 when motor vehicles joined the horses, trams and traction engines pounding its wood-paved surface, increasing road maintenance and improvement costs, including safety measures. Constraints of space limit this paper to main road maintenance. From 1902 Chiswick’s main road funding became precarious, forcing its Urban District Council (UDC) to compensate through increased district rates and borrowing. By 1906 community tension over this posed a threat to its local government, when Chiswick’s Ratepayers Association- backed candidates challenging councillors in four of the district’s six wards.2 It was the most highly- contested poll in over a decade. Ratepayers were not told their high rates and UDC indebtedness were partly due to Middlesex County Council’s (MCC’s) underfunding of their main road and its unfavourable post-1902 reimbursement terms for constituent local authorities. -
77321 River Thames Travel Leaflet V4.Indd
TRAVEL TRADE GUIDE TO The River Thames Oxford Cotswolds Abingdon Lechlade Marlow London Cricklade Wallingford Heathrow Henley Airport Teddington Richmond upon Thames Windsor Goring & Streatley Reading Runnymede www.visitthames.co.uk/traveltrade Delightful riverside towns and villages The towns and villages along the River Thames are ready to welcome your customers The riverside, Marlow Here’s a selection to include in your itineraries. HENLEY ON THAMES LONDON AND GREENWICH This 13th century market town is one of the most The Thames fl ows through London and provides a beautiful towns in England. Henley enjoys a wonderful stunning backdrop to many of the city’s top tourist stretch of river with delightful independent shops, brilliant attractions. The 2,000-year-old river harbours much pubs and great restaurants. It hosts internationally of London’s history, as well as providing a host of renowned sporting events and festivals. Henley-on- sporting and leisure. Discover London on sightseeing Thames, aka Causton, In Midsomer Murders, has river tours with City Cruises; hop-on/hop-off tickets appeared in numerous episodes. The Henley Royal and great special packages combining a tour and visits Regatta takes place early July and is the most famous in to top London attractions. Cruises depart every 30 the world. minutes to Greenwich. GREENWICH is where to fi nd 01491 578 034 the Meridian Line, the famous tea clipper Cutty Sark, the [email protected] Royal Observatory, National Maritime Museum, the Old www.visit-henley.com Royal Naval College including the Painted Hall, The O2, London’s cable car and plenty more. -
Runnymede Community Engagement Plan
Southampton to London Pipeline Project Community Engagement Plan Revision No. 2.0 June 2021 Runnymede Borough Council Southampton to London Pipeline Project Community Engagement Plan – Runnymede Borough Council Contents 1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................1 2 Scope ............................................................................................................................................2 3 Overview of the Project................................................................................................................3 4 Community Engagement Team ...................................................................................................4 5 Community Stakeholders ............................................................................................................5 6 Core Engagement Channels ........................................................................................................6 7 Frequency of engagement ...........................................................................................................8 8 Core Engagement Topics ............................................................................................................9 9 Within Runnymede Borough ..................................................................................................... 10 10 Location-Specific Tactical Communication Plans ................................................................... -
Corporate Peer Challengepeer Challenge Report
Corporate Peer Challenge Runnymede Borough Council 9 th-11th October 2019 Feedback Report 1. Executive Summary The Borough of Runnymede is a largely prosperous district in North West Surrey with a population of population of 88,0001 . It covers 7,804 hectares, of which 6,136 hectares is Green Belt. The Council has an emerging local plan ‘Runnymede 2030 Local Plan’ and has adopted a strong commercial approach to deliver financial sustainability and progress regeneration of its main towns. The Council is one of 11 districts and boroughs in Surrey and has a strong working relationship with the County Council and its neighbouring boroughs. The Council has taken bold decisions to invest in commercial property in order to manage the challenges of falling revenue support grant and other funding sources. It has moved faster than many councils of its size in doing so. Consequently, the Council is in a more financially sustainable position than many other district councils and has taken a clear political decision not to cut customer facing services. The Council has a positive reputation with partners; is well respected; and its strong financial position has afforded it the opportunity to deliver services and, in some instances, take on new services for partners. The Council has clear ambition to extend this further and redefine its role as a place shaper, local service provider and system leader. The Council has demonstrated confidence in taking bold decisions and is now in a position where it needs to invest in enhancing its strategic capacity to channel its ambition on place leadership and identify the next phase for the Council. -
Harrow Urban District Council
3ist July, 1934. Vol. 1—No 6. HARROW URBAN DISTRICT COUNCIL, MINUTES of the Monthly Meeting of the Council held in the Technical School, Station Road, Harrow, on Tuesday, the 31st day of July, 1934. PRESENT: Councillor Mr. T. Charles, J.P. (Chairman). „ Mr. G. F. Telfer (Vice-Chairman). Councillor Mrs. M. E. Webb. Councillor Mr. T. A. Ellement. Mr. W. T. Adams. Mr. A. G. Elliot-Smith. Mr. G. VV. Alien. Mr. D. C. Ellis. ., Mr. A. C. Andrews. Dr. R. Forbes, J.P. ,, Mr. C. Brown. ,, Mr. J. Greer. ,, Mr. A. Buttle. Mr. J. E. Ousey. Mr. F. A. Coles. Mr. D. J. Pratt. Mr. F. P. Cope. Mr. S. J. Rust. ,, Mr. H. Cornish. Mr. J. V. Smith. Mr. R. W. Cowan. ,, Mr. E. G. Swann. ,, Mr. E. L. Cridford. Mr. H. Walker. ,, Dr. N. Crosby. ,, Mr. W. Weston. ,, Mr. H. Dawson. ,, Mr. J. Wibberley. Mr. G. W. B. Wilkins. (131) MINUTES.—The Minutes of the Meeting of the Council held on 3rd July, 1934, being printed, were taken as read and the file copy signed, attention being directed to the following :— (a) an inaccuracy in Minute No. 118, which should refer to children at Roe Green having to attend the new school at D'Arcy Gardens, Kenton ; 3ist July, 1934. 274 (b) Minute No. 119, Resolutions Nod. 664 and 665, page 239—Councillor Cowan not shewn as voting against; (c) Minute No. 105, Resolution Nod. 521, page 202— the grounds for the proposition not stated, i.e., on a point of equity, having regard to the Council's decision to supply surplices for clergy ; and (a) Minute No. -
Statement of Common Ground Surrey Waste Local Plan
Town & Country Planning (Local Planning) (England) Statement of Common Ground Concerning Strategic Planning Policies for Waste Management in Surrey June 2019 Statement of Common Ground between the county council and the boroughs and district councils within Surrey concerning strategic planning for waste management – FINAL v 3.15 - 17 June 2019 Page 1 of 27 Version Amendments Date FINAL v 1.0 27 March 2019 Additional text added: Section 6.4 Reigate & Banstead. Other subsequent Sections FINAL v 2.0 01 April 2019 renumbered. FINAL v 3.0 Confirmation of Mole Valley DC signature 02 April 2019 FINAL v 3.1 Additional bullet under para 6.6 – Oakleaf Farm - Action to resolve disagreement 02 April 2019 Confirmation of Reigate & Banstead BC Signature. Confirmation of Epsom & Ewell BC Signature FINAL v 3.2 08 April 2019 Additional text added: Section 6.9 Waverley Borough. Woking Borough Section renumbered. Amending wording in Section 6.1 - Elmbridge Borough Council - Action to be taken to FINAL v 3.3 08 April 2019 resolve disagreement. FINAL v 3.4 Confirmation that Mike Goodman has signed for Surrey County Council 09 April 2019 FINAL v 3.5 Current status for submission 12 April 2019 FINAL v 3.6 Confirmation of Runnymede BC signature 23 April 2019 Para 5.2.5 - text amended to make it clear that general agreement to ILAS is subject to FINAL v 3.7 25 April 2019 the particular areas of disagreement and points of clarification in Section 6. Confirmation of Tandridge DC signature FINAL v 3.8 29 April 2019 Appendix amended re Woking Core Strategy Confirmation of Woking BC signature FINAL v 3.9 30 April 2019 Confirmation of Guildford BC signature FINAL v 3.10 Minor amendments to para 6.9 1 May 2019 Confirmation of Spelthorne BCsignature FINAL v 3.11 Amendment to Para 6.1 Elmbridge Borough – Action being taken to resolve 22 May 2019 disagreements FINAL v 3.12 Further amendment to Para 6.1 – Action being taken to resolve disagreements 28 May 2019 FINAL v 3.13 Confirmation of Waverley BC signature 5 June 2019 FINAL v 3.14 Confirmation of Surrey Heath BC signature. -
Therunnymede Boroughcouncil Responsetothe Thorpe
The Runnymede Borough Council response to the Thorpe Neighbourhood Plan at Regulation 16 Consultation Sukhpreet Khull, Principal Planning Officer [email protected] Phone: 01932 42 5267 DATE 24 August 2020 1. The purpose of this document The purpose of this document is to set out supporting information for the examination of the Thorpe Neighbourhood Plan and to provide a statement from Runnymede Borough Council. 2. Legal requirements Runnymede Borough Council officers have reviewed the submitted documents against the requirements of Regulation 15 of the Neighbourhood Planning (General) Regulations 2012 (as amended) and relevant legislation and are satisfied that the required documents have been submitted, and that the requirements of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) have been met. 3. Statement from Runnymede Borough Council Runnymede Borough Council welcomes the opportunity to comment on the Thorpe Neighbourhood Plan under Regulation 16. The Borough Council strongly supports and advocates the Neighbourhood Planning Process and has a number of plans being drafted in its own administrative area, together with the formation of new areas and forums. Council Officers have worked closely with the Thorpe Neighbourhood Forum (TNF) to assist them in reaching this stage of the Neighbourhood Planning process. An immense amount of time, effort and hard work has gone into the preparation and revision of the neighbourhood plan (since Regulation 14) that supports the community’s ambitions for the Thorpe Neighbourhood Area; and as such the Council commends the work of the Neighbourhood Forum. Policy TH4 At the Regulation 14 pre-submission consultation stage of the TNP, officers commented on Policy TH4 (Housing Mix and Type, including affordable housing) wording, recommending that it should be clearer and more precise in its policy requirements to ensure it is consistent with the (then) emerging Local Plan Policy SL20 and that the TNP policy does not conflict with (emerging) strategic policy. -
Berkshire Functional Economic Market Area Study
Berkshire Functional Economic Market Area Study Thames Valley Berkshire Local Enterprise Partnership Final Report February 2016 Berkshire Functional Economic Market Area Study Final Report Thames Valley Berkshire Local Enterprise Partnership February 2016 14793/MS/CGJ/LE Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners 14 Regent's Wharf All Saints Street London N1 9RL nlpplanning.com This document is formatted for double sided printing. © Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners Ltd 2016. Trading as Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners. All Rights Reserved. Registered Office: 14 Regent's Wharf All Saints Street London N1 9RL All plans within this document produced by NLP are based upon Ordnance Survey mapping with the permission of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office. © Crown Copyright reserved. Licence number AL50684A Berkshire Functional Economic Market Area Study: Final Report Executive Summary This report has been prepared by Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners (‘NLP’) on behalf of the Thames Valley Berkshire Local Enterprise Partnership (‘TVBLEP’) and the six Berkshire authorities of Bracknell Forest, Reading, Slough, West Berkshire, Windsor and Maidenhead and Wokingham. It establishes the various functional economic market areas that operate across Berkshire and the wider sub-region, in order to provide the six authorities and the TVBLEP with an understanding of the various economic relationships, linkages and flows which characterise the sub-regional economy. The methodological approach adopted for this study has been informed by national Planning Practice Guidance for assessing economic development needs and investigating functional economic market areas within and across local authority boundaries, and been subject to consultation with a range of adjoining authorities and other relevant stakeholders. A range of information and data has been drawn upon across a number of themes as summarised below: Economic and Sector Characteristics Berkshire has recorded strong job growth in recent years, outperforming the regional and national average. -
Licensing and Planning Policy Committee
Public Document Pack Legal and Democratic Services LICENSING AND PLANNING POLICY COMMITTEE Thursday 7 March 2019 at 7.30 pm Council Chamber - Epsom Town Hall The members listed below are summoned to attend the Licensing and Planning Policy Committee meeting, on the day and at the time and place stated, to consider the business set out in this agenda. Councillor Graham Dudley Councillor Chris Frost (Chairman) Councillor Rob Geleit Councillor David Reeve (Vice- Councillor Tina Mountain Chairman) Councillor Martin Olney Councillor Michael Arthur MBE Councillor Humphrey Reynolds Councillor Steve Bridger Councillor Robert Foote Yours sincerely Chief Executive For further information, please contact Sandra Dessent, tel: 01372 732121 or email: [email protected] AGENDA 1. QUESTION TIME To take any questions from members of the the Public Please note: Members of the Public are requested to inform the Democratic Servicers Officer before the meeting begins if they wish to ask a verbal question to the Committee. 2. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST Members are asked to declare the existence and nature of any Disclosable Pecuniary Interests in respect of any item of business to be considered at the meeting. 3. MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING (Pages 3 - 6) The Committee is asked to confirm as a true record the Minutes of the Meeting of the Committee held on January 24 2019 (attached) and to authorise the Chairman to sign them. 4. CORPORATE PLAN: KEY PRIORITY TARGETS FOR 2019 TO 2020 (Pages 7 - 12) This report presents the Committee with its Key Priority Targets for 2019 to 2020. 5. PROGRESS ON THE LOCAL PLAN (Pages 13 - 84) The Committee is asked to note the continued forward progress being made in preparing the new Local Plan; and the contents of the Local Plan Annual Monitoring Report and agree to its publication on the Council’s website 6. -
Runnymede Borough Council Electoral Review Warding Pattern
Runnymede Borough Council Electoral Review Warding Pattern Proposal 1 Contents Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 3 Electoral Cycle & Council Size Submission ................................................................. 4 Electorate Population Size ................................................................................................ 4 Warding Proposal ....................................................................................................................... 5 Development of proposed warding pattern .................................................................. 5 The Proposed Warding Pattern ........................................................................................ 6 Addlestone North ................................................................................................................. 7 Addlestone South ................................................................................................................ 8 Chertsey Riverside .............................................................................................................. 9 Chertsey St Ann’s .............................................................................................................. 10 Egham Hythe ....................................................................................................................... 11 Egham Town .......................................................................................................................