INDEX

1985

January - December Ti r ' ririr r ¶'"' '1ff II rrr ri'r 'i

.1

MINUTE INDEX 1985

a

ACCESS TO INFORMATION

Local Government (Access to Information) Bill: 143,538

ALLOTMENTS

Allotment Competition 1985; 319,570 Deepdene Allotment Site: 326,374,727(i),749

ANCLIAN WATER AUTHORITY

Anglian Water Matters: 99 Capital Programme 1985/86 to 1989/90 348 Hulibridge Pumping Station: 737,773

AUDIT

LGORU — Report on Parks Section: 734 BUDGET STRATEGY

(See also Capital Programme) 32,58 Computer Centre Budget: 33

BYE—LAWS

Proposed Bye—Laws at Plea8ure Fairs: 425 Straw and Stubble Burning: 595 Burning of Crop Residues: 696 Infringement at Hullbridge Playing Field: 733 Infringement at Ashingdon Playing Field: 733 CAPITAL PROGRAMME

1984/87 Capital Programme: 32,33,89,92

Bramerton Road — Private Street Works: 139 Day Centre & CAB, Rochford: 148 Supplementary Capital Estimates: 484 Spencers Nursery Site: 547 Horse Riding Trails in : 636 Little Wheatleys, Rayleigh: 582,659 Bell Rouse, Wakering: 582,659 Public Conveniences, Hullbridge: 582,659

CARAVAN SITES

Site Lthence Conditions: 84,301 Riverside Village Trailer Park: 301 Tower Caravan Site, Hullbridge: 311,421 NAPAS Exhibition 1985: 327 Distances Between Caravans: 595

CARING FOR 2K-MENTAL PATIENTS IN THE COMMUNITY

Visit to Runwell Hospital: 284,325 Provision of Group Home: 418,419,481,491 Assistance by Leisure Services Committee: 452 Assistance by Development Services Committee: 472

CAR PARKING

General: 366,507 ,540 Market Car Park: 49 Rayleigh Town Centre: 111 Assandune Villas, Rochford: 188 Websters Way Car Park: 215,249,365,666,670 Approach Car Park: 228 Sunday Market, Rayleigh; 351 King George V Playing Field, Rayleigh: 441,506,539 Car Parking Charges: 541,760 Golden Cross Parade: 633,674,678,680,750 Southend Road, Hockley: 667 Hullbridge Playing Field: 726,771

CHARGE S

Review of Charges 1985/86: 34 1985/86 Charges for Leisure Facilities: 88 Review of Car Parking Charges: 541,760

Contd/ CLEMENTS BALL LEISURE CENTRE

Provision of Licensed Bar: 20 Security Surveillance Equipment: 21,50(a) Jacuzzi Bath: 22,50(b) Riding for the Disabled — Gymkhana: 23 Training Facilities for International Athletes; 26 Alterations to Ear Entrance: 89 Facilities; 90,134 Use of Facilities by Disabled: 91,605 Second Access: 158,381,446,474,500 Break—Ins: 162 Sports Goods Franchise: 223 Royal Visit: 232 Replacement of Vending Machines: 378 Spencers Nursery — Use of: 444,547 Use of Tennis Court: 603 New Access— Taffic Management: 650 Water Flume: 722 Screening to Roof Plant: 723 Craft Fair: 730

COAST PROTECTION

Financing of Coast Protection: 461 Effects of Thames Barrier: 461 Flood Prevention and Coastal Protection: 634

COMMITTEES AND REPORTS OP

Distribution of Agenda/Minutes: 36,63,210 Revised Programme of Meetings: 58 Special Development Services Committee: 201 Visit to Committee Meeting by Girl Guides: 313 Finance Report: 120,209,362,483,535,757 Format of Committee Agenda: 536 Special Policy & Resources 6.11.85: 544

COMMITTEES — PANELS OP

District Plan Working Party: 115,275,655,744 Joint Staff & Safety Panel: 126 Joint Works & Safety Panel: 126 Community Centres Panel: 140 Chairman's Panel: 140,208,482(c),655(b),756(c) Audit Panel: 140,176,208,655(c) Er-Officio Membership: 371 Baltic Wharf Working Party: 396,512,531 Twinning Sub—Committee: 482(a) Rate Consultation Panel: 4-82(b),756 Staffing Sub--Committee: 482(d),655(a),655(d),756 Horse Riding Working Party: 636748 Economic Development Panel: 756(c) Charities Panel: 772

C ontd/ ...... * . COMMITTEE STRUCTURE

Cycle of Meetings 1985/86; 142 Appointment of Standing Committees 1985/86; 261 Cycle of Meetings 1986/87: 766

COMMITTEES — TERMS OF REFERENCE

Amendments to: 142,226 Health & Housing Services Committee: 422 Leisure Sen ices Committee: 451

CONMIJNITY CENTRES

Rayleigh Grange: 92,318,600 Rayleigh'Grange Mflagement Committee: 317,438,506,599,678 Freight louse Management Committee; 598

COMPULSORY IMPROVEMENT

See; Unfit Houses

COMPULSORY PURCHASE O1CERS

Grange Village, Rayleigh: 146

COMPUTERS — USE OF

C—View: 369

CONFERENCE S C.I.P.F.A.: 489(a) A.D.C.: 489(b) Family Practitioner Committee: 543,662 Institute of Housing Conference: 588 Essex County Council Social Services Conference: 764

CONTRACTS

Lift Installation — Spa Court, Hockley; 12 Public Conveniences — High Street, Gt. Wakering; 13 Progress Reports: 14,94,192,324,427,611,699 Cleaning Contracts: 42,235 No. 1010 — Extension to Britton Court: 74,134,156 Day Centre & C.A.E., Rochford No. 1004: 148 No. 1096 — Painting at Rayleigh (West): 197 No. 1099 — Painting at Rayleigh (Central); 197 Trade Refuse Removal; 212 Contract 1100 — Redecoration (Rochford North) 308 Contract 1101 — Lift Installation, Pembroke House 308 Contract 1105 — Renewal of Boiler Equipment, Goodmans, Gt. Wakering 308 Sun Lounge — Mill Hall: 329 No. 1117 — Re—roofing at Malting Villas/Worcester Drive: 433 No. 1135 — Construction of Golden Cr088 Car Park: 553 No. 1114 — Replacement of Windows: 558 Clearance of Private Drain Blockages: 647 No. 1104 — Replacement of Windpws at Goodmans, Gt. Wakering 706

contd/...... COUNCILLORS

I.E. Nokea: 46,56)574 B.A. crick: 71407,176,569,782 Mrs EM. Hart: 149 Miss B.G.J. Lovett 149,389,664,678 PA. Beckers: 175 Royal Garden Patties: 181 C.J. Gardner: 64,Para 13 P.R. Hawke: 166,Para 6 T. Fawell: 202,Para lB R.H. Boyd: 229 E.M. Heath: 248,255,383 J. Parkinson: 248,255 Appointment of Council Chairman, Vice Chairman, Leader 1985/86: 256 T.L. Dean: 307,312,Paras 19/20,389 D. Wade: 333,355 Nrs Jo Jones: 477 C.R. Morgan: 476,503,508 M.A. Welt: 476,503,508 L.K. Cope: 525,Para 3 T.H. Burt: 525,Para 9 Ex—Councillor R. Fryer: 572 3.?. Taylor: 664 Ex—Councillor B. Mutimer: 677 J.A. Sheaf: 678 AJ. Harvey: 678 B. Taylor: 678 C. Stephenson: 753 ICE. Banks: 770 P. Gwinnell: 774

COUNCIL PROPERTY MD PREMISES Cash Office, Rayleigh: 52,56,178 Extension to Britton Court, Rayleigh: 74 Pembroke Rouse, Rochford: 75 Fairview Playing Fields, Rayleigh: 102 Ashingdon Playing Fields Pavilion: 331,443 Public Halls and Leisure Centres — Catering: 380,682,768,771 King George V Playing Field, Rayleigh: 441 Castle Hall — Use by Community Police: 442 Security of Public Buildings: 453,732 17 South Street, Rochford: 545 Dutch Cottage — Deift Tile CollectiDn: 601 Siguposting Leisure Buildings: 602 Use of Goldfish as Prizes on Council Property: 609 Property Transactions: 672 Display of P & ER Plaque at Civic Suite: 677 DEEMED PLANNING CONSENTS

Land R/O South Street, Rochford: 40,386,408 Scout Hall, Ark Lane, Rochford: 43 Pembroke House Lift Installation: 75,517,579 Lodge Close, Rayleigh: 271,299(c),304,376(a) Qilvers Crescent/North Street, Gt. Wakering: 376(b),392,409 Eramerton Road A.P. Scheme: 701 Car Parking — New Grested Court, Rochford: 703

DELEGATION OF AUTHORIfl

Environmental Health Functions (DHH): 11 Free Use of Sports Facilities (DL): 26 Amigos Restaurant, Rayleigh (DTP): 164 Festival of Sport (DL): 448 Wayleave Consents (SOL): 471

DISABLED PERSONS

Facilities for the Disabled: 743

DOG LICENSING

Future Arrangements in U.K.: 125

DOMESDAY ANNIVERSARY

Translations of Domesday Book: 724,771 ECONOMIC, EFFICIENT & EFFECTIVE USE OF RESOURCES

Leisure Directorate: 27,87 Building Maintenance: 132 Advertising on Council Vehicles; 211 Housing Revenue Account Service Expenditure: 412 All Health & Housing Services: 413 Reports to Policy and Resources: 478,544 DUD — Performance Measures and Targets: 583 Directorate of Development: 675(a) Rating and Cost of Rate Collection: 675(b) Local Land Charges: 675(c) Community Programme & YTS: 675(d)

ELECTIONS

Bye Election Results: 505 Parish Electoral Arrangements: 550

EMPLOYMENT AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVES

(See Also Rochford Enterprise Manpower Services Commission)

Economic Initiatives: 372,497 Business Seminar on Economic Initiatives: 53O,756(b)(i) "Lifting the Burden" — Development & Employment: 645 Employment Generation Through Planning Process: 668 Economic Development Panel: 756(c)

ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH

Review of Delegated Powers and Authorities: 11 AI.D.S: 184 Factory Site — Alexandra Road, Ut. Wakering: 189 Food Legislation: 194

ESSEX COUNTY COUNCIL

Essex Bill: 37,57,82,145,370 Essex Structure Plan: 100,646 Social Services 5 Year Plan: 303 Local Consultation Between the Community & the Police: 225,490

ESTIMATE S

Replacement Franking Machines: 123 FIREARMS

Issue of Firearm Certificates: 39,144

FOOD HAWKERS

Food Act 1984 — Sale of Food by Hawkers: 10

FOOTPATHS

Fouling By Dogs: 193,249,310 Footpath 10 (Hockley): 343,631 Footpath 23 (Hawkwell): 469 Footpath 10 (Canewdon): 470 GRANT AND LOAN REQUESTS

Grant Aid to Outside Bodies 1985186: 46,56,135 Subscriptions: 47 ,213 ,542 Assistance Towards Christmas Lighting; 214 Ray1eih Consultative Committee: 364 South Bedfordshire D.C.: 488 Roof Insulation Grants: 585 Rebuilding Properties in Green Belt — Financial Assistance: 644 S.E.E. Marriage Guidance Council: 658

GREAT WARERING SPORTS CENTRE

Sports Shop Franchise; 604

GYPSIES

Gypsy Sites: 41,220,249,642,741 HACKNEY CARRIAGES (See also Committees)

Fare Increases: 548,631 Hackney Carriage Conditions: 637

HEALTH ANT) SAFETY

Firework Injuries 1984: 285 Local Authorities Responsibility for: 423

HIGHWAYS (See also Traffic Regulation Orders)

Brsmerton Road Street Works: 103,139,342,467 South Fambridge Works: 108 Pedestrian Crossing — Main Road, Hawkwell: 112 Ashingdon Road, Rochford: 188 County Highways Matters: 337,626 One Way — Love Lane, Rayleigh: 340 A127/A129 — Weir Improvements: 341,357,464 Main Road, llawkwell, Dangerous Bend: 627 Eastwood Road — Traffic Management Study: 630 Perry Road — Ford Across : 632 B1013 Access to Southend: 222,640,745 Proposed Pedestrian Crossing — Main Road, Hawkwell: 648 Clements Hall Way — Traffic Management: 650 41—67 Lower Lambricks, Rayleigh: 719 Euliwood Road, Hockley: 728

HOUSE PURCHASE LOANS

H.P.L. Arrears: 70,187,289,410,306,307,580,690

HOUSING (See also Improvement Grants Unfit Houses Municipal Housing Housing Benefits House Purchase Loans Housing Act 1980 — Right to Buy)

Housing Investment Programme: 81 Key Worker Housing: 198 Conditions of Tenancy: 290 Lettings and Applications 1984/85: 291 O.A.P. Waiting Lists: 292 Building Maintenance: 293 Green Paper — "Home Improvements — A New Approach": 417 Estates — Cleaning of Communal & External Areas: 426 Springboard Housing Assn. — Ashingdon Road, Rochford: 567 40 Rochefort Drive, Rochford: 684 Right to Repair Scheme: 697 Programme of Pre—Painting Repairs and Painting: 698 Rehousing Tenants of Crested Court: 708

contd/ * .. HOUSING ACT 1980 — RIGHT TO BUY

Exemption Provisions: 416

HOUSING BENEFITS

Overpayinents; 499 Reform of: 665

HOUSING INVESTMENT PROGRAMME (HIPS)

HIP and Strategy 1986/87: 419 IMPROVEMENT GRANTS (HOUSING)

Hou8e Renovation Grants: 81 Secure Tenancies (Right to Repair Scheme) Regulations 1985: 697 LAND

llullbridge Foreshore: 25,612 Land RIO South Street, Rochford; 40,208,254,386 Land at Hambro Hill, Rayleigh: 115,495,506 Grange Village, Rayleigh: 146,496 Land at Warwick Drive, Rochford: 147 RIO 269 Main Road, Hawkwell: 170 RIO Assandune Villas, Rochford: 188,294 Land Adj. 19 The Chase, Rayleigh; 217 Land Adj. 21 London 11111, Rayleigh; 218,546 Land South of Little Wheatley Chase: 219 Land West of Doggetts Close, Rochford; 221 Rochford ; 320 Spencers Nursery Site: 330,547 Adj. to 64 Nelson Road, Rayleigh; 347,375 Cheapside West/Downhall, Rayleigh: 374,557,727 Land Adj. Brooklands, Rayleigh: 389,395,515 RIO Hockley C.P. School: 439 Land at Bramerton Road, Hockley: 466 Land of f Pearsons Avenue, Rayleigh: 473 Land in Aviation Way, SUFC: 514,525,565,641 RIO Woodlands Close, Rayleigh: 549 Land RIO 299 Eastwood Road, Rayleigh: 590 Hockley Woods — Parsons Snipe: 613 Land RIO Bull Public House, Ilockley; 614 Land RIO Richmond Drive, Rayleigh: 615 Land Surplus to Requirements at ,Britton Court, Rayleigh: 747 Land at Betts Farm Estate, Hockley: 752

LEISURE FACILITIES

Rayleigh Mount: 18,322 Rochford and District Sports Council: 19,437 Riding for the Disabled — Gymkhana: 23 Prince Philip Cup Competition; 24 Training Facilities for International Athletes: 26 Charges for: 88 Rayleigh May Day Fair: 101 Horse Riding Facilities: 110,636 District Councillsports Council Liaison: 316 Arts Review of Essex; 323 Sports Council — Festival of Sport: 332,447,453,503 Leisure Buses — Essex Games: 448 Rochford Show: 453,503,569 Signposting Leisure Buildings; 602 I Rochford Town P.C. — H.Q. Building: 606 Childrens Playgrounds: 547,607 Gt. Wakering Recreation Ground; 608 Facilities for Young People in Rayleigh: 610,661 Hockley Woods — Parsons Snipe: 613

LICENCES AND LEASES

Land at Hullbridge Foreshore; 25,612 Rochford Day Centre; 154 Hotel & Restaurant, Rochford; 251,253,494 Land R/O Bull Public House, Hockley: 614

c ontdl • • • • • $ LISTED BUILDINGS (HISTORIC)

Pulpits Farmhouse, Greensward Lane, iloclcley: 241 Historic Boundary Walls RIO Council Offices, Rochford: 746 toca AUTHORITY MORTGAGES

Interest Rates: 71,43]. MANPOWER SERVICES COMMISSION

Community Programme: 127,150,231,249,373 Youth Training Consortium: 127 C—View: 369

MARKETS

Proposed Sunday Market — Rayleigh: 351,392,522

MEETINGS WITh LOCAL ORGANISATIONS

Rayleigh Iatepayers: 663 Rochford Hundred Assoc. of Parish Councils: 663 Rochford Chamber of Trade & Commerce: 663,678 Hockley Community Assoc.: 663,678 British Rail: 664,678,765 Rochford and District Sports Council: 678 Rayleigh and District Chamber of Trade: 678

MILL HALL

Proposed New Bar: 328 Proposed New Sun Lounge: 329,377 Security: 732

MUNICIPAL HOUSING — DEVELOPMENT

Bramerton Road A.P. Scheme: 124,l76,224(a),701,702,707 Lodge Close Housing Scheme: 224(b),234,298,299,376(a),552 Land RIO Council Offices, Rochford: 296,556,703 Wedgwood Court A.P. Scheme; 297

* MUNICIPAL ROUSING - GENERAL

Spa Court, Hockley: 12 Assandune Villas, Rochford: 188,294 King Georges Close, Rayleigh: 295 Pembroke House, Lift Installation: 308(b) Goodmans, Wakering — Replacement Windows: 706

MUNICIPAL ROUSING — SALES

Garage No. 6 Pulpits Close, Hockley: 107 Assandune Villas, Rochford: 188 OFFICE EQUIPMENT

Franking Machines; 123,153 Telephone Equipment: 157 Telephone Dictating Equipment; 657 Sound Level Meter: 762

OUTSIDE BODIES

Rural Community Council of Essex: 38 Southend Health Authority: 69 Countryside Commission: 133 School Governing Bodies: 149 Appointing Representatives to: 264 Eastern Authorities Orchestral Assoc.: 449 Meetings with Outside Bodies — Insurance: 757 Southend—on—Sea Post Office & Telecom Advisory CommIttee: 763 PARK SPORTS CENTRE

Sports Shop Franchise: 604

PIThLIC CONVENIENCES

High Street, Ct. Wakering: 13,79 Crown Hill, Rayleigh: 195 Capital Programme 1985/86 — Public Conveniences: 783

PUBLIC HETll

Pood ilygiene: 76 Pest Control Services: 77 Thump" Campaign 1985: 300 Surface Water Ditch, Stile Lane, Rayleigh: 349 216—218 Main Road, Hawkwell: 586 Drug Abuse: 593 Snuff Dipping — "Skoal Bandits": 689 Noise Nuisance — 123 Southend Road, Rochford: 694

PUBLIC OPEN SPACES

Grove Road Open Space: 93 Rochford Reservoir: 320,440,725 Tree Planting: 321 Turret House: 445 Cheapside West/Downhall, Rayleigh to NPFA: 660,678 I nt!!

RATES GENERAL

Recovery of General Rate — Authorised Officers: 122 District Rate 1985/86: 32,58,141,173,177 Irrecoverable Items 1984/85: 486 Authorised Prosecuting Off icers: 487,759 District Rate 1986/87: 758

RATE RELIEF

Charitable & Other Organisations: 121,363,485,5&6

RAYLEIGH — PARISH STATUS

Parish Electoral Arrangements: 550

REFUSE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL

"Save—a—Can" Recycling Scheme: 80 Sponsored Litter Bin Scheme: 191 Trade Refuse Removal: 212 Bottle Banks: 430 Waste Disposal: 493

RENT S

Rent Collection and Arrears: 7,72,185,288,411,581,691 Housing Rents: 8,35 Rental of Ceder Centre, Rayleigh: 216

RIGHTS OP WAY

Diversion of Purdeys lad. Estate: 106

ROACH VALLEY CONSERVATION ZONE 98

Education Officer: 151 Group of Representatives: 335,459,635 Horse Riding Trails in Hockley Woods: 635

ROCHFOED LOCAL DISTRICT PLAN 207,275,355,744

Land West of Doggetts Close, Rochford: 221 Relocation of Allotment Sites: 278 Amendments to: 279,475,481 S.E.E.T.E.C.

Official Opening: 248,255

SELECTIVE TENDERING 299,309

SEWERS (See also Surface Water)

Canine Close, Canewdon: 113 Defective Sever — Abbey Road/Abbey Close, llulibridge: 190

SOUTHEND HEALTH AUTHORITY

Matters 283,578

Financil Constraints: I 283,574,578 Start Regional Capital Allocation: 424 Essex Ambulance Service Operational Plan 1986/89: 591,688 Regional Health Authority — Cancer Treatment Services: 592,678,686 Southend Health Authority Operational Plan: 687

SPORT

See Leisure Facilities

STAFF — A.F.T. & C.

D.T.P. — Revised Management Structure: Si D.L. — Post R45: 128 Woodland Officer: 133 Computer Centre — Restructuring: 159 Designation of D.T.P.: 161 8. Lawrence/C. Parsons — CIPFA: 391 P.R. Blower — Principal Assistant (Architecture): 428,504 Review of Leisure Services Directorate: 451 Staffing Policies & Restructuring: 501 Mr ED. Lee — Solicitor to the Council: 504 T.P.O.'s Authorised Signatories: 518 Mr R. Stanford: 571 Mr A. Hindshaw: 616

STAFF — GENERAL

Manpower: 129 Vacancies: 130 Chief Officers Conditions of Service: 160 Early Retirement & Voluntary Redundancy: 180,237 Warden — Britton Court Extension: 434 Pilot Reward Scheme: 756(a)(i) Staff Appraisal: 756(a)(ii)

contd/ P IF

STAFF - MANUAL

Early Retirement — Parks Section: 236 Manual Workers Pay Award: 671 40 Rochefort Drive) Rochford: 684 Parks Section Annual Programme: 729

STANDING ORDERS

Suspensiont 53,65,167 ,179 ,273,276,277 ,526,532,564,,651 Amendments: 226

STREET NAMING

Development R/O 43/49 Southend Road) Hockley: 104 Development at 'Warwick Road) RayleIgh: 105,153 Development at Doggetts Close) Rochford: 344 Former Rawreth Industrial Estate: 345 C.H.LI.CI. — Second Access Road: 446,474 Development at 353/355 Ashingdon Road, Rochford: 468

SURFACE WATER (See also Sewers)

Rayleigh Surface Water Scheme: 99 Ashingdon Hill: 99 Surface Water Ditch — Stile Lane, Rayleigh: 349 Flooding — Rawreth Lane; 350 Hullbridge Pumping Station: 737 Hedgehope Avenue) Rayleigh: 738 — 1I!1 11 pI !

TEACH — INS

Building Regulations: 152 Crime Prevention: 152 Citizens Advice Bureau: 492 Leisure Directorate/SEETEC: 492 Drug Abuse: 506,660 "Fair Havens" Hospice: 660 NPFA: 660

TOURISM

E.C.C. — Tourism In Essex: 230

TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING (See also Conservation Grants R.V.C.Z. T & C.P. Contraventions Trees)

Land RIO South Street, Rochford: 40 Scout Hall) Ark Lane) Rochford: 43 Proposed Retail Development at : 45 Plot 2, Green Lane, Eastwood: 61 Agricultural Permitted Development: 109 Doctors Surgery — Adj. to 136 Greensward Lane, Hockley: 116 Rochford Hall Barns: 117 Grange Village, Rayleigh: 146 Amigos Restaurant, Hockley Road, Rayleigh: 164 Land RIO 269 Main Road, Hawkwell: 170,246 T.P.P. & P.T.P. Consultation Documents: 203,222,639 Stansted Airport Expansion: 229,249 Regal Cinema Site, Bellingham Lane, Rayleigh: 242,779 Former Gun Site, Alexandra Road, Wakering: 243 Witherdens Farm, Rawreth: 244 Hotel & Restaurant, Rochford: 251,253,494,742 Olivers Crescent/North Street, Wakering: 270,409 Building Regulations; 367 Structural Engineering Consultants: 368 Baltic Wharf — Canewdon: 396,512,521,531 Erection of Property Adjoining "The Bungalow", Rayleigh Downs Road: 402 Rayleigh, Rochford, Hockley Rail Stations: 463 Public Path Diversion — No. 10 (Canewdon); 470 Rayleigh Lanes, High Street, Rayleigh: 522 Buildings RIO 2—6 North Street, Rochiord: 528 Springboard Housing — Ashingdon Road, Rochford: 575 Land RIO 21123 North Street, Rochford: 619 Creeksea Ferry Inn — Access for Disabled: 623

Land in Aviation Way — SUFC : 514,525,565,641 Tillingham Hall, Thurrock — Consortium Developments Ltd 643 North Street, Gt. Wakering: 673 Lamb Court Cottage, Pudsey Hall Lane, Canewdon: 712 Jetty — Poreshore, River Crouch, Hullbridge: 718,784 41—67 Lower Lambricks, Rayleigh: 719

c ontd/ TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING — CONTRAVENTIONS

Stationing Caravan — 3 Leicester Avenue, Rochford: 62 Land Adjoining 266 Plumberow Avenue, Hockley: 168 Stationing of Caravans — 250 Greensward Lane, Hockley: 269 9 Grasmere Avenue, Hulibridge: 384 Storage of Caravans — Heath Nurseries, Rayleigh: 397 317 Daws Heath Road, Rayleigh: 398 Repairs/Storage/Sales Vehicles at 25 Meesons Head, Rochford: 399 Skip Business — New House Farm, Poynters Lane, Wakering: 400,778 Storage of Vehicles on Land at Ironwell Lane, Hawkwell: 401 Land R/O "Gophe", Ellesmere Road, Rochford: 405 Unauthorised Caravan — 266 Pluinberow Avenue, Hockley: 420 "Stepping Stones", Canewdon Road, Ashingdon: 519 R/O "Quest End", Rawreth Lane, Rayleigh: 520 The Ives, Trenders Avenue, Rayleigh: 523,693 Development at Curtis Way, Rayleigh: 529 Land South of Eartletts, Rayleigh: 560 Castle Inn, Little Wakering: 561 Unauthorised Caravan Opposite 317 Daws Heath Road, Rayleigh: 589 Unauthorised Sign — 1 Spa Road, Hockley: 711 Suttons Farm, Barling: 713 Suttons Boat Yard, Wakering: 7i4 Unauthorised Sign — 84 The Chase, Rayleigh: 717 Land Of f New Hall Road, Hockley — Tipping of Waste Material: 777 Change of Use — Agricultural Land to Residential Garden — Various Sites: 780 Construction of Jetty at Foreshore, River Crouch, Hullbridge: 784 Horseshoe Farm, Lower Road, Hullbridge: 785 Barratt Homes Development — Albert Rd/Alexandra Rd, Rayleigh: 786

TRAFFIC REGULATION ORDERS (See also Highways)

Waiting Restrictions — Rochford/Rayleigh Town Centres: 339 Revision of Waiting Restrictions in Rochford: 465 Waiting/Loading Restrictions — Purdeys Estate, Rochford: 628 Mended Waiting Restrictions — Seddons Walk, Hockley: 629 Overtaking Restrictions — Hockley Road: 649 Speed Limit — Hullbridge Road: 739,771

TREE S Consultative Procedures — Tree Planting & Felling: 44 Public Open Space — Tree Planting: 321 Clearance of Trees — Grove Woods: 535 Rawreth IndustrIal Estate — Loss of Trees: 566

TWINNING Haltern Visit: 391 950th Anniversary of Death of Ring Canute: 569 Rochford & District Swimming Club — Visit to Haltern: 617 Visits by S.P.D. & Haltern Fire Brigade: 677 UNFIT HOUSES

3/4 New Row, East End, Paglesham: 73 1 Church Street, Rayleigh: 286,414 3 Russell Row, Canewdon: 287 15 London Road, Rayleigh; 415 23 Hawkwell Park Drive, Hawkwell: 584,692 29 London Hill, Rayleigh: 704

VEHICLES AND PLANT

Special Items — Depot: 48 Maintenance of Refuse Vehicles: 338 Vehicle Fleet Management in Local Government: 761 COUNCIL MINUTES

1985

July (Part 1) ROCUFORD DISTRICT COUNCIL

Minutes of the -Planning Services Committee

At a Meeting-held ott 2nd July 1985. Present: Councillors It. D.Foster (Chairman), M.N. Anderson, P.A. Beekers, R.U. Boyd, W.H. Budge, Mrs. t.M.A. Campbell—Daley, Mrs. P. Cooke, L.K. Cope, B.A. Crick, T.L. Dean, Mrs. J. Fawell, T. Pawell, C.J. Gardner, B.T. Grigg, P. Gwinnell, Mrs. E.M. Hart, A.J. Harvey, Mrs. P.E. Eawke, Mrs. L.A. Iloldich, Mrs. Jo Jones, M.J. Jones, Miss B.G.J. Lovett, Mrs. J.M. Munson, J.E. Nokes, R.A. Pearson, J.A. Sheaf, C. Stephenson, B. Taylor, J.P. Taylor, Mrs. L. Walker and D.C. Wood.

Apologies: Councillors K.E. Banks, C.I. Black, T.H. Burt and J. Gibson.

393. MINUTES

Resolved that the Minutes' of the Meeting of 6th June 1985 be approved as a a correct record and signed by the Chairman. W394 MONITORING OF PERFORMANCE - MEETINGS OF 3RD JANUARY, 20Th MARCH AND 11Th APRIL 1985

The Comnittee were satisfied that all necessary action had been taken. Minutes 766/84, Para. 16, 202/85, Paras. 9, 528 and S29, 240/85, Para. 15 and 243/85 were carried forward.

The Director of Development was asked to investigate the free—standing advertisement signs in front of the Rayleigh Lanes Market which it was alleged were causing an obstruction. (21210)

395. LAND ADJOININGBROOKLANDS, HOCKLEY ROAD,-RAYLEIGII-(Minute389/85)

The Director of Development reported that a site visit took place on 13th June 1985 when Members met representatives of the County Council with regard to the proposed private residential development on the land.

The Director further reported that this matter had recently been considered by the County and it was understood that certain amendments to the plans were being pursued. Members asked that copies of the relevant information be circulated when it came to hand. (ROC/853/84/CC) (SEC)

396. APPLICATIONS ROC/856/84 AND ROC/O55/85 —-BALTIC WHARF — BAMBERGERS LIMITED

The Director of Development reported' receipt of a letter from Canewdon Parish Council requesting that a Member of the Parish Council be invited to serve on the Baltic Wharf Working Party. The Committee considered that additional membership to the Working Party should be resisted but agreed to give consideration to any further views the Parish Council might wish to put forward.

Resolved that the Parish Council be advised accordingly. (472) (DD) Planning Services

397. UNAUT}IORISED STORAGE OF CARAVANS AT HEATH NURSERIES, DAWS HEATH ROAD, RAYLEIGH

The Committee gave consideration to a report of the Director of Development on some 17 caravans and one coach stored on the above site, which according to the owner/occupier, had been continuing without the benefit of planning permission since 1979. The use had become evident following the removal of trees and hedges at 317 Daws Heath Road, Rayleigh. Members noted that the property was a mainly open site within the Green Belt and, as well as being visibly obtrusive from Daws Heath Road, the site backed on to higher ground and the rear gardens of houses in Eastwood Road were clearly visible.

Resolved that the Solicitor to the Council be authorised to take all necessary action, including the is sue and service of Notices and action in the Courts, to secure the remedying of the breach of planning control now reported. (23066) (SOL)

398. UNAUTHORISED PARICING/STORAGE OF MOTOR VEHICLES ETC. AND THE ERECTION OF STRUCTURE AT 317 DAWS HEATIt ROAD, RAYLEIGH

The Conimittee considered the appended report of the Director of Development concerning the planning history and various breaches of planning control at the above site which was situated within the Green Belt and immediately adjacent to Heath Nurseries referred to in the previous item.

Resolved that the Solicitor to the Council be authorised to take all necessary action, Including the issue and service of Notices and actiqn in the Courts, to secure the remedying of the breaches of planning control now reported. (7068) (SQL)

399. UNAUTHORISED REPAIRS/STORAGE/SALES OF MOTOR VEHICLES AT 25 MEESONSMEAD, ROCEFORD

Members considered a report of the Director of Development on the various inspections which had taken place following complaints that repairs were a being carried out to vehicles not in the ownership of the occupants of this property. Furthermore, it appeared that there was a frequent turnover of vehicles which were brought onto the site, repaired and then sold.

It was also reported that these operations were in part undertaken on a shared driveway which had caused noise nuisance and obstruction to the occupants of the adjacent property. The Committee were of the opinion that the operations exceeded that reasonably required as a hobby and that such use within a residential area had a detrimental effect on the neighbouring properties.

Resolved that the Solicitor to the Council be authorised to take all. iièsiuiy action, including the issue and service of Notices and action in the Courts, to secure the remedying of the breaches of planping control now reported. (1183) (SQL) U I

* Planning Services

400. USE OF LAND FOR SKIP HIRE BUSINESS AND TIPPING OF WASTE MATERIAL — NEW HOUSE FARM, POYNTERS LANE, GREAT WAKERING

The Solicitor to the Council reported that a mini—skip hire business was being run from this property and the site also contained a substantial quantity of associated rubbish from this use. The property, which was situated in the Green Belt, had been erected with a covering condition that it was for occupation by an agricultural worker and the present use was not considered compatible with this planning condition. The use of the site for a skip hire business would have a detrimental effect on neighbouring residents by reason of general disturbance associated with the business and an increased traffic movement along the heavily— trafficked Poynters Lane.

Members noted that the tipping of waste on land other than for a proper agricultural use required both planning consent and a licence from the County Council and the present operation of the skip hire business and the apparent contravention of the agricultural worker's condition were contrary to the Council's Green Belt policy.

Resolved that the Solicitor to the Council be authorised to take all necessary action, including the issue and service of Notices and action in the Courts, to secure the remedying of the breach of planning control now reported. (16656) (SQL)

401. STORAGE OF MOTOR VEHICLES ON LAND AT IRONWELL LANE, HAWKWELL

The Solicitor to the Council reported that an inspection of this site, situated on the northern side 2f Ironwell Lane, Hawkwell, and within the Green Belt, had revealed that the land was being used for the storage of new and unregistered motor vehicles contrary to the provisions of the Green Belt policy. After the owner of the site failed to remove the vehicles by an agreed date the Chief Executive had exercised his powers under Standing Order 18 to authorise the service of both an Enforcement Notice aS a Stop Notice to prevent the land being used in this connection in the future.

The Director of Development confirmed that all vehicles had been removed from the site by 24th June 1985 in compliance with the Notices. (72036) (DII)

402. ERECTION OF DETACHED PROPERTY ADJOINING "THE BUNGALOWS, RAYLEIGH DOWNS ROAD, RAYLEIGH (Minute 240/85)

The Committee considered the report of the Solicitor to the Council on a submission from the Solicitor acting for the applicants in respect of the above development (ROC/86l/83/1) that they be released from one of the six planning conditions imposed by the Council.

Members noted that the property in question would be situated within the Green Belt, that the proposed condition removing the usual "permitted development rights' had regard to the initial size being sought which was felt to be in keeping with the condition relating to the occupation of the dwelling imposed by the Secretary of State for the Environment when he h,,a4 earlier granted the application on appeal. Planning Services

Resolved that the Council re—affirms its decision of 11th April 1985 for consent to the details submitted under application ROC/861/83/l subject to the six conditions specified and completion of the Legal Agreement. (ROC/861/83/1) (SOt) I 403. PROGRESS REPORT — APPEALS DECIDED AND APPEALS LODGED, TREE PRESERVATION ORDERS AND BUILDING PRESERVATION NOTICES

The Committee noted the information as set out in the Agenda.

404. SCIIEDULE OP DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The Director of Development submitted a schedule for consideration and lists of planning applications and Building Regulations applications decided under delegation.

Resolved that decisions be made in accordance with the recommendations in the appended schedule, subject to:—

Para. 3 — ROC/351/85

Amend description of development to —

"Change of use to retail bakery".

Para. 4 — ROCJO39/S5JAD

Solicitor to the Council authorised to take all necessary action, including the issue and service of Notices and action in the Courts to secure the removal of the unautjiorised illuminated fascia signs.

Para. 5 — ROC/082/85/AD

Application refused for the following reason:—

The local planning authority considers that the proposed sign by reason of its excessive size, strident design and prominent positioning would be obtrusive and woUld introduce an over—commercial element detrimental to the character of the street scene.

Para. 6 — ROC/29/85

Application deferred to await the outcome of consultations with the MAFF.

Para.9 — ROC/313/85 I

Permission granted subject to completion of Legal Agreement to the satisfaction of the Solicitor to the Council to ensure full compliance with planning conditions imposed.

Para. 11 — ROC/293/85 ParaT2— ROC/2T4785

Both applications withdrawn by applicants.

SolFilcitor to the Council instructed to take immediate steps tchimplement enforcement action authorised by Minute 912/84.

7iu

Ii I I 1 II I Planning Services

Pan. 14 —ROC/254/85

Delete Cond. 1 — Std. Cond. 3 and substitute the following:—

1. The use hereby permitted shall cease and the building removed from the site not later than five years from the date of this permission unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority.

Add condition. -

4. This permission shall entire only for the benefit of Mr. D.R Vincent and not for the benefit of the land.

Auihority to determine the application delegated to the Director of Development following completion of consultation observations.

Permission granted subject to completion of Legal Agreement to the satisfaction of the Solicitor to the Council to ensure full compliance with planning conditions imposed.

L'ara. 16— ROC/202/85

The Committee were generally of the view t!lat the application in its present form should be refused.

Application deferred and authority to aetermine the application delegated to the Director of Development.

Para, 18— R0C/178/83

Add condition —

14. Notwithstanding the submitted plans the existing tree within plot 20 shall be retained and shall not be removed, lopped or thinned without the prior approval of the local planning authority.

The Development Services Committee be asked tp take up with the Highway Authority representative when he Is next present at their Meeting the need to control the speed of traffic in Seaview Drive.

The Committee considered that the dangers to children in the street would be alleviated if the play area off Seaview Drive could be brought into use.

I Para. 20 — ROC/262185

Application withdrawn at request of applicant.

Para. 22 — ROC/247/85

Application refused for the following reason:— tn order to achieve the purposes for which the Green Belt is intended, it is essential to retain and protect the existing rural character of the area so allocated, and that new uses and buildings will only be permitted outside existing settlements in the most exceptional circumstances. The local planning authority considers that the change of use of the land to

74iw

I ,uI

Planning Services

residential garden together with the stationing of a mobile home would result in the creation of a new dwelling contrary to the above policy. Furthermore, the use of this site in the manner proposed would be visually intrusive in the land scene and would result in an undesirable consolidation of the existing sporadic development in this part of Greensward Lane and would create a precedent for similar development to the detriment of the rural character of the locality.

Para. 23 — ROC/646/84/l

Authority to determine the application delegated to the Director of Development on satisfactory completion of detail amendments.

Para. 24 — ROC/228I85 I

Amend condition 2 to read —

2. The area shown for the bridleway on the submitted plan No. 843/6e shall be kept clear of obstruction at all times and shall be surfaced in a material which shall previously have been agreed in writing by the local planning authority commensurate with the construction of the road hereby permitted. Details of the height, type and positioning of kerbs and fencing to delineate this bridleway shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority and constructed prior to commencement of the development hereby permitted.

Para. 25 — ROC/692184

The Chairman gave an assurance that the Council would assist the Wakering Yacht Club to find an alternative location for their existing facilities.

405. LAND TO REAR OP "GONIE", ELLESMERE ROAD, ASUINGOON, ROCUFORD

The Solicitor to the Council reported that activities on this parcel of land situated in the Green Belt were causing some anxiety in the area. A full investigation was being pursued on various matters, including the erection of a number of struttures and, once ownership details had been established in that respect a further report on any contraventions would be made to the Committee.

One matter, however, related to the stationing of a residential caravan on part of the site which, according to the owner, was used only at weekends. The Solicitor reminded Members that even a holiday type of occsional use would be contrary to the policy of the Green Belt notation as the caravan was stationed permanently on site and as such �onstttuted a material change of use which would normally be resisted in the Green Belt.

Resolved that the Solicitor to the Council be authorised to take all necessary action, including the issue and service of Notices and action in the Courts, to secure the remedying of the breach of planntg control now reported. (12407) (SOL)

S ',t I I 'n"j r'i i'r i''iir' !'"

AGENDA ITEM 7 ROCUFORD DISTRICT COUNCIL

PLANNING SERVICES COMMITTEE — 2ND JULY

REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT

TJNAUTIIORISED PASKING/STORAGE OF MOTOR VEHICLES ETC AND THE ERECTION OF STRUCTUIEAT 317 DAWS HEATH ROAD, RAYLEIGH

This site has a somewhat complicated planning history but the relevant facts are as follows:

(1) In August 1969 the then Essex County Council served an Enforcement Notice (which still has effect) requiring the cessation of a "storage and breaking of motor Vehicles" use on thre particular areas of the above site.

(2) At that time it was determined that the existing Breakers Yard, in the North East corner of the site, although unauthorised, did have the benefit of "established use rights", ie no Enforcement Notice could be served to cease that use.

(3) A fine of £50 each was imposed on Messrs A and D Hedges, the then site operators/owners, in May 1970 for the non—compliance with this Notice.

(4) A further fine of £196 was imposed on Mr D Hedges in February 1974 for a similar oflence.

(5) Since that time the Breakers Yard has been sub divided and the major part operated by a Mr Stephen Wilson. A Mr Cohn Keyes uses the smaller section of the established Breakers Yard.

(6) In the early part of last year, Hr & Mrs Hedges and Messrs Keyes and Wilson, were advised verbally and in writing that, inter alia:

(a) The above Notice was not being complied with.

(1) The Easternmost area of the three referred to in the Notice was being used for the parking of other vehicles, eg customers' cars, without planning permission although, bearing in mind the above factors, an application could be made for this use as a car park if adequate conditions for control were included.

(c) The building being erected to the rear of the Yard appeared to require planning permission. I

(7) Some improvements were subsequently made although no planning applications were received. Now the Enforcement Motice is again being breached, requiring prosecution action to be taken in the Magistrates Court, and in addition a number of other vehicles, including breakdown lorries, employees' cars, etc, as well as a boat, are being parked in the Eastern area. The structure referred to above has been completed and clearly requires planning consent and photographs of this and the other items will be on display in the Members Room before the meetingf)

md The site is within the Green Belt immediately adjacent to Heath Nurseries referred to in the previous Report.

RECOMMENDED That the Solicitor to the Council be authorised to take all necessary action including the issue and service of Notices aud action in the Courts, to secure the remedying of the breaches of planning control now reported.(7068)

I

I .

S 74J DEVELOPMENT CONTROL APPLICATIONS CONSIDERED

DURING THIS SESSION 1'1

PLANNING SERVICES COMMITTEE 2nd JULY, 1985

SCHEDULE IFThEX

ITEM CASE NO. DEVELOPMENT OFFICER

1. ROC/356/85 First floor extension and loading bay. JW Unit 4, brook Road, Ray1eih.

2. 1400/355/85 Replacement of fire crew accommodation.

I Southend Airport, Terminal 8uilding, Municipal Airport, Rochford.

3. RCC/35l/85 Change of use to baker. JW 136, High Street, Rayleigh.

4. rtbb/O39/b/AD IllUmnkted fascia bins to 'canopy approved under planning application ROC/60l/83 and ex4ect 7m high illuminated pign on forecourt. Ashingdon Service Station, 'Ashihgdon Road,

Athtirigdon. I I 5. ROC/082/85/AD Erect fred stanthnE illuminated offset pole sign FCC and free standing illuminated "oal post' price signs. Link Service Station, Ashihgdon Road, Roohford.

6. ROC/�92/85 Outline appiicaMion to erect farm dwelling, PCC hay barn and sheep shed. Moons and Chamberlains Far1, Fanibridge Road, Ashingdon.

7. ROC/52/8t3 Demolish' existing scout hut and erect single PCC storcy building for same purpose. Scout Headquarters, Kenilworth Gardens, Rayleigh.

8. 1WC/264/85 Outline application to erect detached bungalow and CR garage. Adj. 59, Kimberley Road, Little Wakering

' 9. ROC/3l3/85 Erect private jetty. I FCC The, Chalet, 24, Kingsman Farm Road, Hullbridge.

10. RQC/349/85 Change of use of part of ground floor offices FCC to Physiotherapists. 22, South Street, Rochford.

11. RbC/P95/8S Change exitin,g mobile hom to double 'unit as FCC extra temporary accommodatjon. Ricbra, Lower Road, Hockley.

12. 1WC/294/85 Alter entrance once used for entry to field from FCC hardcore and gravel to reinforced concrete drive. Ricbra, Lower Road, Hockley.

13. R0C348/85 Change of use from Primary School to registered JW nursing home. Sutton County Primary School, Sutton.

14. RCC/254/85 Erect single storey building for use as shop. ' TMM Long Acre Farm, Lower Road, Hookley. 7ao I'J I 15. R0C/373/85 Erect two metre high timber fence to front FCC boundary. 1, The Approach, Rayleigh.

16. ROC/202/8b Erect new workshop. TMM 72, Main Road, Hawkwell.

17. ROC/321/85 Extdnd existing car park to provide additional PCC 60 parking spaces. Rear of Hockley Station, Plumberow Avenue, Hockley.

18. ROC/178/85 Erection of 31 detached houses and access roads. NACB Land in Seaview Drive, Great Wakering.

19. ROC/415/Ss Erect two detached bungalows with integral garages. FCC (Previously 22, Burrtham Road, Hulibridge. I 'Iii' liii I II

20. ROC/262/S5 Erect three dotached houses with attached garages. NACB Sitd of 23, The Westerings, Eock1ey. 21. R0C/031/84/l Erect detaohed house and detached garage (details). T4M I Clenmoant, Warwiok Road, Rayleigh.

22. ROC/247/85 Permission to site mobile home. PMM 131, Greensward Lane, Hockley.

23. FtOC/646J34/l Demolish existing sirgery and erect new surgery, TMM shop unit with of'ic over ard associated car park and I apcess. I Eastwobd Road, Rayleigh. I

24. R0C/228/35 Construct new industrial estate road. PlACE Land to west of Aviatibn Way, Rochfbrd.

25. ROC/692/84 Change use of vacant wharf to Wakerig Yacht Club. Darling Hall Wharf, Barling Road, Roach Group.

S PLANNING SERVICES COMMITTEE

2nd JULY, 1985

SCHEDULE OF DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS, WITH DIRECTOR'S RECOMMENDATIONS, FOR DETERMINATION AT THIS COMMITTEE.

1. RQC/35J85 RAYLEIGH UNIT 14, BROOKROAD, RAYLEIGH

First floor extension and loading bay. Fisco Products Ltd., do R. Michael Welton and Partners, Baryta House, 29, Victoria Avenue, Southend-on—Sea, Essex, 582 6AZ.

RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO:

1. Std. Cond. 3 — Commence in five years. 2. Std. Cond. 9 — Materials to match existing.

REPORT: No adverse comments have been received from statutory consultees to this proposal.

2. ROC/355/85 ROCHFORD SOUTHEND AIRPORT, TERMINAL BUILDING, MUNICIPAL AIRPORT, ROCHFORD

Replacement of fire crew accommodation.

British Airports International, Southend Airport, Southend-on-Sea, Essex, S82 6YF.

1 I1 I T'I1Iu,.i,p 1! ______—r".'ir !'U IIfrW

REcoMMENoA9roN: APPROVAL, SUBJECT To:

1. Std. c&zd. 3 - Comwence in five years. 2. 5th. Ccbnd. B - Sbi maeria. a sphedqle. 1

______:j II No adversØcommert ase en recei*4 fom statu4ory consultees to this I I

3• !OC/31/è5 flAYLEIGH 136, HIGH STREET, RAYLEZGEX'

Change of use to jakery. Mr. S.R. alter .pd Mrs. q.i. Wa4.ler, Neve oaa, essex, 5512 pN . 96A, Wickrd, H

RECOM!€NDMTON APPWVAL, SUBJECT To

1. Std. Cond. 3 - Commence .n five years.fl 2. DetaU of arty IJ:michar4cfl venpiajt4n sstem shall be submitted p and apprbved t1e locil panting authority before installat.o couuier1ces an4 'prtør to U ceient of the use hereby pe tte4

—REPORT: I A letter Ipfi!expnajor.s bs been he applicants who say "A tbra4 Icitched is t4ie al'retai bakery, except titt" the lbfl; aCE ii tion area on view to the tx This enables them S to see IO being performed, and ensures & CQIIS 'giout the day".

The DireCFOr ot'H€ thited and raises no objection subjscrt 'any mechanical at ed condition Nc).venti1at$cA2. sytem 1

& ,1 4. S AS tISGDON SERVICE STATION I

2 S rjj Illuminated fascia signs to canopy approved under ROC/601/83 and erect 7 metre high illuminated sign on forecourt. Marden Motors Ltd., do D.J. Coleman, Ashingdon Service Station, 543, Ashingdon Road, Ashingdon, Essex.

RECOMMENDATION: REFUSAL, FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: The local planning authority considers that the 7 metre high — forecourt sign already erected at the site is, by reason of its excessive size, strident design and prominant positioning, too obtrusive and introduces an over commercial element detrimental to the street scene in general and particularly lacking in sympathy with the Grade II listed building on the opposite side of Ashingdon Road.

I I I I Ii I I

REPORT; This application would normally be dealt with by the Director of Development under powers delegated to him, but is brought to the attention of the Planning Services Committee because o the Director's concern over the application and because the sign has already been erected. There is no objection to the advertising material on the canopy for which planning permission was granted under application ROC/6O1/83, but it is the large freestanding forecourt sign supported on the vertical supports and infilled with petrol price information with a height of 7 metres which causes conCern. The form of the sign is such that it almost appears as a solid 'slab' of advertisement and looks particularly prominant as a result. The sign is part of the Texaco Coippany's programme for the identification' of all their service stations in the U.K. The County Surveyor has no objections to the sign subject to restrictibns over brightness. Please refer also to the following item.

5. ROC/082/85/AD HAWKWELL LINK SERVICE STATION, ASHINGDON ROAD, ROCHFORD

Erect freestanding illuminated offset pole sign and freestanding illuminated 'goal post' price sign. Texaco Ltd., do Grahame Herbert Associates, 6, Muddleton Buildings, Langham Street, London, W1P 7PE.

3 REPORT: S w Another sign in Texaco's re-identification programme. Originally intended as two freestanding signs - one Gm (2Oft.) high, the other 3.13m (loft.) and both to be sited on the Ashingdon Road frontage of this station - they have, following discussions, been combined into a single erection. The Director of Development is not convinced that even this reduced proposal can be accommodated in this position without looking over prominant, though recognises that it is not sQ seriously detrimental as that referred to in the previous item. The County Surveyor has no objection to the signs subject to a restriction over brightns nd tha the signs should be erected clear of the highway. The applicants lave been informed of the latter but their revised plans still indicate the signs to overhang the grass verge on the Ashingdon Road frontage vihich does form part of highway land, this point is still being discussed with the applicants and the Director of Development will report further at the meeting.

6. Roc/292/8S ASHINGDON MOONS AND CHAMBERLAINS FARM, FAMBRIDGE ROAD, ASHINGDON'

Outline application to erect farm dwelling, hay barn and sheep shed.

A. & S. Woodford & Sons, Bolt Hall Farm, Canewdon, Rochford, Essex, 554 3SA.

RECOMMENDATION: REFUSAL, FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1 Std. Rsn. 36B - M.G.B.

REPORT:

A similar application was considered at the Planning Services Committee of 11th April. Planning Permission was refused on Green Belt grounds, because the local planning authority did not consider that the circumstances of the case justified overriding the strong presumption against development on the Green Belt. The Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (M.A.F.F.) confirmed that the land at Moons and Chamberlains, together with the applicants other land at Bolt Hall and Upper Raypits, totalling some 574 acres, had been farmed as a viable fnit by the applicants for almost 30 years.

4 S 1tSv) —i rYu'' 1

It appears that the dwelling was required in connection with the • intention to use 86 acres at Moons and Chamberlains as a separate farm unit for the benefit of one of the applicant's sons. The view was taken by the Directorate of Development that, given that the agricultural activities planned at Moons and Chamberlains were only statements of intent, there was no clear justification for a permanent dwelling on the land. M.A.FI.F. considered that it was desirable that the applicants farming enterprises were diversified to make full use of the available facilities and that it was desirable that a responsible person be resident on the land for security and proper livestock management while the beef and sheep enterprises were being developed. The 'vieW of this Departmei-it was that' this could be achieved by temporary caravan acdomrnodation and that this was the only form of living accommodation that could be justified on the land at the present time.

In a letter accompanying this present' application, the applicants have stated that the M.A.P.F. were mistaken in their belief that one of the sons intended to make a viable and separate unit of Moon's and Chamberlains, but say that the land needs a dwelling in order to safeguard valuable machinery and crops and also the ease of management. It appears therefore that the proposal is to facilitate the use of the total farming enterprise of the! family and the applicants appear to ! be suggesting that the decision on this application should not hinge upon the viability of Mobns and Chamberlains land. I The Director of Development has not, to date, received the comments of the M.A.F.F. but, until convinced otherwise, can see no reason to change from the previous view of the proposal.

Hopefully, the Ministry's1 appraisal will be available by the date of the meeting. If it is not it is recommended that final a determination of the application is deferred until it is W available. I

7. ROC/352/85 RAYLEIGH SCOUT HEADQUARTERS, KENILWORTH GARDENS, RAYLEIGH

Demolish existing scout hut and erect single storey building for same purpose. 1st Rayleigh Sbout Group, do R.A. Powell, CEng., MICE4) 30, Spring Gardens, Rayleigh, Essex, SS6 7DQ.

5

IJUt RECOMMENDATION— 2 APPROVAL,—------SUBJECT TO: a 1. Std. Cond. 3 — Commence in five years. W 2. The building shall only be used for the meetings and instruction or for the social or recreational activities of the 1st Rayleigh Scout Group. 3. Std. Cond. 8 — Submit materials schedule.

4. The hardstanding indicated on drawing AD/i shall be hardsurfaced to the satisfaction of the local planning authority prior to first use of the hall hereby approved.

I I REPORT': I I The 1st Rayleigh Scout Group have occupied this site for several years and wish to replace their existing building with a larger structure. Approval has been granted on two previous occasions for a replacement building under applications ROC/346/83 and, nkore recently, in October 1984 under reference ROC/640/84. That latter application was for a flat roofed prefabricated building measuring some Sm (2Gft.) by l9m (62ftJ. This proposal measures Sm (26ft.) by l7.3m (57ft.) and would be an improvement upon that previously granted permission an being a purpose built brickwork building with tiled pitched roof. The site is situated between allotment garäens and a school playing field at the end of Kenilworth Gardens, There is a footpath abutting the site which connects Kenilworth Gardens with Station Avenue. There are no existing parking facilities within the site, although a hardstanding to accommodate two cars is' also , now proposed. Despite this absence of onsie parking, in the past rip problems would appear to have arisen'. Immediate neighbours have been notified and, at the time of writing, no objections have been received.

As with the most recent approval, this proposal would involve the loss of one oak tree but it is not a notable specimen — having a split trunk. The existing ditch to the'east of the site is to be piped. Anglian Water have no objections.

8. ROC/264/S5 ROACH GROUP AlIT. 59, KIMBERLEY ROAD, LITTLE WAKERING

6 Outline application to erect detached bungalow and garage.

Mr. and Mrs. C. Arnold, do Ron Hudson Designs Ltd., 305, London Road, Hadleigh, Benfleet, Essex, 857 2BN. Frontage: 13.6m; Depth; 34.4zn.

RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO: 1. Std. Cond. 1 - Reserved matters to be approved.

2. Std. Cond. 2 — Commence in five years or two years.

3. Std. ond.l3 — Sm (6ft.) high brick screen walling to be erected. l I i 4. Notwithstanding Article 3, Schedule I of the Town and Country Planning General Develbpment Orders, 1977 and 1981, there shall S be no insertion of doriners or windows in the roofspace of any W dwelling approved under the reserved matters without the prior written permission of the local planning authority.

REPORT: The proposed dwelling would be situated to the rear of a sewage pumping station in Kimberley Road between Woe. 59 and 63. The forwardmost part of the main site is approximately l6.Bm (SSft.) from the rear of the footpath level with the rear of the existing buildings to either side. To the north of the site lies the rear garden of No. 63, Rimberley Road; to the west the rear garden of No. a4O, Little Walcering Road; to the south lie the rear gardens of Woe. 336, Little Wakerirxg Road and No. 59, Kimberley Road and to the east lies the sewage pumping station. Access to the site would be gained via a driveway running adjacent to No. 63, Kimberley Road within the curtilage of the pumping station. Objectibns have been receiveçl from the neighbours adjoining 'the site, their main concern being the loss of privacy, due to 'bacIcfilling'. Policy Hld of the Draft Roahford District Local Plan states that developments which:

"produce a, 'Tandem' relationship betvleen dwellings of one dwelling facing the rear of another" and "Result in overJpoki1,ng — and privacy problems", will noriAally be refused. In this particular case, however, there is no 'tandem' relationship as the proposed dwelling would face the 'pumping station and, being a bungalow, there need by no overlooking or privacy problems. The County Surveyor, Anglian Water and Director of Healt4 and Housing have no adverse comments.

7 (J 9. ROC/313/85 HULLERIDGE

THE CHALET, 24,KINGSMAN FARM ROAD, HULLERIDGE

Erect private jetty. Mr. R.R. Swetman, The Chalet, 24, Kingsman Farm Road, Hullbridge, Essex, 555 6QB.

RECOMMENDATiON: APPROVAL, SUBJECT TQ THE FOLLOWING—,CONDiTIONS AND THE COMPLETION OF A LEGAL AGREEMENT:

1. Std. Cond. 3 — Commence in five years. 2. The jetty hereby permitted shall only be used for the mooring of boats belonging to the owner of the property known as "The Chalet", Mr. R.R. Swetinan, or his successor in title d that property, for his private use only and for no other purposes without the prior approval in writing of the local planning authority.

3. If affected by the construction works Of the jetty, the sea wall footpath shall be reinstated to the satisfaction of the local planning authority prior to first jase of the jetty.

EPORT I I Planning permission has been iefused on two ocbasions for a jetty at this site under applications ROC/a90/83 and ROC/O93/84, the reason for refusal on that most recent occasion being that :-

"To permit the proposed jetty would be contrary to Policy NR18' of the approved Essex Structure Plan which states that 'There shall be the most stringent restrictions on development on the rUral and undeveloped coastline outside built—up areas and any development which is exceptionally permitted shall not! adversely affect the open and rural character or wildlife'. Furthermore, the proposal, if permitted,! could generate pressure for many similar facilities along this stretch of the river frontage thereby despoiling the appearance o the river edge. ", Following the inclusion of Policy LT15 in the Draft Rochford District Local Plan, which would, if adopted, in principle permit the proposal, together with the recent favourable conaideration of an application for a jetty at "The Lebanon", Kingsnan ! Farm Road (ROC/lS/85), the applicant has now re-submitted the proposal. The Department of Transport has given its consent fr the jetty and the necessary consent from Anglian Water a he Crouch Harbour Authority have also been given. The latter body have appeared to have changed their view with W regards to jetties at this part of the Crouch, having for some time objected to structures projecting beyond ¶he base of the sea wall to one of allowing limited projection such as would be the case here in exchange for the benefit of bein9 able to moor boats out of the main channel of the river.

The Nature Conservancy Council have no objections to the • proposal. No comments have been received to date from the Hullbridge Parish Council. Similatly with Essex County Council and Borough Council, although it is understood both continue to have objections to jetty proposals, considering them to be contrary to Policy NR1B of the Essex Structure Plan, likely to result in congestion, and to the precedent which would be set I' II I 1 I 'I? Having in mind the support of the Cro&ch Harbour Author itj to the proposal and to the lack of objections from the Natpre Conservancy Council, it may be, as in the case f the jetty proposed at "The Lebanon", difficult to substantiate an objection • to the proposal. Policy LT1S of the Draft Rochford District Local Plan, as applicable to this part of the river, would restrict jetties to those owners/occupiers of properties in Kingsmarz Farm Road, r with an accompanying legal agreement restricting the use of those jetties to private use only.

10. ROC/349/85 ROCHFORD

22, SOUTH STREET ROCFXFORD

Change of use of part of ground floor from offices to physiotherapists •1 • Mrs. H. Neville, MCSP. SRP. do Abbotts, 22, South Street, Rochford, Essex, 554 lEa.

RECOMNENDATION: APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO: I I Std. Conch 3 — Commence in five years.

REPORT: The proposal involves the change of use of two rooms in this building, previously used for office purposes, to one treatment room and a waiting room for use by a Physiotherapist.

9 The car parking standard for a use of this scale would be two car spaces. The owners of the building, Abbotts, have indicated that the Physiotherapist will be allowed to make use of their existing car park to the rear of the property, although there is no indication of any formal agreement to such an arrangement.

11. RC)C/295/85 HOCKLEY

I RICBRA, LOWER ROAD, HOCKLEY Change existing mobile home to double unit as extra temporary accommodation. I L I

W.S. and J.T., Lemon, Ricbra, Lower Road, Hockley, I SSS 5NL. Essex, I

RECOMMENDATION: REFUSAL, FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1. Std. Rsn. 36 - M.G.B.

2. The mobile home having full facilities laid on and also being separated from the adjoining property "Ricbra', by the erection of fencing and having its own independent point of vehicular access, amounts to a new and separate residential unit contrary to the aboye policy.

REPORT: This application, together with that the subject of the following item1 is described differently here than as appeared in the Parish Council Consultation list of 24th May. The applicants consider that their own description of development as indicated on the submitted application forms more fairly describe the subjects of their applications rather than those descriptions used by the Directorate of Development, and they have insisted that it is their own descriptions which are used here. The double unit is presently being used by the applicants. The applicants explain that they purchased the adjoining residential property "Ricbra° for their parents but, when one parent became unwell and help was needed in the maintenance of the property, they sold their own house and caine to live at the site. One parent has now died and the applicants continue to use the mobile home on what they consider to be a temporary basis in order to keep the family together and look after the remaining parent, and to allow their children to finish their education unCsturbed.

10 (3k — — — — — — — — — ______IIIPfIuI

The dwelling "Ricbra" is not large enough to accommodate all of • the family. Planning permission was refused in May of last year for works of extension to IRicbrabl — the proposal being considered to be unreasonable within the terms of Green Belt policy and that decision has now been upheld pn appeal b' the Department of the Environement. One half of this double unit was previously stationed elsewhere on the plot when it appears not to have any facilities associated with it. The mobile home has now been relocated, doubled in size and has full facilities laid on.

As such it cannot be regarded as 'overspill sleeping accommodation which can be accommndated within the curtilage of a residential property without the need for express planni9 permissions 'but i' to all1 intents and purposes 'a' new separate residential unit and is thus contrary to Green Belt policy. This is all the more evident as the mobile home has been separated from the dwelling "Ricbra'1 by the erection of fencing and is served by a separate vehicular access. While having some sympathy for the applicants circumstances, the above represents a serious breach of planning control. The matter has already been considered by the Planning Services Committee in December of last year when the outcome of the appeal against the refusal of planning permission for extensions to the property was not known and, in accordance with Minute 912/84, the Director of Development proposes action to remedy the breach of planning control. I I As noted above, Lhere is the facility to provide extra sleeping accommodation when it is incidental to the enjoyment of the dwelling house, i.e. does not by the nature of the facilities provided form a separate unit and, if the matter can be remedied without the need to take enforcement action, the Director of Development will discuss the matter with the applicants. The Director of Health and Housing informs that this use of a • mobile home requires a Licence under the provisions of the Caravan Sites and Control! of Development Act, 1960. The Hockley Parish Council objects to this, mobile home situated within the Green Belt.

12. ROC/294/85 HOCKLEY RICBRPS, LOWER ROAD, HOCKLEY Alter entrance once used for entry to field from hardcore and gravel to a reinforced concrete drive. W.B. and L.J. Lemon, "Ricbra", Lower Road, Hockley, Essex, 555 SNL.

11 RECOMMENDATION: REFUSAL, FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: The local planning authority considers that the work carried out amounts to a new vehicular crossing. The access is being used to facilitate the use of a mobile home on a separate residential unit, the establishment of which is contrary to Green Belt policy and considers as a result that there is no legitimate justification for such an access.

REPORT: The applicants maintain that there has previously been a vehicular access in this position, although the Department has phographic evidence indiqating that if thre ias an access ere previously, it has been re-opened as there was, until recenbly, chain link fencing erected at this position. The County Surveyor has no objections to the access subject to hedging being removed in height in the interests of highway safety. The crossing has been constructed according to the applicants to allow them a means of access to the mobile home the subject of the preceding item without causing disturbance to the parent living in the dwelling "Ricbra" that would result if the acccess to that dwelling was used. The access does, however, facilitate the use of the mobile home as a separate residential unit and ought therefore to be resisted.

13. ROC/348/85 ROCHFORD SUTTON COUNTY PRIMARY SCHOOL, SUTTON

Change of use from primary school to registered nursing home.

A.G. Braxton and A.A. Ricks, c/o 15, Leighcliff Building, Maple Avenue, Leigh—on—Sea, Essex, SS9 1PR.

RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO:

I 1. Std. Cond. 3 — Commence in five years. 2. No persons who are below retirement age (i.e. 60 years of age for females and 65 years of age for males) shall reside at the premises without the prior approval in writing ofn the local planning authority.

12 3. A scheme of car parking provision shall be submitted to the local planning authority for approval prior to commencement of the use.

4. Std. Cond. 33 - Car parking spaces to be marked on parking area.

5. The existing demountable classroom building to the north east corner of the site shall be dismantled and removed from the site prior to the commencement of the use. Furthermore, the existing dilapidated toilet block out—building to the western edge of the existing hard surfaced playground area shall be demolished and cleared from the site prior to the commencement of the use.

I I I I REPORT: I Iii No adverse comments have been received from statutory consultees to this proposal.

r No letters of objection have been received from neighbouring residents save for one from Mrs. P. Seales of Old School Cottage, Shopland Road, who objects on the grounds that insufficient details have been submitted. In answer to this it must be said that the applicants have supplied all the relevant information and would have submitted a detailed layout of the building but this is not available from County at present.

14. ROC/254/85 HOCKLAEY LONG ACRE FARM, LOWER ROAD, HOCKLEY

Erect single storey building for use as shop. I

D.R. Vincent, Long Acre Farm, Lower Road, • Hockley, Essex, 555 5LR. I

RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING COIbITIONS—— AND THE COMPLETION OF A LEGAL AGREEMENT: 1. Std. Cond. 3 — Commence in five years. 2. No retail sales or displays shall ake place from the building or any part of the building other than fresh and frozen uncooked meat, eggs and poultry produced on the holding and other food products grown or produced on the farm.

3. Std. Cond. S - A scheme of tree and/or shrub planting to e approved. nfl

13 I

7 REPORT: Planning permission was refused in 1979 for a farm shop at this site on Green Belt grounds and because of the precedent such a proposal would set for other similar commercial uses (ROC/54l/79). That view was upheld by the Department of the Environment on appeal. The applicant argued that, such is the economic state of pig farming, it is only with the greater margins achieved through direct sales of pig meat to the public that he can reasonably run his business.

Members may recall that in April, 1982, planning permission was granted against the recommendation of the Director of Development for the erection of a farm'shop at'La Vallee Farm about half a. mile to the west (ROC/37/83). The concern over applications such as these is that, while the sale of produce grown on a holding is considered to be ancillary to the agricultural enterprise, when produce is altered or adapted for sale, such an activity is not ancillary to agriculture. With meat produce having to be transported elsewhere to be altered or adapted for sale it is difficult to be certain 4iat only that produce produced or reared on the site would be sold from the farm shop. However, Members considered that in the case of La Vallee with the benefits of a Legal Agreement, the necessary assurance over the future use of the farm shiop could be secured and approval was granted. The applicant naturally feels aggrieved that his own previous application should have been refused. The Director of Development continues to be concerned about the possible proliferation of such activities, but it is feared that a decision other than one of approval may now appear inequitable and difficult to support - though, of course, every application is determineçl and every decision defended, on the merits of the case.

Th applicant proposes a building 3.04m (loft.) by 7.3m (24± t.) to be sited approximately 25m from the, highway with parking provision for three cars and with access from one of two existing accesses to the farm and dwelling. There is natural screening on much of the frontage. The recommendation is made1 in advance of the receipt of the views of the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. The views of the County Surveyor are also awaitea and the Director of Development may have additional conditions to reco end at the meeting.

I

14

p,J'C', r' — — — — — — — — — —— ______— a Hockley Parish Council object to the proposal on Green Belt V grounds. It also suspects that produce other than that produced from the holding will be sold and, in general, believes that farm shops can proliferate to no real purpose.

15. Roc/373/85 RAYLEIGH 1, THE APPROACH, RAYLEIGH

Erect two metre high timber fence to front boundary.

Maidaid (Eastern) Ltd., 1, The approach, Raylei9h, I Essex, $86 9APS. I

RECOMNENDATION: APPROVAL, SU}3JECTTO:

1. Std. Cond. 3 - Commence in five years.

2. The existing site access marked 'A' on the plan returned herewith shall be used as an entrance to the site only and collapsible plates shall be provided across ¶he surface of this access to prevent the exit of vehicles to the'satisfaction of the local planning authority prior to the completion of the proposed boundary fence.

RE PORT:

Members may recall the recent application for a 1.Bm (6ft.) brick boundary wall with decorative ironwork which was favOurably considered at the Planning Services Committee of 13th December, 1984. The applicants are now applying for planning consent for a vertical boarded fence resting on exposed aggregate concrete panels in a similar position to that previously approved wall - the previous proposal being prohibitively expensive.

I 16. ROC/202/85

72, MAIN ROAD, HAWKWELL I

I

Erect new workshop.

W.D. Moore, 10, Bullwood Road, Hocicley, Essex, $55 4Rh.

15

7iG RECOMNENDATION: REFUSAL, FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: Std. Rsn. 36 - M.G.B.

REPORT: The above application was deferred at the last meeting of the Committee on 6th June for further negotiations. The recommendation at that time was one of refusal on Green Belt grounds. Arising from deferrment and discussions with the applicant, the scale of the proposal both in terms of site area and size of building has been reduced by some 50%. The proposed workshop now

I measures 7.Sm x 9m. I I The applicant has confirmed th&t :— (a) It is not his intention to conduct car sales on the site or to carry out car breaking, storage of derelict vehicles, paint spraying or body repairs. (b) He hopes to retain his involvement with the fire service until obliged to retire at 55 years of age. The Brigade's Divisional Commander has confirmed that he expects Mt. Moore will continUe to serve the community until retirement is forced upon him. (c) Utilisation of land within the adjoining industrial curtilage appears impractical not lest because of costs which would be out of proportion with the small personal business proposed. (d) The applicant will reside in the existing dwelling, No. 72, and the attractive gardens at the front will be maintained. The application site is a currently untended area of garden. In the light of the further information and reductions in the scale of the operation, Members may feel that the particular circumstances of the case merit favourable consideration and that a conditional permission personal to the applicant and for a temporary period allied to a legal agreement would not set an undesirable precedent or prejudice the Green Belt in this location. If Members decide to consider an approval, the following conditions are recommended

1. This permission shall enure for the sole benefit of Mr. W.D. Moore and not for the benefit of the land.

2. This permission shall expire after five years fro, the date of this permission and, by that date, the workshop bgØing shall be removed from the land.

16 a '3' a 3. No panel beating or paint spraying shall take place on the

site or within the workshop building. I 4. No machinery, vehicle parts, components or waste materials shall be stored or deposited on the open areas of the site.

6. Only private motor cars and light vans shall be 'serviced and/or repaired within the site and workshop building.

7. No work involving power tools or machinery shall take plaèe on the open areas of the site.

8. Details of any air compressors and their housing and location shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority prior o their installation. III 'I 'I I 9. 'The hours pf work shall be between 8.00 a.m. and 6.00 p.m. each day Monday to Friday and 8.00 a.m. tp 1.00 p.m. Saturday. — No work shall take place ofl Sundays or Bank Holidas. J

17. RoC/32l/85 HOCKLEY REAR OF HOCKLEY STATION, PLUMBEROW AVENUE, HOCKLEY

Extend existing car park to provide additional 60 parking spaces.

British Railways Board, c/o C.J. Srnith,LBSC., ARICS., I Eastern Region, Kings House, 236/240, Pentonville Road, London, Ni 9C1z. I I

RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO:

1. Std. Cond. 3 — Commence in five years.

2. Details of a screen wall/fence to be erected along the line W coloured brown on the plan returned herewith shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority prior to first commencement of the construction of the car park. The screening shall be erected prior to first use of the car park hereby approved. I

3. The final surface of the car park hereby approved shall be laid out at a ground level the details of which shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority prior to commencement of construction of th'e car park. The submitted details shall indicate the proposed ground level of the car park relative to the levels of adjoining residen 4al gardens.

17

I.' REPORT: The car park extension would occupy vacant land to the west of the existing car park which is served by an access onto Plumberow Avenue. The site adjoins the rear gardens of three properties in Plumberow Avenue and is particularly close to the dwellinghouse at No. 1, Plumberow Avenue. There is at present a 6' chain link fence on the boundary of the site and a variety of screening vegetation mostly decidious. The occupiers of those three properties all have strong reservations about the proposal. The occupiers of No. 1 comment that they already suffer from lack of privacy, noise, fumes and other, nuisances as a result of the existing car park and suspect that this will only be madeworse. I Those at No. S are similarly concerned about noise and privacy, together with traffic generation and loss of wild habitat. The occupiers of No. 3 are concerned about noise and! ask for 'screen fencing, but also suggest that extra parking provision could be accommodated on vacant land on the opposite side of the railway lines to the west of the station building as an alternative. Certainly, some land at present is being used in what appears an informal basis for parking, but the formal provision of this land for car parking raises wider, implications about the development of this land in general, particulrly the problems of access onto Spa Road. It may be unreasonable to resist at this time what, with additional screening, would be an acceptable proposal on its own merits. The views of the County Surveyor have not been received at the time of writing but it is understood that he has no objections to the proposal.

18. ROC/178/85 GREAT WAKERING LAND IN SEAVIEW DRIVE, GREAT WAKERING

Erection of 31 houses and access roads. Croft Homes (Essex) Ltd., do R. Michael Welton and Partners, Baryta House, 29, Victoria Avenue, Southend-on—Sea, Essex, 552 6Az. RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO:

1. Std. Cond. 3 - Commence in five years.

2. Before any of the development hereby permitted is commenced, samples of all materials to be used in the external construction of the buildings shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.

18

r EcU 3. Prior to the occupation of the dwellings hereby approved, provision shall be made within the curtilage of each plot for one garage or garage space in addition to one parking space in accordance with the details previously1 submitted.

4. The floor space shown for garaging and referred to in Condition 3 above shall be used for no other purpose.

5. A scheme of landscaping with tree planting shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted. Such planting shall be carried out during the first available season following the commencement of development. Any tree dying within five years of planting shall be replaced by the applicant or their successors in title to the satisfaction of the local planning authority. As part of this scheme, 2 metre high brick walls, details of 'which bhb.ll be submitted aShper the above scheme, shall be provided along the lines indicated in green on the plan returned herewith and erected prior to the occupation of the dwellings they are intended to screen.

6. The dwellings propoed to be erected on Plots 8, 9 and 10 as described on the drawing No. 3607B21D shall not be occupied until after a suitable scheme to make up and extend Seaview Drive is agreed in writing with the local planning authority and implemented accordingly.

7. The carriageway of the proposed estate rdad shall be constructed prior to the commencement of the erection of any residential devplopment proposed to ,have access from such road and the proposed roads and turhing spaces where applicable shall be constructed in such a manner as to ensure that each dwelling before it is occupied shall be served by a properly consolidated and surfaced carriageway between the dwellings and the existing highway. Further, the footways and footpaths commensurate with the frontage of each dwelling shall be constructed and completed within twelve months from the date of occupation of the dwelling.

8. Details of the proposed finished surface of the access ways • intended for adoption other than roads shall be submitted to the authority for approval prior to the erection of ny of the dwelling units proposed, to have access therefrom. All statutory undertakers' services shall be laid prior to the commencement of any works of construction on the said access wayy thereafter, these works of construction shall proceed in such a manner as to ensure that each of such dwelling units, before it is occupied, shall be served by a properly consolidated and surfaced means of access between the dwelling and the existing highway. The inal finished surface of the access way shall be laid within three months of the completion of all dwelling units obtaining access therefrom or within any such extended period as may be agreed by the authority.

19 9. 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.

10. Where the surface finish of private drives are intended to remain in unbound materials, the first six metres, as Measured from the back of highway, should be treated with an approved surface dressing to avoid the displacement of loose material onto the highway.

11. In addition to the requirements of Condition No. 5, details of screening walls and/or fencing or other means of screening, together with their positioning, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority before the development is qommencpa ad shall be erected prior to the occupation of the dwellings hereby permitted. 12. Std. Cond. 15 - Details of walls, fences or other means of enclosure.

13. the bathroom and landing windows outlined in red and marked 'X' on the plans returned herewith shall be obscure glazed.

REPOLC: I This item was deferred at the last Planning Services Committee

I meeting on the 6th June, 1985. I Members may recall that, in 'acbordande"'with th procedure set out in Circular 49/63 whereby Government! Departments seek indications as to the possibility of planning permission being granted, residential development was considered appropriate in 1982. Phase I of this development was granted permission in September, 1983 (reference ROC/479/83) and is now under construction. This second phase proposed for the remainder of the site to complete the development in Seaviéw Drive. After clarifying details concerning surface water disposal, Anglia Water now have no objections to this proposal. the County Surveyor has suggested a number of minor amendments to the original layout and which have now been incorporated into a revised scheme. It was also recommended that

(i) the proposed roads be constructed prior to development commencing and footpaths completed within twelve months of the occupation of the dwellings; I

(ii) details of surfacing for accessways intended for adoption be submitted and all statutory undertakers' services to be laid prior to commencement of construction work;

(iii) pedestrian visibility splays be provided on both sides of all vehicular access;

20

I 'I'- (iv) the first six metres of private drives be treated with -. approved surface dressing if necessary. In addition, the County Surveyor drew attention to the proposed addition to Seaview Drive which would serve plots 8-10 of the development and, amongst other things, suggested an agreement be entered into covering the malcing up of the toad. It is understood the County Surveyor is now content with the revised access and layout. I In response to the notice displayed on site and neighbour notification, three letters have been received. Two of these rased no objections as such but drew attention to lack of children's play space and the need for a rear access way to be constructed along the site's western boundary in order to serve 4, 5 and 6, Broomways. The one letter of objection can be I summarised ad fdllows H I

No shopping facilities nearby, no suitable recreation/ play area, other community facilities in village considered inadequate. It was also considered that the fencing proposed along the eastern boundary and adjacent to the public footpath which has a ditch and hedge on its opposite length, would create a hazard for young children. It should be noted that an area for recreational activities has been allocated some 200 metres west of the site and will be maintained by this authority. The density proposed is in the region of 14 hoases per acre (36 dwellings per hectare) and 'is similar to the development adjoining. The design of the houses is similar to those presently under construction along the frontage with Seaview Drive. Further revisions have now been made to the layout and scren fencing and planting will be required to soften the appearance of the properties and increase privacy for the occupiers thereof. The developer is anxious to at least make a start on a small number of dwellings whilst the weather is favourable and it is considered that Condition 6 will be sufficient (bearing in mind advice within Circular 1/85 paragraphs 34 and 57) to dispense with the need for a legal agreement concerning the making up of the end of Seaview Drive.

19• R0C/415/85 HULLERIDGE I (formerly numbered ROC/144/84/l) 22, BURNHAM ROAD, HULLBRIDGE

21 Erect two detached bungalows with integral garages.

A.W.B. Builders Ltd., do J.P. Leighton, LIOB., MSST., Saitcoats House, Cutlers Road, , Chelmsford, Essex. Frontage: .65m (8Oft.); Depth: 3Gm (ll8ft.) Floor Area: 88m2 (94Osq.ft.) each.

RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO:

1. Std. Cond. 3 - Commence in five years. 2. Std. Cond. 8 — Submit materials schedule.

3. Std. Cond. 12! Garage to be incidntal to enjoyment of dwelling. 4. Std. Cond. 14 - 1.8m (6ft.) high fencing tobe erected. 5. Std. Cond. 34 - Certain windows to be obscure glazed.

6. Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 3, schedule 1 of the Town and Country Planning General Development Orders1 1977 o 1981, there shall be no obstruction to visibility abovp a height of 60cm within the sight splays hatched blue on the plan No. 00299 returned herewith.

REPORT: Outline planning approval was granted on in December, 1984 fQr one detached and one pair of semi—detached dwellings on this site. This application now seeks approval for two detached bungalows to occupy all of the site. The adjoining properties are both bungalows. No comments have been received to date from the adjoining occupiers. Anglian Water have no objections.

20. ROC/262/85 HAWKWELL SITE OF 23, THE WESTERINGS, HOCKLEY

Erect three detached houses with attached garages.

Pannell 'Developments Ltd., c/a John Cotton, 185, London Road, Southend-on--S::, Essex, SS1 lPW - ir T I"I' !'' 'r''

RECOMMENDATION: REFUSAL, FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS:

1. The proposed development by reason of its design, layout and position beyond the established building line would result in a cramped appearance in the street scene out of character with existing adjacent properties and detrimental to the visual amenities of the area. 1 2. The local planning authority considers this proposal to be an overdevelopment of the site which would cause overlooking between the buildings proposed and would also result in the loss of at least one mature oak tree adjacent to the site boundary of significant amenity value in thas location on the junction of two public highways.

REPORT I I This proposal involves the demolition of one bungalow and the erection of three hpuses with garages. I Anglian Water has no objection but requests that surface water disposal be to the surface water sewer and not the foul sewer as proposed. Replies have been received from seven neighbourp, of whom six have objected on the following grounds :- i) obstruction to visibility at dangerous junction close to Westerings School; (ii) overcrowding of site and not in keeping with the area;

(iii) houses beyond the building line; (iv) close to mature oak trees;

(v) loss of access to maintain wall of adjacent property (No. 27). Hockley Ratepayers Association has otjected on similar gropnds and referred to the different foundation levels between the proposed dwellings and No. 27.

A petition signed by 31 neighbours (from 20 properties) objecting to the proposal and pointing out the surface water problems in the area has also been received. However, occupiers from five of these properties have already objected by letter, as reported above. The site is situated in an area comprised mainly of bungalows with a limited number of chalets and bungalows. Four mature oak trees are situated on the highway verge along the eastern unny Road) boundary.

23 74 Reference has been made by the neighbours to the possibility of allowing two properties on this site and Members may wish to express an opinion on this for guidance.

21. ROC/031/84/l RAYLEIGH

GLENMOUNT, WARWICK ROAD, RAYLEIGH

Erect detached house and detached garage (details).

Haralan Property Co. Ltd., do John H. Williams, Estate House, 377, Rayleigh Road, Eastwood, Leigh-on-Sea, Essex, SS9 5PS.

RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO:

1. The existing trees and hedgerows abutting the western, southern and eastern boundaries of the site shall be retained and shall not be lopped, topped, thinned or removed without the prior approval in writing of the local planning authority.

2. Prior to the occupation of the dwelling the private drive access from Kent Way shall be hardsurfaced and available to serve the property. 3. Std. Cond. 8 — Submit materials schedule.

4. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning General Development Orders, 1977 to 1981, the dwelling shall not be extended, other than extensions at ground floor level, nor windows inserted in either of the two flank (north and south) walls or the rear west wall at first floor level or above, without the prior approval in writing of the local planning authority. I

5. l.8m (6ft.) high wooden screen fencing shall be erected between poLnts "A' and 'B' on the application drawing No. 1l08.6B returned herewith commensurate with the occupation of the proposed dwelling. The location and details of such' fencing shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority before the development is first commenced.

6. Any fencing or brick walls proposed to be erected, or as may be required by Conditions 2 and 6 of this permission, shall be erected only in accordaice with details which shall have been submitted to and approved by the local planning authority before the development is commenced. Such details shall indicate the method of construction of the walls or fences and such construction shall ensure that the trees and roots of the trees situated along the eastern boundary of the site and which are protected by a Tree Preservation Order suffer no damge by reason of the provision of the walls and fences.

24 'riI '!I' r 'n1 i' ''ir' R

7. Std. Cond. 12 — Garage to be incidental to enjoyment of dwelling.

- REPORT:

Members may recall that planning permission was allowed on appeal in March this year for two detached houses and garages on this site. Detailed planning permission for a house and garage on Plot 2 was granted by the Planning Services Committee on 9th May this year under item lOof the Schedule of Applications. The present application is submitted as reserved matters 'to the outline consent granted on appeal and indicates the proposed dwelling angled at approximte1y 45 degrees to the dwelling on Plot 2, which is parallel with Kent Way. in his recornmendatiQn, the I,nspectpr, discussed he merts an demerits of wo schenies, scheme B thowing the house on Plot 1 angled as submitted, Scheme A showing the dwelling almost directly facing Kent Way. With the layout as submitted, the distance 'between the front windows of the nearest dwelling, 14, Kent Way, and' the new dwelling is about 75 feet, whilst the distance between the rear wall of the new dwelling and 46, Lancaster Road is 95 thet. 110 Feet exists between the dwelling and the rear of 44, Lancaster Road. About 70 feet will exist to the, rear windows of the house approved on Plot 2. The occupiers of Nos. 44 and 46, Lancaster Road are concerned about overlooking between windows and suggest that the provisipn of high level windows in the new property wèuld eliminate any overlooking, particularly if the high hedgerow at the rear of Wos. 44 and 46 is removed. This hedgerow was mentioned in the appeal decision as a suitable form of screening, and the Agent has confirmed, in the latest revised drawing, and by letter, that these hedgerow trees will be retained. A substantial part of the site would thus be screened but the 95 feet and 110 feet rear to rear distances to the properties in Lancaster Road are slightly S below the 35m (llbft.) minimum "remoteness" distance suggested in W the Design euide for Residential Areas. Against this shortfall must be belanced the fact that the aspect of vision is angled, and the imposition of a cpndition requiring high level windows to be provided is one which the applicants do not feel is justified in the light of the Inspector's comments, in paragraph 6 of the appeal decision, that the "substantial hedge or a 6ft. wooden paralleled fence, together with a number of small trees".... provided, in his view "a reasonable screen and should be sufficient to avoid any serious loss of privacy to the',' rear gardens of the Lancaster Road properties". The revised drawings submitted by the applicants show the hedgerows to be retained and a suitable condition is inclu(ed to retain these, together with an extra condition requiring a1'ence to fill the gaps in the hedgerow.

25 An existing Ut. wall/fence exists along the remainder of the western boundary. Another condition proposes to remove permitted development rights for the erection of extensions other than ground floor extensions. This condition is included to enable the local planning authority to take any overlooking problems into account if extensions are proposed in the future. The occupier of No. 46A is concerned that no overlooking occurs, whilst the occupier of 14, Kent Way is concerned that no more trees or hedgerows are removed than is absolutely necessary for access. Most of the mature trees along the eastern boundary of the site are1 protected by a Tree Preservation Order, as are those adjoining Plot 2. Other objections received relate td car paridny in Kent Way, but adequate off-street parking is provided within Plots 1 and 2. A 4" diameter water main passes" under the site of the propcsed garage to Plot 1 and some of the adjoining residents feel that this fact was ignored by the Inspector when deciding the appeal. However, the Essex Water Company have confirmed that elthough they will not permit building over the main, they have no objection to its diversion. The revised drawings subnitted by the applicants show this diversion. Angi.ian Water do not object to the E3ropoaal which indictes the main sewers passing through the site to be well clear of bile

buildings. I

Screen fencing has been provided for between Plots 1 and 2 a condition imposed on the planning consent for Plot 2 and, uhil the dwelling on Plot 2 has been constructed, no overlooking problems will occur requiring such screening.

'I . I 22. ROC/247/85 ASHINGDON 181, GREENSWARD LANE, HOCKLEY

Chang& of use of vacant land to residential gardei and sitjx 9f mobile home.

B.A. Eustace, Esq., c/o Mrs. R. Miller, 181, Greensward Lane, Hockley, Essex.

26 a 'I'' I I1lI7P

REPORT: Members may recall that planning permission was refused under delegated powers by the Director of Development, for the siting of a holiday caravan on the land at the junction of Crouch View Crescent and Greensward Lane in September of last year. It was considered that the site was outside any area allocated for holiday uses in the Approved Review Development Plan and was situated within the Green Belt, upon which it was considered it would have a detrimental impact. Furthermore, the proposal was considered to be contrary to policy L16 of the Essex Structure Plan Which states that the development of small plots of land in the countryside on leisure plots with any buildings, caravans, etc. Will not be permitted. At the request of the applicant, that determined application was brought before' Members at! a làtet P1annitg Services Committee for its consideration and Committee reaffirmed the authority's objection to the proposal. The applicants, on that occasion, Mr. Eustance, togethe with the occupier of No. 181, Greenswrd Lane, have now made a joint application for the change of use of the land in question to garden land and for permission to site a mobile home upon it. In a letter accompanying the application, Mr. Eustance states "I wish to site a mobile home alongside Mrs. Miller at 181, Greensward Lane, Hockley, which would be used ancillary to existing dwelling as additional sleeping accommodation. As referred to in her Doctor's letter she is an elderly widow of very nervous disposition 4'iho lives on her own, and I feel that my wife and I could be of very great assistance to her by being there to help her". He further states that he would be willing to, enter into a legal agreement restricting occupation o the mobile home to themselves and to ensure that it remains ancillary to 181, Greensward Lane. There is a supporting letter from a Doctor Nicholls who is of the a view that Mrs. Miller "would benefit from'having a friend next 5 door for company and to keep an eye on her". There is in addition a letter from a Mr. E.G. Frost who states that the land immediately adjoining 181, GreensWard Lane was used from approximately 1948 to 1972 as a part of the garden of No. 181 with the remaining land owned and used as a garden by Mr. Frost's father, who lived at No. 182 and then by Mr. Frost over the same period. The land appears to have been comprised of two intended building plots on the Crouch View Crescent estate, of which only a few houses were built before the introduction of restrictive p1 ning policies.

27 The original house plans for 181 and 183 do not show this land as part of the original garden areas to either of those two properties. Even if the use of the land has occurred as Mr. Frost suggests, it does not have the benefit of any established use as garden land and the Director of Development is satisfied that planning permission would be required for its use as garden land. To date, planning applications for change of use of land to residential garden within the Green Belt have been determined on their merits. The Draft Rochford District Plan now expresses that previous view and states at policy G.B.8. that applications which are detrimental to the visual amenities of the Green Belt, affect good quality agricultural land1 affect the viability of agricultural holdings, or affect sites of nature conservation interest or open landscape will normally be refused. Where applications for change of use to garden land have been permitted they have normally been in conjunction with a legal agreement restricting the erection of buildings on the land. The intention being that such land should be retained as open in character and nt taken up with various buildings normally associated with gardens which might impair the character of the area. The Director of Development sees no reason to depart from the view that a mobile home would be visually obtrusive and would consolidate sporadic development along Greensward Lane within the Green Belt whether used as a holiday home or used for purposes ancillary to No. 181. It would appear that if the applicants wish to be able to have the presence of Mr. Eustance nearby, this could as effectively be achieved by stationing a caravan within the existing garden of No. 181. A mobile home within the curtilage of a dwellinghouse to be used as 'overspill' sleeping accommodation by guests of the occupier, arid not as a self- contained unit would be regarded as incidental to 'the enjoyment of the dwelling house and would not require the benefit of express planning permission from the local planning authority. Anything other tha this limited accommodation would be regarded as amounting to a new dwelling and would be contrary to Green Belt policy in areas so designated. It is to be noted that the applicants themselves propose that there would be foul drainage from the mobile home to a septic tank if permitted and which implies a degree of independence from the existing dwelling. The Director of Health and Housing reports that use of the mobile home will require a site licence under the provisions of the Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act, 1960 and that conditions are attached to such licences requiring satisfactory provision of water, drainage and refuse disposal. Such requirements would further re8ult in a development tantamount to a new separate dwelling.

28 a Fl The Director of Development is satisfied that in its present form the application ought to be resisted - a decision which could be made under powers delegated to him — but would appreciate the views of Members towards an application for the change of use of the land to garden only. The applicants would be free to station a mobile home within the existing garden area of 181 within the limited terms outlined above. I

Other replies to consultations have been received as follows ;— The County Surveyor has no objections to the proposal an the specific circumstances where it would be used in conjunction witih the existing dwelling. Anglian Water have no objections provided that il foul sewage resulting 4qm h1e development is passed to a properly I I constructed septic tank. I The Ashinydon Parish council object in principle to the application, maintaining its previous objection contrary to Green Belt policy and the setting of a precedent.

23. ROC/646/84/l RAYLEIGH 55-57, EASPWOOD ROAD, RAYLEIGH I

Demolish exisp.rtg surgery and erect new surgery, shop unit with office over and associated car park and access.

Dr. G.D. Thomas, Mrs. H. Zizzerman and Mrs. A. Swinburne, do The Goodrow Consultancy, Ivy House, 13, HighRoad, Rayleigh, Essex, 556 7813.

RECONbIENDATION: THE DIRECTOR OF' DEVELOPMENT BE AUPHORISED TO APPPbVE THE APPLICATION AFTER NECESSARY DESIGN REVISIONS HAVE BEEN MADE: 1. Before any of the works hereby permitted are commenced, samples of all materials to be used in the external constructiOn of the buildings shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.

2. Elevational details of the proposed shop fronts sha1lj be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority before any of the works hereby permitted are commenc

29

tie . REPORT: Outline planning permission for this development was granted in January this year. The details now before Members for determination are much as were envisaged at the outline stage and an indicative model of the proposal will be available for inspection in the Members' room before the meeting.

The County Surveyor has no objection to the development and draws attention to his previous Direction of November last year.

I Anglian Water has no objection. H

No objections or observations !have as let been received from the County Planner or in response to the site notices, etc, although the period for receiving comments will not expire until the 10th July, 1985. In addition, it is understood that, informally? the County Planner's specialist, Mr. Richards, is unhappy with elements of the design, e.g. height of the archway, roof light and fenestration to the surgery. The Agent has already been contacted on the subject of the insertion of altered glazing bars, etc. to the windows and would have no major objection to alterations here. In the circumstances, it is felt that a meeting could be held between the Agent, Mr. Richards and the Director's representative tp agree suitable minor alterations if the Committee are in agreement with the overall design. I Condition 4 of the outline permission required the footpath zone to be raised with a slopihg kerb 4"-S" above the finished level of the adjacent car park. In view of the possible danger (to pedestrians, wheelchair occupants, etc., visiting the surgery and using the pedestrian route) from having an angled kerb (even of a subtantial width) which persons could trip over, etc., the Agent has suggested the sloping raised path as described in the submitted plansb A clear demarcation line will be inccfrporated along the edge of the path and a distinct change of material or colour will be incorporated to ensure that the footpath is clearly visible.

I Details of the lighting to be provided to' the rear of the surgery are being finalised with the County Surveyor and the Agent and it is hoped these details will be available at the meeting.

24. ROC/228/85 ROCEIFORD LAND TO WEST OF AVIATION WAY, ROCHFORD Construct new industrial estate road. Charter Projects Ltd., do The Livemore Partnership, 98, Broadway, Leigh-on-Sea, Essex. a w 30 RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS.

1. Std. Cond. 3 — Commence in five years.

2. The area shown for the bridleway on the submitted plan No. 843/6e shall be kept clear of obstruction at all times and shall be turfed commensurate with the construction of the road hereby permitted. Details of the height, type and positioning of kerbs and fencing to delinate this bridleway shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority and constructed prior to commencement of the development hereby permitted.

REPORT: It will be recalled hat the Planning! Services Committee, on the • 31st January this year, delegated a proposal for a warehouse and office complex (reference No. ROC/783/84) to the Director of Development for approval. The vast majority of this site was within Southend Borough Council's area however. This current proposal involves a substitute access road to that described in the previous application and is mainly within the Rochford Administrative Area. It is understood that provision of this road is a condition of sale required by the land owners, Essex Counjy Council, and will allow access to other E.C.C. land to the west of the building — formerly the Aircraft Museum — north of the application site. Objections have been received from the British Horse Society and the Essex Bridleways Association who are concerned with the effect on the bridlepath which is situated along the northern boundary of the main site. Loss of part of the adjoining ancient hedgerow has also been objected to. Horse Owners and Riders of South East Essex (HORSE) objected to the making up of this path when the matter was originally described in the previous application. It should be noted that the previous application was later revised to exclude this northern roadway — now the subject of the current application. Rochford Parish Council, the Civil Aviation Authority and the County Surveyor have no objections although the latter has suggested the bridleway be surfaced. Furthermore, the Co3anty Surveyor has stated that there would be no objection to the previous application (ROC/783/84) if the access described in that proposal was temporary only and the permanent means of access was gained from the currently proposed estate road. The Ramblers Association has also expressed concern although Southend Borough Council has no objections and is anxious to see work on the warehouse/office complex commenced.

31 . In summary, it would appear that unless permission is granted for this road the warehousing/office complex will not be developed. Therefore, on balance, and bearing in mind the site's location in an area allocated for industry and the two metre wide grass verge proposed for the bridlepath, a recommendation of approval is made.

25. rtoc/692/84 ROACH GROUP BARLING HALL WHARF, DARLING ROAD, ROACH GROUP

Change use of vacant wharf to Wakering Yacht Club.

W&cering Yacht Club c/o A.J. Poole, 16, Whitehall Road, Great Walcering, Essex, SS3 OAA.

RECOMMSNDATION: REFUSAL, FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS:

1. The proposal is contrary to the Coastal Protection Policy NR18 in the Essex Structure Plan. Within the Coastal Protection Belt, there will be the most stringent restrictions on development and any development which is exceptionally permitted shall not adversely affect the open and rural character of wildlife.

2. The proposal is contrary to the Special Landscape Areas Policy NT12 in the Essex Structure Plan. Within Special Landscape Areas, there will be a presumption against development unless its location, siting, design, materials and landscaping accord with the character of the area in which the development is proposed.

3. The proposal is contrary to the Structure Plan Policy NR6 which precludes any development which would adversely and materially affect designated national nature reserves and Sites

of Special Scientific Interest. I

4. The proposal conflicts with Structure Plan Policy NRS which states that within an area identified as a Nature Conservancy Zone, development prejudicial to the retention ad management of important wildlife, habitats and their inter—relationships with each other will normally be refused. I

EPORT: This report is structured under four main headings (a) Explanation. . 32 I 0€-i " Pr ¶!"flII r' mi' 1'!

(b) Background information about the Wakering Yacht Club and the case for the application.

(c) The case against the application. (d) Specific notes for Members' attention.

(A) EXPLANATION Following consultations under paragraph 19 with the county Planner, the above item was recommended by the Director of Development for refusal at the Planning Services Committee meeting of 28th February, 1985 (Schedule Item No. 14 refers) being contrary to Essex Structure Plan Policies.

(i) MUG Coastal Protection Belt. (ii) NR12 Special Landscape Area. (iii) NR6 Site of Special Scientific Interest.

(iv) Nature Conservancy Zone. t The application was deferred for further consideration of the circumstances of the case and the planning implications. Further representations have been received for and against the proposal, together with some background information about the existing yacht club. Unfortunately, none of these additionl points address themselves adequately to the material planning considerations. of the letters supporting the application, five are from the applicants, three from declared Wakering Yacht Club members, one from the Trustees of Caleb Rayner, deceased, the owners of • Barling Hall Farm which includes the sea wall and the saltings beyond the wall and the private road leading to the farm from Barling Church on the main road, one from the Association of Yacht Clubs of Southend-on-Sea and Area, one from the Crouch Area Yachting Federation and two from private individuals. There are three letters of objection to add to the previous 100 signatures against and includes one from the Roach Group Parish Council.

(B) BACKGROUND INFORMATION ABOUT THE WAKERING YACHT CLUB AND TIlE CASE FOR THE APPLICATION The Wakering Yacht Club was founded in 1962 in Potton Creek coutesy of Sutton and Smith's boatyard but were forced to move to their present location in Mill Head Basin, a small site With limited tidal water, itt 1980.

33 7j1; I At 11th February, 1985 the Wakering Yacht Club had 82 family memberships, 51 single memberships, 13 junior members and 12 honorary members. The total number of individuals stands at 235 of which 66 require moorings. However, membership is likely to increase if permission is granted. The club ship 'Trent' is used for social gatherings once or twice a month in winter where numbers attending are restricted to 100 i.e. 50 or less cars usually. The club bar is open each Friday night 8.00 - 11.00 p.m. and Sundays 12.00 - 2.00 p.m. where attendance seldom exceeds 40 to 50 i.e. 3) cars or less. Most yachting activity takes place as one would expect at weekends. I I I It is the current Jacht club comma,ttee's !lope that once a secure site has been established, it may be possible to find club premises in keeping with a permanent yacht club. The Yacht Club have stated that professional fishermen are denied use of boat facilities in connection with their profession at their present site. "At Darling Hall it may be possible for a limited number of the existing professional fishermen to be given conditional access. We believe that there are approximately four fishermen operating at present1. A further letter from the Yacht Club has been submitted in upport of the application in response to the previous report to Committee and, in particular, the letter reported to that Inpeting under various headings submitted on behalf of local residents. The relevant points of this most recent letter are reproduced below

"The application is for the relocation of an existing facility in its entirety. There is existing development at the Darling Quay site including a concrete barge, a white painted corrugated shed, crane, and diesel fuel tanks and a number of moorings, many of which are unauthorised. We consider our barge 'Trent' more in character with the environment than the existing development. The area is not an SSSI. It is undestood that rare birds nest on Potton Island and they are unaffected by existing moorings and boat traffic in the Violet. Nearby to the proposed site there are sand—pits, a mineral extraction site and rubbish tip.

The site we are vacating is teeming with wildlife." Other points raised in the letter are dealt with under the following headings :- "PLANNING POLICY As already mentioned this is a relocation of an eisting and established facility, a

ri 4 — UI'

RISK OF PILFERING I trust that no slur is being cast on the character ot our members here. The fact is that our development will increase security as the landowner will require locked gate access to this

I site. I

LOSS OF COASTAL AND LOCAL ENVIRONMENT Gilsons do NOT own or occupy the wharf. Their lease is already terminated by the landowners, Messrs. Tolhurst, Tanton, Rayner and Rayner. They had not used the site, except for a very short period whilst under Noticed, in the 18 month' prior to the Notice. The oyster layings have not been used since the early 1970's and we cannot understand how 9 people will be' displaced. Gilsons have never used this area for oyster cultivation. RE: LOCAL PETITION

A lot of our members live in the immediate area but have not been approached by the petitioners. The Crouch Harbour Authority have been in correspondence with the Minthtry of Agriculture and Fisheries following a letter from the local fisheries officer about our development and they confirm that the area we propose to occupy is not part of a fishery licended or regulated by the M.A.F.F. and is a private freehold therefore. I The conclusion to draw is that the Ministry have no interest in how the ground is used and that they have no objections. There have been NO oysters laid there since the early 1970's. FURTHER DEVELOPMENT Development as outlined is not envisaged. There cannot be a Marine there as it is contrary to the Rochford plan as are mooring pontoons. There are slipways there already. We will not Wa be siting anything there that is injurious to the character of the area.

DETRIMENTAL TO VISUAL AMENITIES floats will enhance this, witness any photograph of a water side area, the photographer will include a boat to enhance his

picture. 1 I TRAFFIC GENERATION This has already been covered above. The Fire Prevention Off icer has confirmed that they do have provision for fighting a fire at Barling Hall Wharf.

In this paragraph they refer to track leading to site. Phist\is in fact a private road which the landowner will be improving t41 a standard suitable for our use.

35 S PARKING NUISANCE There is no intention of parking in Church Road or lane to wharf or on footpaths whatever. More than adequate parking facilities for members and their guests will be provided for on site (see plan). If by track in this paragraph he means Church Road this ts a through road - public highway. GENERAL DISTURBANCE The copy of the attached planning notes details our openings i.e. twice a week on a regular basis and likely density at weekends. We feel that the Yacht club will cause less disturbance than the previous operation (Gilsons). The car park is too far from dwellings for the closing of car doors to be of any influence; there being large barns and trees in between. We have a private dwelling near us at present and it is significant that in our 22 years of existence there has NEVER been a complaint from a resident of Great Wakerin. If the story of us being a nuisance stems from our present Landlord it would be because we resisted his demands to move a third time when he wanted the site1 that we had reclaimed from marsh, for his own use. We consider that rather than being a nuisance, we are providing a very valuable local amenity for young and old alike. DAMAGE TO WILDLIFE AND MARINE LIFE There has been in existence at this site a port in addition to the existing leisure activities of boating, sailing and fishing. It is not proven that these activities disturbed wildlife. Existing wildlife areas co—exist with heavily populated boating areas. The river Colne, Arlesford Creek and the Walton backwaters spring to mind. The rare, protected birds on Potton exist adjacent to the Violet which is quite extensively used. We do not understand what interest a Planning Of fleer or Committee have in the water a,s it were but I have found out the following 'P.B.T. antifouling which all the fuss is about has been withdrawn by the manufacturers. No conclusions have been reached yet anyway."

Inter-Club (Association of Yacht Clubs of Southend- Sea Area) support the application on the following grounds :— I 36 "1) The Essex Coastal Protection Policy is not against recreational use of the coast. It must be an advantage to the local residents to have an industrial site change to recreational use.

ii) Yachtsmen support conservation. They wish to sail in attractive surroundings which support wild life. The Club would carry out such site developments your Council may require.

iii) The Club is well established and has a good name in Walcering. It controls its members and supports the R.Y.A. educational policy, which sets standards of seamanship.

iv) The sea walls bounding Barling Creek are already a right of way. Little additional disturbance to wild life will result if the Club is relocated. For most of the week the c'ub site will be quieter than it was when the Gilson Cockle Plant was working. v) I note the list of objectors. Nany R.Y.A. members belong to these organisations. I believe, and so does the R.Y.A. Council, that the interests of all concerned could be safeguarded by sensible give and take on all sides.

Sailing is a growth sport. The majority of Wakering members are local people, running small yachts on low budgets. I feel that their efforts to develop better facilities, at no expense to the ratepayers, should be supported and I hope to hear from you that permission for relocation of their Club 14.0. and change of use of * the Barling Hall Wharf has been granted. The Director of Leisure agrees there is a local need. C) THE CASE AGAINST THE APPLICATION

Birds are dumb and powerless. They coexist with man who has the means to protect or destory them at will. Not surprisingly, therefore, the Council has received representations from expert • consultees the most important of which is the Nature Conservancy Council (N.C.C.) whom the Government via Department of the Environment Circulars says we are obliged to heed. Two letters of objection have been receive (a) Heather Chaplin — SSSI Renotification Assisant, Essex (N.C.C.) says "Foulness Island SSSI boundary currently follows thp western bank of Darling Hall Creek then runs downstream, meetin the coast at the mouth of the River Crouch. At this point it lies next to the Dengie 5551 which is in process of being re-notified under the Wildlife and Countryside Act, 1981. Both sites support internationally important bird populations which are vulnerable to disturbance by sailing boats. Hence, the building of a new yacht club with moorings within Foulness Island 5551, particularly if it led to a subsequent increase in membership an,q boats, would have an indirect effect on both the+ internationally important SSSIs. I 37 2ui S From the information available, it is impossible to predict the long-term indirect effects of these proposals, but we would be seriously concerned over any development which would, in our view, lead eventually to a significant increase in boat traffic within the SSSIs."

(b) Mr. C.F. Durrell — Assistant Regional Off icer, Essex (NeC) says

"Furither to our letter of the 16th November, we have now had an opportunity to inspect the site and have the following comments to make.

Barlinghall and Potton Creeks are quiet, remote creeks which form part of Foulness Site of Special Scientific Interest, a site of international importance for wildfowl and waders. At present there is a very low level of activity with moorings mainly for work boats to the south east of the Wharf. the relocation of Wakering Yacht Club to the Wharf would intensify activity in this area to the detriment of wildlife, especially if sixty-six moorings were provided in Position 2 shown on the location map. This area of creek is particularly sensitive because of the presence of a rare breeding bird protected under Schedule 1 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act, 1981.

We would like the Council to regard our two letters as objections to the proposals."

(a) The Foulness Wildfowl and Wader Counting Group lend weight to these comments as follows "Rare species of birds which nest on Potton Island and elsewhere within the Coastal 5581 (Site of Special Scientific Interest) would be disturbed by people using the moorings and could result in fewer young being reared and abandonment of their nest sites altogether. Three species of these birds in the vicinity are of special importance and one of these is sufficiently rare in Great Britain to be included in Schedule 1, Part 1 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act, 198]. whereby it is a serious offence subject to penalties to disturb such birds while nest building, at a nest containing eggs or young, or to disturb the dependant young. The second item of special interest is the small heronry in the trees adjacent to Barling Hall at the N.W. corner of the area on the map allocated to the boat park, where 4 nests were reported this year. Herons nest very early in the spring, just when there would be great activity in the boat park with boats being prepared for the forthcoming season right below the heronry. The herons, (also protected by law from disturbance at their nest) would be constantly put up, nestlings would chill anfldie, and the heronry probably deserted. a

38 'U) The gravel pits leased by Cory Sand and Ballast Co... on the south side of the approach road, hold the third bird of special importance as the Kingfisher breed here. This bird is also on Schedule 1 part 1. Increased use of the approach road! and the presence of many more people in the vicinity should the Yacht Club be relocated where proposed, could lead to disturbance of this and other species breeding in the area. The area is also interesting botanically, orchids are reported to grow there. Additionally, many other species of bird nest in the vicinity, on the saltings, borrow dykes and seawalls, while flocks of small birds fed there in.. winter. The expose4 mud along the creeks is an important winter feeding ground for numbers of wading birds. Again, disturbance by increased human activity if the Yacht Club were to be located there would be harmful to the birds. a For these reasons therefore we hope that the application will be V rejected."

(ci) The South Essex Natural History Society endorse the above and make the additional point that this is a wild and secluded area served by public footpaths easily accessible for nature lovers to escape from 'civilisation to enjoy the quiet of the countryside and observe the local wildlife, particularly birds.

(e) The Essex Naturalists Trust reiterate the grounds of objection put forward by the other groups and support the reasons for refusal. They also emphasise that the site is within the Roach Valley Conservation Zone and Green Belt and quote policy L.9 of the Essex Structure Plan which suggests "major water recreation facilities will not be permitted on the rural coastline and would be better located near coastal towns such as Southend and ". A second letter has been received in which the Essex Naturalists S Trust state — "since December, oUr objections to this particular application have been strengthened by the attitude of the Paintinakers' Association, who are campaigning against the banning of anti- fouling paints, and their campaign is bound to encourage to some extent the use by yachtsmen of these toxic paints, which further work has shown directly to affect the molluscs and probab3,y the worms which are the main food supply of the wading birds in the Site of Special Scientific Interest. (See below for further

comments on anti—fouling). I Secondly, there are proposals to build a huge marina at Southend. As this site is suggested in the Essex structure Plan, the Trust are not likewly totally to object to this proposal. We consider that any further yachting and boating facilities should e provided there and not in ecologically important areas."

39 7d) I (f) The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (R.S.P.B.) support Essex County Council and the Nature Conservancy Council in their grounds of objection. These are (i) impact on Foulness SSSI; (ii) threat to rare breeding birds; (iij) change in the appearance and character of the area. The R.S.P.B. are so concerned as to the plight of the rare breeding birds that they would be prepared to present evidence to this effect if the issue comes to a public inquiry.

(g) Mrs. J. MacConnell - Roach Valley Conservation Zone (R.V.C.Z.) Working Group endorses all previous representations and ummarises their main grounds of objection as ) unacceptable intrusion into the landscape o the' $oach Valle Conservation Zone; (ii) damage and disturbance to wildlife in an SSSI; (iii) disturbance to local residents of Barling; (iv) risks of further development and despoilation. A number of specific points backing and supplementing the above are also raised as follows "The area suggested for siting of moorings is a considerable distance from the proposed club base. 66 (or more) yachts moored anywhere along the creek would be very intrusive presenting a forest of clanking masts visible and audible in the flat landscape over a very large area. Unfortunately yachting activities are not only concerned with sailing. Maintenance work is carried out at various times and yacht moorings re normally associated with an unacceptable amount of litter. Large numbers of people walking along the wall at all states of the tide would creat an insupportable amount of disturbance to feeding and roosting birds. Yachts from the club already have access to 3 creeks. It is unlikely that they would reduce usage of any of these in compensation if their club were to move into this undisturbed backwater. • The landscape value of this site is considerable with its views over what is probably the largest extent of pnspoilt reclaimed marsh in the District. The club is in an already damaged area and it would be better if it were to remain there."

The R.V.C.Z. Working Group have also commented on the points'made in support of the application. They say "the Nature Conservancy Council are the authority on 5851's and their boundaries not Wakering Yacht Club. The site is definitely on the fringe of the Foulness and Maplin SSS1. Wakering Yacht Club clearly have no idea what disturbance to wildlife entails. It is a very uneasy co—existence and I know that there are problems at the places mentioned. We also have similar problems in Leigh where unrestricted growth of yachting, power-boating and now sailboarding is continually disturbing winter b%d and is damaging other marine life and the mud itself."

40 I In response to the Association of Yacht Clubs letter,the R.V.C.Z. Working Group make the following comments on each specific relevant point in turn

i) the Coastal Protection Policy seeks to protect some parts of the coast, including this one, from over—exploitation.

ii) this does not accord with my local experience where yachts and other boats continually disturb birds resting on the high tide. Their surroundings leave much to be desired and rubbish washed up along the shore, including paint cans and oil contaznars, is a cqntant problem. Are their present 1 II ii surroundings not attractive enough?! ii I

!I iv) 235 members and 66 boats must have, a considerable inpact, the effect of the Gilson Plant was contained in one small area, not spread over the length of the creek.

v) I have been given to understand this is the reason for their wanting to move — a little extra sailing time. Hardly a valid reason for damaging a relatively unspoilt area.

Everything claims to be a growth sporti These minority interests should not be allowed to take places over just to satisfy theix t "demands"."

It is acknowledged that from the leisure viewpoint there is a local need but this is not sufficient justification for transferring an environmental problem from one area to another. The R.VC.Z. Group go on to say that they "certainly don't regard the taking over of Barling Creek by a yacht club as an improvement, the existing development is very low key and the • impact minimal. But then not everybody appreciates the wildness and solitude of marshland or its high ecological value. Sailing may often take place in and around nesting and feeding grounds but it is by no means an acceptable activity and disturbance to nesting birds is an offence under the Wildlife and Countryside Act. Finally, all the additional representations were forwarded to the County Planner f or consideration but he does not wish to alter his view...

"I consider that the Coastal Protection Policy NR1S is the strongest of the refusal reasons. Whilst I accept tha. the application site and its environs are not completely undeveloped, the proposed development would bring about a permanent and marked change which is not appropriate to this area of the rural coast. Furthermore, it could easily lead to pressure for additkonal permanent shore based facilities in due course.

41 . No doubt you have already sought the advice and support of the Nature Conservancy Council and/or the Essex Naturalists' Ttust on the detailed likely impact of these proposals on the coastal 5551 and the Nature Conservation Zone.

In conclusion, whilst sympathising with the Yacht Club's apparent landlord and tenant difficulties, I do not consider that this is sufficient justification for a further intrusion into the Coastal Protection Belt."

<1)) SPECIFIC NOTES FOR MEMBERS' ATTENTION

I I I N.B. There would appear to be evidence to support the anti— fouling paint lobby damage to marine life. Details will be given to the meeting if requested. I

N.J3. N.B. Members are urged before making a decThion on this application to consider carefully the relevant Structure Plan and Draft District Local Plan policies appended in conjunction with representations made. To allow development to satisfy a local need, however laudiable would appear to be sailing very close to the wind from the environmental viewpoint. The! international environmental importance of this area shoul not be underestimated.

I

S

. 42 consideration will be given to the effect on existing farming operations.

POLICY RC1 THE DISTRICT PLANNING AUTHORITY WILL NOT NORMALLY ALLOW DEVELOPMENT ON FARMlAND IN THE METROPOLITAN GREEN BELT WHICH WOULD RESULT IN TkE INEFFICIENT OPERATION OR FRAGMENTATION OF FARM HOLDINGS.

8.4.0 Nature Conservation

8.4.1 Rochford District is of special importance for two features which typify Essex habitats — the coast and thu'woodland. The past two decades have brought adverse changes to the natural! habitat of the District, principally as a result of modern farming policies and techniques which have led to a greater arable' use of land, the enlargement of fields by hedgerow removal and land drainage bhemes. The spread of Dutch Elm disease has been particularly pronounced in the District.

8.4.2 Whilst changing farming practices are largely outside the scope of planning control, it is important that in sensitive areas the District Planning Authority uses its' powers as far as possible to prevent development which is likely to adversely affect them. Furthermore, Structure Plan Policy NRS states that "development in the countryside will be required to provide for the retention and management of wildlife habitats as far as possible."

8.4.3 Local Authoritie are asked in Circular 108/77 "Nature Consevation and Planning" to take full account of nature conservation factors and the need to conserve the natibn's natural 'heritage in formulating structure and local p].ans and in taking planning decisions. As an input to the Essex Structure Plan the Nature Conservancy Council (NCC) identified a heirarchy of nature conservation areas, namely Statutory National and Local Nature Reserves, Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs), Areas of Nature Conservation Interest and }Tature Conservancy Zones (NCZs)

8.4.4 The County Council adopted policies in the Structure Plan which impose restrictions on development within Nature Reserves, SSSIs and NCZs. The detailed boundaries of these areas are shown in the County Council's Countryside Conservation Plan, a noh—statutory document now being produced as supplementary planning guidance for all those concerned with the countryside. This Plan aims to endorse and,amplify the guidance given in that document. There are no statutory National or Local Nature Reserves in Rochford District. 8.4.5 Sites of Special Scientific Interest 8.4.6 These are statutory designations relating to sites of special interest because of their wildlife, plants or , and are of particular value because their unique characteristics are irreplaceable. There are two SSSIs within the District — Foulness and Maplin Sands, a Grade I key site of national importance and entirely within the ownership of the Ministry of Defence, and Hockley Woods, which are predominantly owned by the District Council. The District Council is obliged to consult with the 14CC on any planning application which is likely to affect an SSSI and to take account of its comments in reachA a decision.

704 '.4.7 The NCC is currently undertaking a review of SSSIs and it is likely that further sites may be scheduled in the near future.

POLICY RC2 THE DISTRICT PLANNING AUTHORITY WILL APPLY THE STRUCTURE PLAN POLICY NR6 TO THE AREAS SHOWN ON TIlE PROPOSALS MAPS A,B AND C OR TO ANY OTHER AREAS WHICH MAY BE DESIGNATED AS NATURE REERVES OR SITES OF SPECIAL SCIENTIFIC INTEREST.

•.4.8 Nature Conservancy Zones

Although SSSIs are afforded special protection under planning legislation there is at present no statutory recognition of the importance of the supporting ares. Successful conservation of nature relies heavily on the retention of natural and semi—natural veetation and the limitation of activities which are harmful to wildlife and its habitats. To increase the awareness of wildlife habitat the ,r need of protection, the NCC designated certain areas as Nature Conservacy Zones, which act as buffer zones around 5551's and other wildlife habitats. All these features are shown on the NCC's Nature Conservancy Map for Rochford District.

9.4.9 Within the Zones the NCC prefers to see existing farming methods continued, with all semi—natural vegetation, especially woodland, heathland, and grassland, retained, and public open space provided within them where appropriate.

8.4.10 The importance of Nature Conservancy Zones is recognised in the Structure Plan and Policy NR8 states that within them development prejudicial to the retention and management of important wildlife habitats and their titter—relationships with each other wilt normally be refused.

8.4.11 Of the fifteen NCZs proposed for Essex, three are located wholly or partly within Rochford District:—

(i) Roach Valley (ii) Rockley and 1-ladleigh Woods (iii) The Coast — to Stanford—le—Hope

8.4.12 On 20th December 1977 the District Council adopted the Roach Valley Conservation Zone which comprises the Roach Valley NCZ and that part of the Hockley and Hadleigh Woods,NCZ which is located within Rochford District. The primary purpose of the Zone is nature conservancy, aiming at the protection of flora, fauna and the landscape generally, and the co—ordination of all land uses such as farming and recreation to further this objective. The special character of the area can only be protected through voluntary co—operation between those people or organisations with an interest in the land and those concerned1 with conservation. The aims of the Zone are furthered by the regular meeting of a group of representatives from interested bodies with a Panel of Council Members to consider detailed matters affecting landscapes, wildlife habitats) or problems of public access.

8.4.13 The south bank of the Crouch estuary has been identified as part of The Coast NCZ, but no specific co—operative arrangements are env4aged in the Plan. The boundary of this proposed Zone is defined on proposals map. •

a 76 8.4.14 Structure Plan Policy NR8 states that within an area identified as a Nature Conservancy Zone development prejudicial to the retention and management of important wildlife habitats and their inter—relationship with each other will normally be refused,

POLICY RC3 THE DISTRICT PLANNING AUTHORITY WILL APPLY TIlE STRUCTURE PLAN POLICY NR8 TO THE ROACH VALLEY CONSERVATION ZONE AND THE COAST NATURE CONSERVANCY ZONE AS SHOWN IN THE PROPOSALS MAPS A,B AND C.

8.4.15 The NCC's Nature Conservancy Map also identified local Areas of Nature Conservation Interest, a non—statutory classification which shows sites of nature conservation value which either fall short of suffieient scientific interest to be given statutory recognition or which have been inadequately surveyed by the NCC. The Z'ICC is in the process of surveying in detail these and! other sites and several may be given 5551 status in the near future, It is the intentipn of the District Planning Authority to consult with the NCC over development proposals which are likely to affect any site of nature conservation importance, including SSSIs and areas of nature conservation interest.

8.4.16 Additionally the District Planning Authority will also consult the Essex Naturalists' Trust and other local organisations concerned with nature conservation to identify areas of nature conservation interest in order that proper consideration may be given to the protection of flora and fauna when considering proposals for development.

POLICY RC4 THE DISTRICT PLANNING AUTHORITY WHEN pONSIDERING PROPOSALS FOR DEVELOPMENT AFFECTING IMPORTANT NATURE CONSERVATION SITES WILL SEEK TUE ADVICE OF THE NATURE CONSERVANCY COUNCIL AND OTHER APPROPRIATE BODIES.

8.5.0 Landscape

8.5.1 The landscape reflects continuing spcial and agricultural evolution, but despite the effects of changes in farming practice and the loss of elm trees through disease, many features of the pre—war landscape remain. The Essex Structure Plan provides dual policies for dealing with the landscape — the conservation of the best features of the traditional landscape through the identification of special landscape areas (SLAs), and the replacement of some of the vegetation cover which has been lost to creata new landscapes in landscape improvement areas (LIAs). Additionally Structure Plan Policy NRlO states that in general "the natural beauty, amenity and traditional quality of the Essex landscape will be protected, conserved and enhanced" and that "there will be a presumption against development which would cause permanent loss to or damage Ito this landscape."

8.5.2 !p!cialLandscape Areas

These are areas of high quality landscape resulting from a combination of features such as vegetation cover and landform. Their conservation is important to the county's natural heritage and there is a presumption against development within them unless it accords with the character of the area concerned.

8.5.3 Three SLAs have been identified in Rochford District:—

(i) Hockley Woods, a largely unspoilt area, containing a small complex of old woodlands and farmland on undulating ground between Hock1y and Southend—on—Sea.

'P7 ______I (Ii) Upper Crouch, based on the River Crouch and containing numerous creeks, mudflats and saltings on either shore. It is a slightly less remote version of other coastal marshes and relatively treeless and unspoilt. Part of the Special Landscape Area is in District. (iii) Crouch/Roach marshes, consisting of a large number of islands, creeks and channels, with saltmarah, mudflats and drainage ditches predominating. Apart from the timber wharf at Wallasea Island, the area is remote and largely undeveloped, supporting a large bird population.

8.5.4 Structure Plan Policy NRI2 states that "within special landscape areas, in addition to other policies set out elsewhere in this statement, there will be a presumption against development unless its location, siting, design, materials and landscaping accord with the character of the area in which the developmdnc is proposed".

8.5.5 The detailed boundaries of the three SLAs within Rochford District have been precisely defined in the District Plan.

POLICY RCS THE DISTRICT PLANNING AUTHORITY WILL APPLY ThUCTURE PLAN POLICY NR12 TO SPECIAL LANDSCAPE AREAS OP HOCIUJEY WOODS, THE UPPER CROUCH AND THE CROUCH—ROACH MARSHES AS DEFINED IN THE PROPOSALS MAPS A, B AND C.

8.5.6 Landscape Improvement Areas These are areas in need of remedial treatment to improve the quality of the local environment and to maintain and enhance the rural character of the landscape. The County Council's Countryside Conservation Plan, which is to be published as supplementary planning guidance, proposes three LIAs in Rochford District:—

(i) — Uullbrldge, where the landscape has been adversely affected by a proliferation of overhead power lines, loss of trees and hedgerows and a growth in thorsiculture' plots. There are particularly harsh urban edges at Hullbridge and Rayleigh.

(ii) Stambridge — North Rochford, where loss of trees and hedgerows due to elm disease and field amalgamations has had a dramatic effect on the landscape. There are harsh urban edges at Rochford and Ashingdon and increasing 'horsicultural' uses.

(iii) The Wakerings, affected by urban sprawl, elm disease and brickearth removal. Another area with harsh urban edges.

8.5.1 Within LIAs greater care must be given to planning matters1 for example through design control and landscaping of new development, so that their environment is improved. Structure Plan Policy NR13 states that "in areas where the landscape needs improvement, emphasis will be given to measures that will help to restore and enhance damaged landscape". Purthermore Policy NRI4 makes LIAs prioroty areas for Essex Cç4nty Council tree planting schemes.

a

78 POLICY NR4 HIGH STANDARDS OF LAYOUT AND DESIGN FOR FARM BUILDINGS IN THE COUNTRYSIDE WILL BE PROMOTED AND ENCOURAGED IN ORDER THAT NEW BUILDINGS COMPLEMENT THE CHARACTER OF ThE COUNTRYSIDE IN WHICH THEY ARE TO BE SITUATED.

72 Nature Conservation Essex has 2 National Nature Reserves and 61 Sites of Special Scientific Inteest, The latter are of particular value because their unique charactenstics are irreplaceable In mosI cases these key ecological sites are small and sensitIve to changes In their surroundings Local planning authorities re requjred 10 consult the Nature Conservancy Council on planning appIicatios wrtl-iin those areas However, in 1977 only 1.200 hectares (3,000 acres) were being managed specificaity for wldhfe as nature reserves and qf these only 400 hectares (1,000 acres) were owned by bodies whose prime objective Is nature consepiatlon. Although itis Intended that there should only be very limited development in the countryside, any charigeswhlch do take place shouki take account of their natural surroundings

POLICY NRS DEVELOPMENTS IN JHE COUNTRYSIDE WiLL BE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE FOR THE RETEN- TION AND MANAGEMENT OF WILDLIFE HABITATS AS FAR AS POSSIBLE

I I Ii I POLICY NR6 THERE WILL BE A PRESUMPTION AGAINST ANY DEVELOPMENT WHICk WOULD ADVERSELY AND MATERIALLY AFFECT DESIGNATED NATIONAL NATURE RESERVES AND SITES OF SPECIAL SCIENTIFIC INTEREST1

SPOLICY NH)' PROPOSALS FOR NEW NATURE RESERVES IN APPROPRIATE LOCATIONS WILL BE ENCOUR- AGED AND EXISTING NATURE RESERVES WILL BE PROTECTED FROM DEVELOPMENT AS FAR AS POSSIBLE It is Intended to define Nature Conservancy Zones around Sites of Spectal Scientific Interest to help protect the latter, In these 4atur Conservancy Zones the Nature Conservanty Council In general prefers to see existing farming methods contjnued, with all semi-natural vegetation, especially wetlenc, woodland, heathland and grassland retained and also public open space provided where appropriate. The Nature Conservancy Council has ident1led the following areas In Essex which it consIders should be Nature Conservancy Zones' I I I The Coast — Stour Estuary to Stanford Is Hope Stour Valley — Sudbury to Cattawade Braintree Chappel to Shalford I Wickham BIshops — Tiptree to Langford Hockley and Hadleigh Woods Langdon Hills —Great Dunton to Horndon on the Hill — Billencay to Hanningfleld High Woods .LWrittle to Mountnessirlg Brentwood — Navestock and Ttiorndon Eppirig Forest — Woodford to Epping Green and AbrIce Lea Valley — Ware to Chlngford , Hatfield Broad Oak Roach Valley Danbury Until The boundarIes of the proposed zones are agreed and ddined in a Loqal PIar o be prepared by the County Council, these areas suggested by the Nature Conservancy Councjl may be used for consutation on prc4xied developments, At present two Nature Conservancy Zones have been adopted by tile County Council. These are Danbury Ridge — south to Woodham Ferrers Roman Rrier Valley — Copford to the Alver Colne ConsIderable progress has been made organislng co-operation of the many interests in land in these areas and it seems that separate consultative arrangements apprppn ate to each zone will be desirable

POLICY NAB IN AN AREA IDENTIFIED AS A NATURE CONSERVANCY ZONE, DEVELOPMENT PREJUDICIAL TO THE RETENTION AND MANAGEMENT OF IMPORTANT WILDLIFE HABITATS AND THEIR INTER-RELATIONSHIPS WITh EACH OThER WILL NORMALLY BE REFUSED. DANBURY RIDGE FROM THE RIVER CHELMER SOUTHWARDS TO WOODHAM FERRERS AND THE FROM COPFORD TO THE COLNIE ARE NATURE CONSERVANCY ZONES

42 I -. - I7J3 7 3 Countryside Conservation Areas Where a number of the poficies for safeguarding particular features of the countryside overlap in an area, example where Special Landscape Areas. Nature Conservancy Zones and high grade agricultural lan coincide, there may be a need both for reinforcing existing planning controls and for special arrangements to balance the vark)us, sometimes conflichng, interests in the management of the land These areas may be defined as Countryside Conservation Areas At present the Roman River Valley is the only Countryside Conservation Area although other areas could be defined n futue I I

POLICY NAS THERE WILL BE A PRESUMPTION AGAINST ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT IN COUNTRYSiDE CONSERVATION AREAS OThER ThAN THAT ESSEN11AL TO AGRICULTURE, FORESTFW OR RECREATION ThE CO-OPERATION OF THOSE WITH INTERESTS IN LAND IN ThE AREA WILL BE ESTABLISHED BY CONSULTATION ARRANGEMENTS ThE ROMAN RIVER VALLEY IS A COUNTRYSIDE CONSERVATION AREA

1.4 Landscape I I Essex is a county of landscape contrasts resulting from the changing (and generally increasing) demands made on It. Recent changes In farming practice are equivalent tS evoiutldn spread ove 'centunes but many of the features of the old landscape remain They are a part of the hentage and provided their value is recognised can usually be retained as permanent features in a changing landscape However, this pends toalarge extent on the oo-opertIon of owners of land end statutory bodies

POLICY NRIO ThE NATURAL BEAUTY. AMENY AND TRADITIONAL OUALITY OF ThE ESSEX LANDSd'I WILL BE PROTECTED, CONSERVED AND ENHANCED THERE WILL' BE A PRESUMPTION AGAINST DEVELOPMENT WHICH WOULD CAUSE PERMANENT LOSS TO. OR DAMAGE TO, This LANDSCAPE I Dedharn Vale is an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and there must be stnngeht control on development taking place there However, the future of the Dedharn Vale wl depend substantially on the voluntary contnbution, co-operavon and co-ordination of the users of the area

POLICY NR1 1 NO DEVELOPMENT SHALL TAKE PLACE IN DEDkIAM VALE AREA OF OUTSTANDiNG NATURAL BEAUTY WHICH WOULD CONFLICT WITH CONSERVATION OF ThE AREA AND MEASURES FOR ITS MANAGEMENT AND ENHANCEMENT Special Landscape Areas are particularly valuable Their high quality landscape is a result of a combination of natural features such as vegetation cover and relief The conservation of these areas Is important to the county's natural heritage and they should be protected from development which detracts from their character The boundanes of these areas will be defined In a Local Plan to be prepared by the County Council

POLICY NR12 WITHIN SPECIAL LANDSCAPE AREAS, IN ADDITION TO OThER POLiCIES SET OUT ELSEWHERE IN ThiS STATEMENT, ThERE WILL BE A PRESUMPTION AGAINST DEVELOPMENT UNLESS a LOCATION, SITING. DESIGN, MATERIALS AND LANDSCAPING ACCORD WITH ThE CHARACTW OF ThE AREA IN WHICH ThE DEVELOPMENT IS PROPOSED ThE SPECIAL! LANDSCAPE AREAS ARE'

STOUR VALLEY I STOUR COAST COLNE VALLEY WALDEN UPLANDS PANT VALLEY UPPER BLACKWATER BLACKWATER — (INCLUDING THE R'AAN RIVER VALLEY STOAT VALLEY HATFIELD BROAD OAK CHELMER VALLEY TERLING CHELMER — BLAC1cWATER RIDGES CAN VALLEY EPPING RIDGES RODINO VALLEY H1GHWOODS — HANNINGPIELD WOODHAM ESCARPMENT DENGIE MARSHES WEALD CAM VALLEY (UPPER CROUCH CHILDERDITCH HOCKLEY WOODS t CROUCH - ROACH MARSHES LANGDON HILLS MAR DYKE HADLEIGH MARSHES

Ti(Ji 43 1 IflI iui ''r c!1!'

There are also places in the county where the landscape needs improvement These areas are frequently productive but because of the removal of natural features such as woods and hedgerows, or because of the addition of unsympathetic man-made features, the landscape needs improvement to maintain and enhance Its rural character These degraded and damaged landscapes will also be defined in a Local Plan to be prepared by the County Council and the areas being consIdered are. Lea Valley — to Chinglord Stow Manes — Cock Clarks Thameside — Marshes to Canvey l-Iighwood — Cooksrnlil Green (except Mar Dyke Valley) Birch West Homdon — Baslidon Silver End Crays Hill — Wlckford St Osyth — Jaywick — Hulibridge North Weald — Thomwood Stambridge — North Rochford — LIttle Bardfceld Sullen — The Wakerings — Stapletord Abbotis

POLICY NR1S IN AREAS WHERE THE LANDSCAPE NEEDS IMPROVEMENT, EMPHASIS WILL BE GIVEN TO MEASURES ThAT WILL HELP TO RESTORE AND ENHANCE DAMAGED LANDSCAPE The retention of hIstorIc landscape features must be complemented by planting new trees to replace those lost through dIsease or changing conditions, or in areas of damaged landscape The County Council provides advice and grants towards planting In the countryside The frees and woody shrubs used are those indigenous to the area, which support wildlife and maintain the traditional character of the countryside The policies for landscape improvement seek a compromise between maintaInIng the high productivity of Essex farms and the protection of the landscape Planting in field corners and along streams, the screening of ugly buildings and retention of important hedges and copses, will form part of this approach

POLICY NRI4 IN ORDER TO IMPROVE THE PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT, ENCOURAGEMENT WILL BE GIVEN TO THE PLANTING OF NATIVE TREES AND SHRUBS BY GIVING ADVICE PRIORITY FOR TREE PLANTING SCHEMES WILL BE GIVEN TO AREAS DENUDED OF HEALTHY TREES BY DISEASE OR DECLINE IN THE COURSE OF FARMING CHANGES AND TO LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENT AREAS THE NEEDS OF GOOD FARMING, TOGETHER WITH ThE NEED TO CONSERVE MORE IMPORTANT ELEMENTS OF THE EXISTING LANDSCAPE, WILL BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT With the larger field sizes and more open countryside ol contemporary farming, all existing woodlands are Important to the landscape and should be retained Ancient woodlands, however, are incomparably more important for scientific reasons as well as amenity and the County Council hopes to see no reduction in their area Should any recent woodland be removed the County Council will seek'roplacement planting of a comparable area AB woodlands require management in the interest of nature conservation, timber growing and amenity in ancient woodland nature conservation will govern the form of management adopted, whereas recent woods can be treated on theIr individual merits

POLICY NR15 IN PROPOSALS FOR DEVELOPMENT, EXISTING TREES AND WOODS SHOULD BE RETAINED WHEREVER POSSIBLE AND NEW PLANTING OF APPROPRIATE SPECIES WILL NORMALLY BE REQUIRED TO REPLACE ANY LOSSES RESULTING FROM DEVELOPMENT.

POLICY NR16 EXiSTING WOODLANDS SHOULD BE RETAINED WHEREVER POSSIBLE WITH MANAGEMENT APPROPRIATE TO AGE, USE, LOCATION AND SCIENTIFIC INTEREST Certain lanes have hislonc and landscape value and they are Important to the character of the county The County Council wishes to preserve their traditional character by keeping the banks, ditches and verges as tar as possIble Trees and hedges wHI be protected where they are on highway land and where they stand outside the boundary, the co-operation of adjoining owners will be sought As highway authority, the County Council will relate traffIc volumes, weight and speed to the need to avoid damage to the amenity and histonc character of these lanes

POLICY NAil ANY PROPOSALS WHICH WOULD ADVERSELY AFFECT THE PHYSICAL APPEARANCE OF ThE PROTECTED LANES OF HISTORIC OR LANDSCAPE VALUE OR GIVE RISE TO A MATERIAL iNCREASE IN THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFiC USING ThESE LANES WILL NOT NORMALLY BE ALLOWED

7 5 The Coast It has long been the County Council's policy to control development along the coast and estuaries to their natural attractions and since 1965 an interim policy of stnngent restnctlon on development In operation

• But) The Essex coast and estuaries are of international and national, as well as local, scientific importance Much of the coast, including the Stour estuary, Hamford Water, parts of the Coirie and Blackwater estuaries. Dengie Marshes, Foulness Island and are included in a list of internationally important wetland sit As the list Includes a total of only 201 areas in the whole of Western Europe the significance of the Essex coa clear, National and regional studies have also emphasised the Importance of the coast and the need to give priority to the conservation of those parts of the coastline that remain unspoilt or that can be rehabilitated. At present most of the remaining undeveloped coast and estuaries (about 100 mIles) are covered by the statutory protective designation of Sites of Special Scientific Interest (5351) because of their flora, fauna and geological features (this Is about one-half of the total length of coastline in South-East covered by 5881's), In addition, the whole of the coast from the Stour to Corringham is included in a number of suggested Nature Conservancy Zones (see SectIon 72) It is therefore essential that the previous interim coastal protection policy is continueq in order that the natural attractions of the undeveloped coast are safeguarded from development which has mined much of the nation's coast and to conserve the character and wild Life of these intemationaily important areas The coastal protection policy will apply from to Tlibury The effective conservation of the coast1 even when protected from further building, will depend to a large extent on the voluntary co-operation of those with an interest in the land. A Local Plan, prepared by the County Council, defines the extent otthe area wflhin which the coast protection policy applies

POLICY NR18 THERE SHALL BE THE MOST STRINGENT RESTRICTIONS ON DEVELOPMENT ON' THE RURAL AND UNDEVELOPED COASTLiNE OUTSIDE BUILT-UP AREAS AND ANY DEVELOPMENT WHI IS EXCEPTIONALLY PERMITIED SHALL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT THE OPEN AND RURW CHARACTER OR WILDLiFE Policies on coastai activities are included in other sections For ports see Section 3,10 and for recreation and tourism, see Section 8 0

7.8 Minerals Essex has extensive mineral resources which are of national economic importance. and are essential to the continuing community needs of the County and the region. Minerals dug In Essex supply the building and civil engineering industries with their raw materials and, therefore, the whole process of development and change governed by Structure Plans has consequences for mineral working Mineral extraction is a ldrge land user which puts it in conflict with many planning policies and environmental objectives. It uses agricultural land, is unattractive in the landscape and the processing and associated plants can be objeotlonabte to people living nearby as can the heavy traffic generated by these operations Many of the county's roads which give access to the workings are relatively narrow and twisting, are attractive as they are, but present problems In accommodatlng heavy traffic n addition, workings can endanger water supplies, sites of archaeological importance and features of natural history Nevertheless, minerals must be extracted and deposits safeguarded where possible Mineral workings, however, will be restricted to where a need has b identified and where that mineral must be obtained from Essex Mineral extraction is a temporary use of land and restoration to a beneficial after-use is of paramount importance and Is not limited to 'filling the hole', Identifying and securing the correct after-use of the site and organising and carrying out a programme of land management for a number of years after filling is of vital importance it the quality of the land is to be improved After extraction of minerals workings must be blended back into the landscape, often at new ground levels, and there s usually a presumption that the land should be returned to food production aithough opportunities do occur fpr after-use in recreation and nature conservation

/ I 76.1 SandandGravel The demands of an increasing population with aspirations for higher living standards over the last thirty years have resulted in vastly increased building activity This has required raw materials of which the largest in quantity is natural aggregate In the South , the only locally available aggregate is sand and gravel Minerals can only be worked where they occur and. while large areas of the South East of England are covered by deposits of sand arid gravel, their workability is affected by many factors, such as thickness of the deposit, its quality and the depth of overburden Essex Is rIch in deposits of sand and gravel and has for some years had the highest total production of sand and gravel of any county In the country Currently something over 100 hectares a year is being taken for sand and gravel production. Production levels fluctuate from year to year but the last 15 yepçs has seen a steady overajL growth and it may be that Essex, in common with some other counties in the Sout ast, will be asked to find

(1 I

45 FOR PLANNING SERVICES ELEq.4Tu PAEWNS COMMiTTEE

I have decided the following applications in accordance with the policy of delegation and subject to conditions

APPPjJ

ROC/674/83 New pitch roof, chimney stack, front entrance porch and blockwork inner skin to front and side elevations, underpinning works at Lamb Court Cottage, Canewdon — Mr. J. Gibson.

ROC/779/64 Add single storey rear extension' at Moordown", Wood Avenue, Hockley — Mr. R. Hilligon.

ROC/102/85 Add single storey rear extension at Amberley, Lark Hill Road, Canewdon — Mr. lCD. Marsh.

ROC/104/85 Add porch and extend dormer to front at 11, Assandune Close, Ashingdon — LA. Long. ROC/ll2/85 Extend garage at 69, Marylands Avenue, Hockley - Jack Stubb.

ROC/123/85 Add rear conservatory at "Pleasant View", Stanthridge Road, Staxnbridge — Mr. Smith. ROC/l29/85 Add front porch and rear conservatory at St. Davids, Lower Road, Hockley — Dr. P. Thomas.

ROC/131/85 Add two storey rear extension, new front dormera, alterations to existing front dormer and erect detached garage at 85, Albert Road, Hawkwell — Mr. P. Smith.

R0C/149/85 Add single storey rear extension at 37, Ln.ngfield Drtve,

Roohford — Mr. G. Coupar. I

ROC/157/85 Add first floor rear extension at 8, Brackendale Close, Hoekley — B.J. Gould.

ROC/158/85 Construct new crossover at 299, Rectory Road, Hockley — R.J. Knights.

ROC/lCl/85 Add side dormer and single storey rear extension at 10, Dawlish Crescent, Rayleigh — Mr. W. Rice.

HOC/lOG/es Add single storey side and rear extension at 1, The Chase, Rayleigh — Mr. M,J. Henry.

ROC/171/85 Add single storey rear extension at 16, Canewdon View Road, Rochford — Mr. K. Lagden.

ROC/174/85 Add two storey side extension with garage at 47, Weir Gardens, Rayleigh — J. Stafford.

ROC/175/ 85 Add rooms in roof to rear at 21, Selbourne Road, Hcckleç"- Mr. & Mrs. K.D. Edgson. 8u2 R0C/177/85 Erect detached garage at The Nook, Barling Head, Southend — Mr. E. Hurst.

ROC/184/85 Add single storey side extension with garage, extend roof and dormer and add chimney at 309, Eastwood Road, Rayleigh — Mr. J. Saywood.

ROC/l89/85 Add single storey front and side extensions with attached garage at 1, Fountain Lane, Hockley — R.M. Faccini, Esq.

ROC/190/85 Add two storey side extension with dormers to front and rear and integral garage. First floor rear extension at 11, The Chase, Rayleigh Mr. R. Kelsey. ROC/19l/85 Add single storey side extension at 23, Victoria Avenue, Southend — Mr. A. Key.

ROC/l96/85 Add single storey rear extension at 15, Brook Close, - Rochford — Mr. R. Smith. ROC/200/85 Add single storey rear extension. Demolish garage and S add new attached garage at 2, Holt Farm Way, Hawkwell — Mr. A. Rain.t'orth.

1100/201/85 Add single storey rear extension with pitched roof and attached garage.at 63, Orchard Avenue, Hockley — Mrs. 0. Kelleher.

ROC/204/85 Add two storey side extension with integral garage and front porch at 211, Conway Avenue, Great Wakering — Mr. W.R. Swift.

ROC/207/35 Create new crossover at 295, Rectory Road, Hawkwell — Mr. K. Taylor.

ROC/208/85 Add single storey rear extension at 7, Pevensey Gardens, Hullbridge — Mr. & Mrs. T. MoKeown.

ROC/218/85 Add conservatory to rear at 20, Sandhill Road, Rayle].gh — Mr. W. Booker.

1100/223/85 Add two storey rear extension at 6, New Hall, Hawkwell — C. Clancy.

1100/227/85 Add two storey rear extension at 3, Chase End, Rayleigh — Mrs. A. flabley.

1100/231/85 Change of use from residential to rest home and add single storey side extension at 18, Woodlands Road, Hockley — Mrs. J. Bolton.

ROC/232/85 Add single storey rear extension at 3, The Cedars, Great Waicering — Mr. & Mrs. D. McDonald.

1100/239/85 Add garage and front porch at 38, Folly Lane, J-Jockley — F. Lawrence.

ROC/240/85 Add single storey rear extension at 83, Ray igh Avenue, Eastwood — B. Oxley. 8 ut' — '!'I ! 'F ' IllFflFff' IF!

ROC/241/85 Re—roof existing front dormer at Dormers, Lower Road, Hockley — Mr. R.M. Fox.

ROC/243/85 Demolish existing shed and erect detached garage at 11, Pearsons Avenue, Rayleigh — G.B. Stanford.

ROC/250/85 Add rooms in roof and single storey rear extension at 16, Lascelles Gardens, Hockley — Mr. .1. Seadon.

ROC/259/85 Add first floor extension and detached garage at 34, High Road, Rayleigh Mr. & Mrs. H. Goodman.

RQC/28l/85 Erect detached house with integral garage (amended plans) at 8, Mayfield Avenue, Hulibridge — Mr. E. Randolph.

ROC/283/85 Add single storey side extension' and extend integral' garage at front at 62, Plumberow Avenue, Hockley -. Mr. Garrett.

ROC/290/85 Add single storey extension to rear and two storey extension to front at 55, Hilary Crescent, Rayleigh — Mr. R.A. Wilson.

ROC/303/85 Erect fence (maximum height 6') on side frontage, and removal of screen walling without compliance with Condition 4 approval EEC/ROC/35l/60 at 27, Merryfields Avenue, 1-lockley — M.G. Yeoman.

ROC/309/85 Add storm pbrch to front elevation at 355, Eastwood Road, Rayleigh — C.J. Dunkley.

HOC/aShEs Add single storey front extension at 8, Hawthorne Gardens, Hockley — Mr. & Mrs. flrian Taylor.

REFUSALS

ROC/142/85 Add single storey rear extension at Rose Bungalow, Parkhurst Drive, Rawreth — Mr. F.J. McGuire. Reasons; Excessive development in MI.G.B. 4 t

ROC/162/85 Add rooms in roof and new porch at 48, Hambro Avenue, Rayleigh — Mr. Stanley. Reasons: 1. Incompatible form. 2. Intrusion to ad3oining

residents4 1 111' !' Ti ur

DELEGATED BUILDING REGULATION DECISIONS FOR PLANNING APPROVALiOONS< SERVICES

PLAN NO. ADDRESS DESCRIPTION COMMITTE

84/59 5A 5, Lascelles Gardens, Bungalow conversion. Rochford.

84/lO49A Brook Road, Rayleigh. Erection of a raised platform floor area.

85/168A Meadow Lodge, Montifiore Ave Loft conversion. Rayleigh.

85/210A 189, Eastwood Road, Rayleigh Demolish garage erect side extension.

85/220A 80, Malting Villas, Rochford Single storey side extension.

85/226 20, Avondale Road, Rayleigh, Single storey extensions to provide facilities for disabled person.

85/228 66, Nelson Road, Rayleigh. Cons ervartpry

35/321A 3, Hornbro Me, Rayleigh. Dormer extension.

e5/234A 36, Upper Lambrioks, Rebuild of existing retaining wall, Rayleigh. garage wail, between two properties.

85/243 56, Oak Walk, Hockley. Extension to existing garage.

85/252 16, Grove Road, Rayleigh. Kitchen and porch.

85/257 3, Mendip Close, Rayleigh. Dormer extension on front and rear elevations.

85/258 5a, High Road, Hookley. Alterations to kitchen, utility room and garage to form study.

8 5/3 04 49, Hamilton Gardens, Rooms in roofspace, breakfast room Flockley extension.

85/307 20, North Street, Rochford. Internal alterations to form new toilet for existing office.

85/308 177, Main Road, Hawkwell. Front entrance porch.

85/309 The Chalet, Woodside Road, Reconstruction of rear wall and Hookley. provision of solid ground floor in 1iu of existing. 85/317 6, Dartmouth Close, Extension to first floor dormer. Rayleigh.

8 5/s 19 19, Eastview Drive, Rear extension. Rayleigh.

85/324 21, Chestnut Close,Hockley. Extension to form kitchen.

85/326 64, Alexandra Road, Great Dining room extension and utility Waker lag. room.

85/327 51, Broadwalk, Hockley. Loft conversion.

85/344 Southhall, Eastend, Underpinning. Paglesham. DELEGATED DUflDING REGULATION DECISIONS APPROVALS/1

PLAN NO. ADDRESS DESCRIPTION

85/350 "Southview", Vanderbilt Aye, thain Drainage. Rayleigh.

85/354 97, The Chase, Rayleigh. Front porch.

85/394 68, Abbey Road, Hullbridge. Open carport.

85/11A Sunway, 18, Darling Road, Extension of existing room in roof Great Wakering. I space with dormer to side.

85/26A Orchard Cottage, Hockley Proposed loftrooms. Road, Rayleigh.

85/48 25, Eaatview Drive, Two storey side, single storey Rayleigh. rear extension and porch. S

85/l5OA 31, Great Wheatley Road, Rebuilding of attached garage end Rayleigh.. extensions to existing first fluor.

85/240 7, Pevensey Gardens, Rear extensior. (Relax and approve) Hockley.

85/271 43, Cornhill Avenue, Two No. single storey extensions Hockley. at rear. 85/273 Vacant site (east side of Construct new bungalow and garage. 'Sally Dale'), Pooles Lane, Hullbridge.

85/282 2, Russell Row, High Single storey rear extension. Street, Canewdon. 85/288 117, Lower Road, Hullbridge Hall and bathroom extension, .1 internal alterations.

85/290 47, Southend Road, 1-JociCtey. Proposed internal alterations to provide W.C. lobby and kitchenette area together with new entrance door within existing opening.

85/293 250a, Main Road, I-lawkwell. Porch and chimney breast and stack.

851295 8, Boarded Row, Paglesham. Rebuild dining room, extend bedroom, new cloakroom/utility. (Relaxation only)

85/299 72, Weir Gardens, Side extension. — Rayleigh.

85/306 6, Gladstone Road, Hockley. Install a manhole and new upstairs toilet. a w • 85/318 Kingscot, Kingsway, Single storey rear Hullbridge. So 6 eqon. DELEGATED BUILDING RCGULATION DECISIONS APPR OVA LWflRXU

PLAN NO. ADDRESS DESCRIPTION

85/ 329 342, Ashingdon Road, Demolish external W.C. and add Rochford. kitchen extension.

& 85/331 Little Doggetts, 1-lydewood Form games room in existing building. Lane, Ashingdon.

85/338 8, Tudor Way, Hawkwell. Alterations and additions.

• 85/340 Land opposite Granville Pig farm and five stock buildings. Road, Lqwer Road, Hookley.

85/341 1, Wyburne Avenue East, Alterations and additions. Rayleigh.

85/351 44, London Hill) Rayleigh. Lounge extension and conservatory. •' 85/353 31, Cheapside East, First floor extension on existing Rayleigh. ground floor extension.

85/360 30, Waltham Road, Rayleigh. Car port.

- 85/363 Trelawn, Broom Road, Extension.. Hullbridge.

8 5/36 28, Waltham Road, Rayleigh. Car port.

85/367 1, New Buildings Cottages, Proposed additions. Mucking Hall Lane, Barling.

85/368 25, Kimberley Road, Rear single storey extension. Little Wakering.

85/377 3, Meadway, Rayleigh. Rear kitchen exbension.

85/380 48, Oxford Road, Rochford. Rooms in roof.

85/3 83 28'a, Clifton Road, Cavity wall insulation. Ashingdon.

rS4/9214 'Luoerne', High Street, 4—bedroomed chalet and 4—bedroomed Qanewdon. house.

85/314 Land adj. 'Toporoft', New 3—bedroomed detached bungalow. Hillview Road, Rayleigh.

85/167A 71, Branksome Avenue, Add car port and convert chalet Hockley. into house.

85/2O5A 5, Exmouth Drive, Rayleigh. Loft room.

85/250A Adj. 'The Bungalow', New bungalow. Rayleigh Downs Road, Rayleigh. 8j, DELEGATED BUILDING REGULATION DECISIONS APPROVALSoc

PLAN NO. ADDRESS DESCRIPTION

85/267/½ 73, Golden Cross Road, 4Demolition of parts of existing and Ashingdon. erection of side and front extensions, rooms in roof with dormers front and rear.

85/284 1, Fountain Lane, Hockley. Erection of single storey front and side extensions together with attached single garage.

85/286A Gore House, Ballards Gore, Proposed conservatory. Rochford.

85/294 Units 7—14, Hockley Ind. Sub—division of existing building Est., Eldon Way, Hockley. into smaller units.

85/296 2, Poplar Road, Rayleigh. Rear extension. p

85/325 1, Viotor Gardens, Hawkwell. Extension to dwelling.

85/348 617, Ashingdon Road, Extension to rooms in roofspace Ashingdon. and general alterations and repairs and new drain runs. r 85/356 8, Rosslyn Close, Hockley. Shower room extension.

85/359 3, Shoebury Road, Great Two storey extension. Wakering.

85/371 9, The Drive, Roohford. Demolish existing canopy and erect 'skyline' aluminium framed conservatory. 85/ 378 221, Ferry Road, Hulibridge. Garage. S 8 5/4 12 10, Victoria Drive, Great Strip slates to rear slope of main Wakering. roof and replace with concrete plain tiles — provide additional strut.

85/421 57, Victoria Road, Rayleigh, Bay and canopy.

8 5/3 2 21½ 'Colwinn', Aifreda Avenue, Conversion of bedroom Hullbridge. extension.

S DELEGATED BUILDING REGULATION DECISIONS xN(wcs�REJEçnOHS

PLAN NO. ADDRESS DESCRIPTION —H

8 5/247 21, Western Road, Rayleigh. Extension.

85/249 68, Oxford Road, Rochford. Rooms in roof and rear extension.

85/251 6, Newhall Road, Rochford, Two storey rear extension.

85/255 Adj. 6, Ilidgeway, Rayleigh. Detached house and garage.

85/260 38, Albert Road, Ashingdon. Demolition of existing bungalow and erection of two detached houses and

garages. I

85/263 Site of 34, Eastern Road, Erection of a private vehicle garage. Rayleigh.

85/265 'Waverley', Wood Avenue, Attached garage. Hockley.

85/268 30, High Elms Road, Extension to lounge and kitchen and Hulibridge. other internal alterations.

85/250 Adj. 'The Bungalow', Rayleigh New bungalow. Downs Road, Rayleigh. 85/253 Lonsdale Cottage, Lark Hill Ground floor alterations, new roof Road, Canewdon. and rooms in roofspace.

85/267 73, Golden Cross Road, Demolition of parts of existing and Ash ingdon. erection of side and front extensions.

85/275 Land rear of 230, Plumberow Detached chalet. Avenue, Hockley.

85/281 9, Blenheim Close, Hockley. Convert garage to lounge extension and add garage.

85/283 Dudulah, Eastwood Rise, Demolition of existing house and Eastwood, Leigh—on—Sea. erection of new detached house with seperate granny annexe.

85/286 Gore House, Ballards Gore, Proposed conservatory. Rochford.

85/287 70, ICimberley Road, Little Single and two storey side extension. Wakering.

85/291 6, Dawlish Crescent, Rear single storey extension. Rayleigh. 85/292 20—24, High Street, Rayleigh. Internal alterations to facilitate change of use from storage area to office accommodation.

85/295 8, Boarded Row, Paglesham. Rebuild dining room, extend new cloakroom/utility. bçn DELEGATED BUILDING REGULATION DECISIONS ØQVRCJECTIONS

PLAN NO. ADDRESS DESCRIPTION

85/297 Plot 12, Aviation Way, Ezection of offices and warehouse. Southend—.on—Sea.

85/29 8 19, I-bit Farm Way, Rochford. Rooms in roof.

85/300 39, Princess Gardens, Two new dwellings. Ashingdon.

85 /303 88, Main Road, Hockley. Single storey rear extension. 55/305 14.Site of 23, The Westerings, Three detached houses.

£s/3ii 16, Davis Heath Road, Two storey extension for utility room Rayleigh. and internal changes. p 85/315 New Hall Nursery, Lower Road, New warehouse and aquatic retail Hockley. building.

85/316 15, Roach Aveyiue, Rayleigh. Alterations to existing first floor bedroom, remove existing stair and provide new stair.

-T • 85/320 Sidat Road, Rayleigh. Alterations to loading bay, canopy and gates.

85/321 37, Stanley Road, Ashlngdon. Demolish bungalow and erect detached house.

85/322 'Colwinn', Alfreda Avenue, Conversion of garage and bedroom Hulibridge. extension.

85/328 'Ituta', Broom Road, Internal alterations to form shower Hulibndge. room. S 85/328 New industrial estate at New small office accommodation and Rawreth. factory unit.

85/330 19, Highfield Crescent, Kitchen/living room extension. Rayleigh.

85/333 17, Highfield Crescent, Alterations and single storey Rayleigh. extension.

85/334 Water Authority Works, Extension to existing local radio Gennaught Road, Rayleigh. transmitter building.

- 85/335 72/76, West Street, Rochford. Rxtension to sales area and alteration to existing premises. 85/393 M.F.0. Building, Aviation Demolition of fire damaged portion Way, of building and rebuilding of a storage shed.

4-' ROCHFORD DISTRICT COUNCIL

Minutes of the Health 6 flousig Services Committee

At a Meeting held on 4th July 1985. Present: Councillor Mrs. Jo Jones (Vice—Chairman in the Chair), NJ. Anderson, W.T1. Budge, Mrs. L.N.A. Campbell—Delay, Mrs. P. Cooke, B.A. Crick, T.L. Dean, Mrs.J. Fawell, CJ. Gardner, J.A. Gibson, B.T. Grig, P. Gwinneli, Mrs. E.M. Hart, Mrs. L.A. Holdich, R.A. Pearson, C. Stephenson, J.P. Taylor, and Mrs. L. Walker.

Apolqg4es: Councillors P.A. Beckers, L.K. Cope, A.J. Harvey and J.A. Sheaf.

Visiç4pg by Invitation: Councillor D.C. Wood.

406. MINUTES

Resolved that the Minutes of the Meeting of 14th May 1985 be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

407. MONITORIN'G OF PERFORMANCE — MEEflNGS OF8T[1 JANUARY AND 14TH MARCH 1985

The Committee were satisfied that all necessary action had been taken. Minutes 26/84 and 192/85 were carried forward.

408. DEENED PLANNING CONSENT ROC/234/85—DEMOLISH 3 BTJNGALOWS1, ERECT AGED PERSONS RESIDENTiAL UNIT COMPRISING 38 AGED PERSONS FLATS AND 2 WARDENS FLATS WITH ACCESS ROAD AND CAR PARIç ACCESS THROUGH GRESTED COURT, SOUTH OF EAST STREET, ROCEFORD (Minute 386/85)

The Secretary to the Council reported that this application had now been considered by the Planning Services Committee.

RECOMMENDED That for the purposes of Regulation 4(5) of the Town and Country Planning General Regulations 1976 the above works be carried out subject to the conditions in Minute 386/85. (ROC/234/85)(DD)

ROC/559/84 — OUTLINE APPLICATION TO DEMOLISH 3 GARAGES EXTEND OLIVERS CRESCENT AND ERECT TWO-STOREY RESIDENTIAL UNITS AT A DENSITY OP NOT MORE THAN 12 (TWELVE1 PER ACRE • NORTH STREET (WEST SIDE), GREAT WAKERING (Minute 21(b)/85

The Director of Development and Secretary to the Council reported on the suggestion that the Council should consider the provision of off—street parking in Mercer Avenue and Olivers Crescent in connection with the above development. No such requirement had been made by the Planning Services Committee in approving the application. Members noted the cost to provide off—street parking hardstandings for the 23 properties concerned was estimated at £34,SOO and that there was no guarantee that this would significantly reduce on—street parking. In view of the fact that the County Surveyor had indicated that the roads concerned were acceptable access routes to the new development, it was

RECOMMENDED That no further action be taken on the proposal to provide hardstandings. (7767)(DD & SEC)

CLLj Health and Housing w 410. HOUSE PURCHASE LOANS

The Committee received the report of the Director of Finance on House Purchase Loans arrears as at 31st Nay 1985. (612)

411. RENT COLLECTION AND ARREARS

The Committee noted the report of the Director of Health & Housing that current arrears stood at £12,698.91. Included in these figures was the sum of £937.12 attributable to Housing Benefits where action was still in progress. There were 2,411 accounts clear or in credit to the value of £37,690.10. (615)

412. EXAMINAnON OF HOUSING REVENUE ACCOUNT SERVICE EXPENDITURE

The Committee considered the appended joint report of the Directors of Health & Housing and Finance on a review of Housing Revenue Account Service Expenditure which had been carried out following discussion of the External Auditors! report on the "Overview of the Arrangements for Securing the Economic, Efficient and Effective Use of Resources".

RECOMMENDED That the Audit Panel be advised that the Housing Revenue Account Service Expenditure levels are effective and within Council policy. (196)(DHH & DF)

413. ARRANGEMENTS FOR SECURING THE ECONOMIC, EFFICIENT AND EFFECTIVE USE OF RESOURCES — EXAMINATION OF ALL HEALTH & HOUSING SERVICES OPERATED THROUGH TEE DIRECTOR OF HEALTH & HOUSING

The Committee received the appended report of the Director of Health & Housing regarding the philosophy, aims and objectives of the Health & Housing Committee which had been carried out as a result of the External Auditors' report on the "Overview of the Arrangements for Securing the Economic, Efficient and Effective Use of Resources". Members noted that a further report concerning performance measures and operational targets would be submitted to a future Meeting.

RECOMMENDED That the Audit Panel be advised that the Committee supports the philosophy, aims and objectives stated in the appended report. (l96)(DHH)

414. HOUSING ACT 1957 — UNFIT HOUSE — 1, CHURCH STREET, RAYLEIGH (Minute 286/85)

The Secretary to the Council reported that Notice had been served upon all persons so entitled that at this Meeting the condition of the property and any offer with respect to the carrying out of work or the future use thereof would be considered.

No offer of work had been received.

Resolved that in accordance with Section 17 of the Housing Act 1957 a Closing Order be made, to which the Common Seal of the Council be affixed, in respect of 1, Church Street, Rayleigh. (19753)(SEC) S Bik Health and Housing

415. HOUSING ACT 1957 - SECTION 9(lb) 15,-LONDON ROAD; RAYLEIGH

The Director of Health & Housing reported that the owner's attention had been drawn to a number of defects at this dwelling but that to date the works as detailed in the Agenda had not been carried out.

Resolved that the Director of Health & Housing be authorised to serve Notice under the Housing Act 1957, Section 9(lb), upon the person having control of 15, London Road, Rayleigh) requiring the execution of the works as detailed in the Agenda within 28 days and, failing compliance with this Notice, to carry out the works in default and recover the expenses so incurred. (24323)(DHH)

I 416. HOUSINGACT198O —RIGkT TO BUY

The Director of Health & Housing reminded Members that the criteria in the Housing and Building Control Act 1984 exempted from the "Right to Buy" provisions dwellings in aged persons sheltered schemes which were specially designed, equipped with alarm systems and provided with the services of a Warden. Members noted receipt of a letter from Harrogate Borough Council proposing that the exemption should also apply to properties which, although not precisely conforming to the design criteria, were nevertheless acknowledged as having been built for and occupied by elderly persons.

RECOMMENDED That the Council do support the approach to the Secretary of State for the Environment by Ilarrogate Borough Council to amend the criteria for exclusion from the Right to Buy provisions of the Housing Act. (2387)(DIIH)

417. GREEN PAPER— "HOME IMPROVEMENT — A NEW APPROACH"

The Committee received the report of the Director of Health & Housing on the Green Paper which outlined the Government's proposals for encouraging the repair and improvement of private sector housing. A copy of the Green Paper was on deposit in the Members' Lounge and the Department of the Environment had invited comments by 30th September 1985. Members noted the principal objectives of the proposals. However concern was expressed in respect of the suggested standards of fitness for dwellings and the duty of local authorities to determine the suitability of contractors to carry out works. Additionally, Rochford benefited from the current housing subsidy arrangements and could be disadvataged if payments were made through the block grant system.

RECOMMENDED (1) That this Council advise the Secretary of State for the Environment that it favours the continuation of Government subsidy being paid to local authorities as a specific grant.

(2) That the Council supports the standard of fitness included in the submission of the Institution of Environmental Health Officers.

(3) That the Council expresses reservations on the proposed duty of local authorities to reject applications for assistance where the builder whose estimate is provided is not, in their judgement, a suitable person to carry out the work. (191)(DHH) Health and Housi w 418. CARING FOR EX—MENTAL PATIENTS IN THE COMMUNITY

The Chairman asked that the Committee consider the appended reports of the Chief Executive and the Teach—In for Members on 26th June. In introducing the reports the Secretary to the Council explained that the adoption of the recommendations would involve an amendment to the HIPS Strategy which was the next matter to be considered by the Committee. The proposal to allocate one family unit per year for use as a group home for ex—mental patients was before the Committee as a broad policy and was consistent with previous decisions of the Council to allocate a unit annually for the Essex Nobility Scheme and the National Mobility Scheme and the five A.P. units made available each year for aged relatives of DIstrict residents. The Committee were not t[ereore dealing with the d?tail of the letting. It was important to establish a policy which might also be pursued by the other Districts within the Health Authority and local housing associations. Doctor Winbow had in fact advised the Director of Health & Housing that he would welcome a visit by Members of the Committee to see the persons who had been identified for the first group home. This would of course serve as a pilot project.

Some Members indicated that there were further details about the proposal which it was necessary to establish before the recommendation should be adopted and that if the matter could not be dealt with in confidence, it should be deferred for further consideration. The view of the Chairman and other Members was that the Committee were dealing with the issue of the general policy involved which already had the broad support of the Council and had always been discussed in public.

Questions were then raised as to the persons likely to be selected for the group homes and, whilst it was felt that this need not be a cause for concern as no unsuitable persons would be recommended, it was accepted that the Members of the Committee would have the opportunity to meet the individuals involved and to satisfy themselves in this respect.

A motion pursuant to Standing Order 9.12 (e) that the question be now put was adopted and the Committee then agreed the Chief Executive's report.

P. RECOMMENDED (1) That one unit of Council housing accommodation be available each year to serve as group homes for ex—mentfl patients, the project this year serving as a pilot scheme.

(2) That the Council's HIPS Strategy Statement be amended accordingly and the concept extended to include housing association involvement.

(3) That the proposal to furnish and equip the first unit by voluntary subscri tian and donation be applauded. (l5546)(CE) N&'. kwu4td Miiwkt 49:/es 419. HOUSING INVESTMENT PROGRAMME AND STRATEGY 1986/87 (HIPS BID)

Before considering the appended report of the Management Team on the HIPS Bid for 1986/87 the Committee agreed an amendment to paragraph 4.08 of the Strategy Statement to take account of the immediately preceding recommendations. S Health and Housi

The Secretary to the Council mentioned that it was possible that the new build programme to be commenced in the current year would exceed the level of resources available in 1986/87 and that whilst the Bid would include all three such schemes, the start on one would be delayed until it was confirmed that funds would be available. The Committee agreed that only the Crested Court and Lodge Close schemes should be committed and that a start on the Buckingham Road project should be deferred for the time being. It was noted that provision had been made in the building programme prior to 1990 for the acquisition of land for housing schemes in areas other than Rochford and Rayleigh where it was hoped that Council owned sites would be available after 1990 as provided in the Draft District Plan.

RECOMMENDED (1) That the' revised Strategy Statetheit and the 1986/87 Bid be approved subject to the following amendment to paragraph 4.08 "In this regard the Council has decided to make one family housing unit available each year as a group home, the first such home to serve as a pilot project. Contact will be made with the housing associations operating in the District for them to adopt a similar policy".

P. i (2) That the Buckingham Road scheme be deferred until HIP resources are available either in the 1986/87 Allocation or as a result of either of the other two schemes failing to secure PC]. approval. (881) (MT)

NOTE: The Chief Executive exercised his powers under Standing Order 18 to give immediate effect to recommendation 1 since the latest date for the submission of the HIPS Rid was 12th July 1985.

420. CARAVAN SITES AND CONTROL OF DEVELOPMENT ACT 1960 UNAUTRORISED CARAVAN ON LAND AT 266, PLUMBEROW AVENUE, HOCKLEY

The Director of Health & Housing reported that a caravan had been stationed on this land and was being used for the purposes of human habitation without the benefit of a site licence. The owner of the land was aware of the situation.

Resolved that the Solicitor to the Council be authorised to institute legal proceedings for a contravention of Section 1 of the Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960. (741)(SOL)

421. CARAVAN SITES AND CONTROL OF DEVELOPMENT ACT 1960 — TOWER CARAVAN PARKJL POOLES LANE, RULLBRIDGE (MinuE3.1/85)

The Director of Health & Rousing reported that the freehold title to the above land had been sold and an application had been received for the transfer of the Licence to the new owner, Godfrey Davis Park Homes.

Resolved that in accordance with Section 10 of the Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 the Director of Health & Housing be authorised to transfer Caravan Site Licence No. 1 to Godfrey Davis Park Homes, Elstree Sales Centre, Sterling Corner, Barnet By Pass, Elstree, Boreham Wood, Hertfordshire. (1482)(DRR)

422. TERMS OF REFERENCE AND DELEGATION OF POWERS The Committee considered the appended report of the Secretary to the Council and agreed the amendments suggested by the Director of Health & Housing. LU-a UI

Health and Housing p1

RECOMMENDED That the Policy and Resources Committee be asked to recommend EH revision of this Committee's Terms of Reference and Delegation of Powers to accord with current practice as set out in the appended report. (4500) (SEC)

423. DRAFT PROPOSALS TO EXTEND LOCAL AUTHORITY ENFORCEMENT RESPONSIBILITIES FOR HEALTH AND SAFETY LEGISLATION

The Committee received the appended report of the Director of Health & Housing on a consultation document forwarded by the Association of District Councils revising the Health and Safety (Enforcing Authority) Regulations 1977. Members noted that it was proposed to extend local authority enforcement responsibilities to include a number of new non— industrial activities. Ths Association of District Councils had invited this Council's comments by 31st July 1985.

Members supported the Director in wclcoming the increase in responsibilities but noted that it was being suggested that authorities could absorb the extra duties without additional staff which the Director pointed out would extend the cycle for inspections across the whole range of functions.

RECOMMENDED That the Committee's views be conveyed to the ADC. (646) (DIIH)

424. SOUTHEND HEALTH DISTRICT — CONSULTATION DOC1JMENT ON MAJOR START REGIONAL CAPITAL ALLOCATION

The Director of Health & Housing reported that the Southend Health Authority had invited the Council's comments on this consultation document. As recommended by the District Medical Officer the Committee favoured the concept of providing a community based service to the priority groups as the other options were beyond the resources available and would not improve services outside the hospitals.

RECOMMENDED That the Southend Health Authority be informed accordingly. (26609)(DHH)

425. PROPOSED BTh—LAWS — PLEASURE FAIRS

The Director of Health & Housing reported that although Bye—laws were made by the former Rochford Rural District Council concerning health and safety at pleasure fairs, no such Bye—laws existed for the former Urban District of Rayleigh. Members noted that following discussions with the Home Office, model Bye—laws were now available to provide control of potentially hazardous situations at pleasure fairs throughout the District.

RECOMMENDED That the Solicitor to the Council be authorised to take all necessary steps to secure the confirmation of the appended Bye—laws relating to pleasure fairs, such Bye—laws to be enforced throughout the whole of the Rochford District. (9)(SOL) . Health and Rousing

426. HOUSING ESTATES — CLEANING OF COMMUNAL AND EXTERNAL AREAS

The Commitee noted that because of the need to make urgent pro'iision for replacement cleaning services, the Chief Executive had exercised his authority under Standing Order 18 with regard to the deletion of the Estate Wardens post from the Esta1Pishment, the employment of contractors and the creation by virement of a\qJew budget head for this service. (196)

427. CONTRACTS PROGRESS REPORT

The Director of Development reported on the progress of a number of contracts and Members noted that the expenditure to date on Contract 750 was £803,477.55. (131)

428. MR. P.R. BLOWER — PRINCIPAL ASSISTAN1SARIIThCTURE) The Vice—Chairman of the Committee made reference to the fact that this would be the last Meeting of the Committee attended by Mr. Blower, Principal Assistant (Architecture), who was leaving the District to take up an appointment at Brentwood District Council. She congratulated Mr. Blower on his appointment and thanked him for his contribution to the Council's Health & Rousing Services. Members joined with the Vice— Chairman in wishing Mr. Blower every success for the future. (PP)

429 • INFORMATION REPORT — DIRECTORATE OF HEALTH & HOUSING

The Committee noted the report of the Director of rTealth & }!ousing. (225)

430. BOTTLE BANK

Members were reminded of the decision at the inception of the Can Bank Scheme to allocate any revenue received to the elderly of the District. It was now suggested a similar approach be adopted with regard to Bottle Bank revenue, currently totalling £500.

P. RECOMMENDED That Bottle Bank funds are allocated to the mentally handicapped and physically disabled charities within the District and the allocation of such monies be left at the discretion of the Chairman of the Council. (20701)(ACE)

431. LOCAL AUTHORITY MORTGAGE INTEREST RATES

In accordance with Section 110(6) of the Housing Act 1980, it was

RECOMMENDED That the Council declares its Local Average Rate to be 11% for thTperfThto 31st March 1986. (6l2)(DF)

432. EXCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC

Resolved that, in accordance with Section 1(2) of the Public Bodies (Admission to Meetings) Act 1960, the public be now excluded from the meeting for the reason that publicity would be prejudicial to the public interest, the business about to be discussed being the subject of confidential reports.

8Ae Health and Housing

433. TENDERS FOR RE—ROOFING VARIOUS PROFERTIES AT MALTING VILLAS ROAD, ROCHFORD AND WORCESTER DRIVE, RAYLEIGH — CONTRACT NO. 1117

The Solicitor to the Council reported in confidence that four tenders had been received and had been checked for arithmetical errors.

RECOMMENDED That the lowest tender submitted by A.E. innocent & Company Limited in the sum of £32,666.00 be accepted subject to contract. (14781 )(SOL)

434. WARDEN SUPERVISION - BRITTON COURT EXTENSION

The Director of Health & Housing reported in confidence that on completion the above scheme would be the largest in the District and' to ensure that adequate cover was available at all times it would be necessary to provide an additional part—time relief warden.

RECOMMENDED That the Policy & Resources Committee be asked to increase the establishment of the Directorate of Health & Housing by the addition of the post of part—time relief warden for Britton Court. (194)(DHH)

I

S AGENDA ITEM 9

ROCHFORD DISTRICT COUNCIL

HEALTH & HOUSING SERVICES COMMITTEE - 4TH 3ULY 19S5

REPORT Of THE DIRECTORS OF HEALTH AND HOUSING AND OF FINANCE ARRANGEMENTS FOR SECURING THE ECONOMiC, EFFiCIENT & EFFECTIVE USE OF RESOURCES - EXAMINATION OF HOUSING REVENUE ACCOUNT SERViCE EXPENDiTURE The Director of Health & Housing reports that following discussion of the External Auditor's report on the "Overview of the arrangements for securing the economic efficient and effective use of resources" it was agreed that reviews of certain areas of activity would be unoertaken in accordance with a specified programme (Minute 773/S4) Reviews are being undertaken: to define service objectives, operational targets and performance measures; to critically examine levels of service expenditure where these appear to be above average: to review staffing levels where appropriate; to examine such other areas that are considered to warrant investigation. This report results from a review of Housing Revenue Account Service Expenditure, and in this connection the External Auditors' report states:- " Audit Commission Profile

29 Included as Appendix III to this report is a brief statistical profile ol the Authority crnpiled by the Audit Commission. The profile consists of a series of comparisons between the Authority and a "famil)" of broadly similar authorities. In each case the tables in the profile identify the lowest, highest and average unit costs. The profile further indicates where the uthority appears to be significantly above the family average and where the impact is potentially important. 30 As is stated in the introduction which accompanies the profile its purpose is not to suggest or imply answers but to prompt questions. Overall the Authority's service expenditure is below average. Nonetheless we consider that areas for priority review are tnose where the Authority is indicated to have unit costs above the family average. We are of course aware that the reason may well be demographic circumstances, statistical inconsistencies, the effect of debt charges or the effect of deliberate policy decisions in relation to service provision. For example, the above average expenditure per dwelling in the Housing Revenue Aecount is thought to be largely due to debt charges However, we consider that this should be establisned by specific review. Further we do not believe that effort should be exclusively directed towards such areas. Opportunities to obtain better value for money may also exist in areas where the Authority's unit costs are average or below average. This emphasises that there may be areas which require investigation which are not immediately apparent from the profile 81a 31 Particular areas which the profile highlights include the following: - Family Difference from Rochford Low Average High average (L'OOO) Total Service Expenditure 'Per Head (E) (1983/84 estimates) 36.5 19.7 38.3 64.3 Housing Revenue Account Gross expenditure per dwelling per week (L) (1983/84 estimates) 26.24 12.80 18.34 29.11 1,085 1. iNTRODUCTION The foregoing comments and statistics were based on 1983/84 estimates. We now have the Audit Commissions's profile based on 1984/85 estimates and it is considered appropriate to base this report on the latest available information: The Audit Commission profile shows the average amount per propert taken from a group of broadly similar Authorities: Average number of properties (Rochford) : 2,671 Rochford Family Difference from Average Average (L000) Repair & Maintenance 217 290 - 194 Supervision & Management General 51 94 - 116 Special 129 72 + 154 Debt Charges & RCCO 924 576 + 929 Other Expenditure 30 12 + 48 — Gross expenditure 1,351 1,044 + 821 In furtherance of the Auditors wishes this review is not confined to those areas where expenditure is apparently above average 2. REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE The budget for Repair and Maintenance consists of: 1984/85 Average 1984/85(R) Average Family Budget per property Budget per property Average General Repairs 470,000 470,000 Central Administration 109,900 106,100 Debt Management 1,000 1,600 580,900 217 577,700 216 290 Rochford's orLgtnal budget for 1984(85 is £194,983 less than the famLly average and the revised budget is £197,654 less than average. The General Repairs figure of £470,000 represents the cost of repairs by the D.L.O. and Contractors and averages £175.96 per dwelling. The Director places great importance in providing a cost effective Building Maintenance organisation and in recent years computer and management systems have been developed to this end. Building Maintenance Staff at Rochford have developed a particularly cost conscious approach to building maintenance work. Constant cost comparisons are made between various contractors and the D.L.O. for all types of building maintenance operations and contractors who prove not to be cost effective are dropped from Our lists. Maximum advantage is taken of capitalising major repairs.

• 3. SUPERVISION& MANAGEMENT - GE\ERAL - The budget for Sunervision ana Management - General consists of; 1984/85 Aerage 984/S5(R) Average Family Buaget per property Buaget per property Average \ages (Estate CaretaI.er) '7,400 8950 Bailiff Fees 2,000 1,600 Delivery of rent statements etc 2,300 1.660 Insurances 13,200 12,100 - Central Acimin. 176,900 ' 163,190 Giro Charges 7.900 8.400 Removal Grants(to tPs) .,500 2.600 214,200 198,300 Less: * Owners Allowance - Net 72.000 71,600 Essex \\ater Co. Commission 6,060 6,100

136.200 51 120.600 45 94 This budget shows the cost of administering the Council's nousing witn the exception of \taraen controlled dv.ellings. Rocnford's original oudget for 1984/85 is £114,853 less than the larnilv average and the revised oudget is £130,879 less than a'erage. In fact tne revised buaget is less than a half os the ami1 average The maior cost element is Central Administration whicn inclucies an element of Casnier's costs but consists mainivot Housing staf I covering asoects. of Apoiications1 Lettings ana Excnanges. Tenancy and Estate Management. Rent Accounting and Arrears Control. The Audit Commission is currenty carning out a study ox Housing Surervision and Management. The results of this sway will be reriorted to the Council when published but are expected to confirm the belief that Rochforcl's Housing staffing levels are less than average. None- the-less, in tine with Council policy Housing staffing levels will be kept under review and maintained at the minimum necessary to provide an effective Housing service. Despite substantially lower than average expenditure, the Audit Commission profile shows Rochford's void control, rent arrears and rent write-oft figures to be exemplary.

Bi 4. SUPERVISION & MANAGEMENT - SPECIAL

The budget for Supervision & Management - Special consists of:

1984/85 Average 1984/85(R) Average Family budget per property Budget per property Average Wardens Wages (inc. On-costs) 80.600 81,600 Wardens Accom.costs 32,300 33,900

Total Warden Costs 112,900 115,500

Maintenance of Grounds 34,800 34,800 Gas (central htg) 97,000, 97,000 Electricity 19,800 19,800 Cleaning Materials 3,200 3,200 * Other Communal Serv's 17,700 14,000 Contract Cleaning 11,000 11,000 Telephone Costs 3,500 2,900 Central Admin. 45,600 41,300 345,500 339,500 Less: - Misc Income 300 100

345,200 129 339,400 127 72 * This includes the cost of maintaining personal alarms and fire alarms; maintenance and replacement of domestic appliances; cleaning and replacement of soft furnishings; and replacement of furniture. This budget is mairly expenditure related to the provision of Warden controlled dwellings. Rochford's original budget for 1984/85 is £152,247 above the family average and the revised budget is £146,905 above the average. There is a statistical inconsistency in the Audit Commission profile in that the average expenditure is computed by dividing the expenditure on Supervision & Management - Special by the total number of Council dwellings and not just those which contribute to 'such expenditure. It follows that an Authority which has a higher proportion 01 Warden controlled dwellings compared to total dwellings, as Rochford has, will, show an apparently higher cost. The major elements of cost are Wardens, Gas (central heating) and Central Administration:

(a) Wardens There are 19 Wardens and Deputies covering our 13 schemes plus a number of Relief Wardens who are paid only when required. Wardens give support and advice to their elderly tenants, obtain medical assistance and contact relatives in emergencies, provide supervision and administration of the buildings and equipment (with particular emphasis on Health & Safety) and encourage/organise communal activities. They are on duty for 19 hours on each working day. Salaries are determined by the number of dwellings in the Scheme, the average salary being £3,1L5 p.a. The costs of Wardens' services to tenants are fully recovered by a weekly charge of 14.55 included in the rent; this charge is covered by Housing Benefits. In 1982 a detailed study of Alarm Systems was carried out which included the possible sharing of a Central Console facility. This would have allowed a reduction in the number of Relief Wardens. The study showed that costs associated w4th a Central Console would not be cost effective and accordingly the option was not pursued (Minute 592/82) (b) Gas Central Heating The 1984/85 budget for central heating in sheltered schemes is £97,000 for 356 dwellings, representing an average of £68.12 per quarter per dwelling. This cost is fully recovered by a heating charge of £5.24 per week. This is not covered by Housing Benefit but persors in receipt of Supplementary Benefit receive a heating allowance of £6.25 per week. Considei able time and effort has been expended on energy conservation measures in Sheltered Schemes resulting in cost effective heating and hot water levels appropriate to the needs of elderly tenants. The accounts for 1984/85 were still being finalised at the time of writing but the actual central heating costs are believed to be £88,368, averaging £62.06 per quarter per dwelling. (c) Central Administration There is a further statistical inconsistency in this item in that Rochford's budgets include Central Administration under Supervision & Management - Special, whereas neighbouring Authorities do not; thus apparently increasing our costs in comparison with others. Having regard to the importance placed by this Authority in Warden controlled dwellings it is considered appropriate to readily identify associated administrative costs. 5. DEBT CHARGES AND REVENUE CONTRIBUTIONS TO CAPITAL The budget for Debt Charges and Revenue Contributions to Capital consists of: 1984/85 Average 1984/85(R) Average Family Budget per property Budget per property Average Debt Charges 2,211,500 2,180,500 Revenue Conts. to Capital 143,000 140,000

Debt chgs. I (hsg.repairs) 113,000 178,800 2,467,500 924 2,499,300 936 576 Rochford's original budget for 1984/85 is £929,508 above the famil' average and the revised budget is £961,560 above the average. The Director of Finance has previousWadvised the Council that the Debt Charges figure reflects the Council s high capital investment in housing during the last five years. Capitalised repairs were originally intended to be financed from revenue contributions, but it became apparent that it would be advantageous to fund this expenditure from loan. Debt charges play a major part in the calculation of housing subsidy and the Audit Comm.s4tistics show that Rochford's housing subsidy is £767,000 higher than other Authorities in our family group, in fact our proportion of subsidy to expenditure is the second highest of the English District Councils. Maximising Government subsidy is a strategy which the Council is recommended to continue. 6. OTHER EXPENDITURE The budget for Other Expenditure consists of:

1984/85 Average 1984/8R) Average Family Budget per property Budget per property Average Rent(paid to ECC) 1,100 1,100 Hsg Benefits Admin 29,900 36600 Debt Management 25,100 25.100 Cost of Comm.Servicing 22,200 15,200 78,300 30 78,000 29 12 Rochford's original budget for 1984/85 is £48,078 above the family average and the revised budget is £45,407 above the average. There must be an element of statistical inconsistency in "other expenditure" since the items included must vary within Authorities. Rochford includes rent paid to Essex Count> Council for an ex-police house and the cost of committee servicing. The Director of Finance has previously advised the Council that it is now apparent that the formula applied by the Department of Health & Social Security does not adeqqately compensate for the additional administrative costs of Housing Benefit Administration and that the shortfall for 1982/83 and 1983/84 has been included in 1984/85 budgets. Finally there isthe fact that Rochford's Debt Charges are 62% higher than the familyaverage, resulting in higher costs of Debt Management. S

7. CONCLUSIONt

The Auditors expressed the thought that the above average expenditure per dwelling in the Housing Revenue Account is largely due to debt charges. This report confirms that view and points to the beneficial effect in Housing Subsidy. If Rochford's debt charges figure were equal to the family average then Rochford's Housing Revenue Account Gross Expenditure would fall below the family average.

RECOMMENDED

That the Audit Panel be advised that the I Housing Revenue Account Service expenditure I levels are effective and within Council policy.

TAF/SE 2.5.85 1w BA r"r ¶ 'r'n I!I.TIr!! rr!'M", J r•

AGENDP. ITEM 10

ROCHFORD DISTRICT COUNCIL HEALTH AND HOUSING SERVICES COMMITTEE - 4TH JULY, 1985 REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF HEALTH AND HOUSING

ARRANGEMENTS FOR SEguRING THE ECONOMiC, EFFICIENT AND EFFECTIVE USE OF RESOURCES - EXAMINATION OF ALL HEALTH AND HOUSING SERVICES OPERATED THROUGH THE DIRECTOFME OF HEALTH AND HOUSING

1. Introduction The Director of Health & HousIng reports that followIng discussion of the External Auditors report on the "Overview of the arrangements for securing the economic, efficient and effective use of resources" it was agreed that reviews of certain areas of activity would be undertaken in accordance with a specIfied programme (Minute 773/84) Reviews are being undertaken:-

to define service objectives, operational targets and performance measures; to critically examine levels of service expenditure where these appear to be above average; to review staffing levels where appropriate; to examine such other areas that are considered to warrant investigatIon. This report results from a review of Health & Housing Committee service objectives, operational targets and performance measures. In this connection the External Auditors' report states:— Fara 10 "Although at present there is no specific detailed statement of all the Council's objectives expressed in terms of realistic targets, considerable progress has already been made in this direction. For example, we noted that the two major servIce directorates, namely Leisure and Health & Housing, have both submItted to members documents on what they see as their objectives.tt

Pare 12 "The Health & HousIng DIrectorate's 'Operational Plan' is a detailed document which has been produced for use by officers for a number of years, and has been submitted to members for the first time in early 1984/85." Fara 13 "We would not expect all dIrectorates to produce a document In the level of detaIl of this Operational Plan, but we consider that each service area should have an approved statement of Aims, Policies and Objectives, and a set of Measurable targets for all major activities. We believe this is the only feasible way in which results can be monItored and performance measured, therefore allowing an assessment of efficiency and effectIveness."

82IS 2. Directorate's Operational Plan S As the External Auditors point out this Operational Plan Is a very detailed and complex document primarily for use by Officers In the management of their responsibilities. It includes not only, duties which fall within the terms of reference of the Health & Housing Services Committee but reflects the responsibility of the Director of Health & Housing for the maintenance of all civic buildings and offices through the Policy & Resources Committee and for maintenance of Leisure Centres, Sports Halls and other public and community halls through the Leisure Services Committee. The Director would like to be able to find the administrative staff time to continue its production because, together with the files of practice and procedure notes, virtually everything the Directorate does and how and when to do it is explicitly covered. It' Is considered that this disciplined! approach helps to obtain valUe for money In the Directorate. 3 Purpose of this Report This report has been prepared In response to the comments made by the External S AudItors in the "Overview" Report in order to suggest a philosophy, aims and objectives against which the Committee may in due course judge its progress. To do this those of the key activities in the Directorate's Operational Plan which are within the terms of reference of this Committee have been summarised. Other Chief Officers will report on the objectives and performance measures for which they are responsible to this Committee. If the Committee accepts the philosophy, aims and objectives now suggested, performance measures for main areas of work can be considered for presentation to a future Committee. 4. Phllosopy In establishing a phIlosophy for the housIng management, maintenance and Improvement and environmental health functions, Members should consider the overall directions In which the Committee! should aim with these functions. In addition, the obligations placed upon the Council by a wide range of statutes should be incorporated within 0 that philosophy. The following is suggested:- 4.1 To provide the opportunity for resIdents in the District to live in a separate dwelling, in good condition, containing sufficient bedroom accommodation for the separation of the sexes, adequate bathroom and lavatory facIlities, a living room and a room for the preparation of food. 4.2 To ensur that works of repair, alteratIon and improvement to all Council owned housing ahd specialist equipment are executed efficiently and expeditiously in order to:-

a) maintain appearance; b) protect structure and fabric; c) maximise useful life; d) satisfy statutory requirements; a) minimise loss of income and other costs to the Council; f) ensure client satisfaction; and 9) provide modern standards. 4.3 To ensure that the environmental health functions are executed efficIently and expeditiously in order to achieve and maintain high standards and to satisfy statutory requirements. U - 'iF PI I P•i"U! 1"!' 'Pr!"" ¶' yr Pr

5. Alms and Objectives

Aims are established to provide guidance to the Director of Health & HousIng on what the Committee wishes to see achieved. They are broad in their framework as they give a general direction to the diverse activities carried out in the Directorate. More specific objectives are requIred to support these aims and to provide short range, attainable ends leading to the ultimate achievement of the stated aims, with the resources available. The following are suggested: - AIMS OBJECTIVES

5.1 Control of environmental factors 5.1.1. To control risks to publIc health which may adversly affect from atmospheric pollution. physical, mental or social well being 5.1.2. To control risks to public health from accumulatIons of refuse and lIcensed waste disposal sites. 5.1.3. To ensure the adequacy and wholesomeness of public and private water supplies and the quality of swimming pool waters. 5.1.4. To control risks to publIc health from private drainage systems.

5.1.5. To control risks to health from the condition of the private housing stock.

5.1.6. To control risks to the health and safety of persons at work or visIting places of work.

5.1.7. To control risks to public health from noise.

5.1.8. To assist in preventing the transmission of communicable diseases.

5.1.9. To control risks to public health from rodents and insects.

5.1.10 To administer the House Renovation Grant system in accordance with Government and Council Policy.

5.1.11. To administer the Home Insulation Grant System in accordance with Government Policy. n

5.2. ProvIsion of community 5.2.1. To control by registration protection services. and licensing systems, I such premises and activities as are specified by legislation, in order to provide for the protection of the community Viz: Animal Boarding Establishments, Dog Breeding Establishments, Riding Establishments, Pet Shops, Dangerous Wild Animals, Food Act Registrations, Offensive trades, Scrap Metal Dealers, Places of Public Entertainment, Milk Licences '& Registration, Caravan Sites, Ear Piercers, Electrolysis Treatment Premises.

5.2.2. To ensure the safety and cleanliness of food and the maintenance of satisfactory standards of hygiene.

5.2.3. To arrange for cremations and burials under the provIsions of the National Assistance Act 1948

5.3. Provision of information on 5.3.1. To provide literature, posters, Environmental Health in order advice etc. as necessary to influence behavIour. and to participate in exhibitions, displays and the preparation of releases to the media etc. S 5.4. Maintenance of Council owned 5.4.L To ensure a degree of priority dwellings In a satisfactory is allocated to each valid condition. repair or alteration.

5.4.2. To ensure that repairs and' alterations are completed as quickly as possIble. 4 5.5. Maximising the lIfe, maintainIng 5.5.1. To ensure that all Council the appearance and protecting owned dwellings are decorated the structure and fabric of externally three years after Council owned dwellings handover and, thereafter, a and specialist plant and on a six year cycle. equipment. 5.5.2 To ensure that A.F'. schemes are decorated Internally on a five year cycle. I' o AIMS OBJECTIVES

5.5.3 To ensure that one bedroom dwellings occupied by pensioners are decorated internally on request by the tenant. 5.5.4 To ensure that specialist plant and equipment in Council owned dwellIngs Is maintaIned in accordance with the recommended standards.

5.6. Improving and modernising 5.6.1 To prepare and implement standards and facilities of schemes of pthnned Improvements Council owned dwellings In conjunction with the HIP submission. I 5.7. Estimation of housing needs 5.7.1 To estimate housing demands of the District including the requirements of special groups. 5.7.2 To examine and appraIse housing strategy prior to, and in conjunction with the annual HIP submission. 5.8 Provision of sufficient rented 5.8.1 To meet the Council's housing accommodation to meet the provision targets as stated requirements of the District in current policy. 5.9 Meet the requirements of 5.9.1 To investigate claims of the Housing (Homeless homelessness and to notify Persons) Act 1977 applicants of the result of their claim. 5.9.2 To provIde adequate temporary shelter to those in nepd. 5.10 Priority for housing given 5.10.1 To establish and maintain to those applicants with the Housing Waiting Lists. the greatest need. 5.10.2 To appraise the efficiency of the 'points system' for selection of prospective tenants. 5.11 Minimise the loss of income 5.11.1 To ensure that stock is on empty housing. re-let as quickly as possible to the most suibble applicant.

f_i a AIMS OBJECTIVES

5.12 Manage and control the appearance 5.12.1 To ensure every estate of Council housing estates is inspected regularly and standards are maintained. 5.13 The smooth and efficient operation 5.13.1 To ensure all Aged Persons of Aged Persons Schemes Schemes are inspected regularly and standards are maintained. 5.14 Ensure that rent accounts are 5.14.1 To ensure prompt actIon accurately maintaIned and in all cases of rent arrears.

arrears are1 moqitored. I 5.14.2 To minimise percentae of rent arrears.

5.15 Sale of Council, Houses 5.15.1 To ensure that the approval of all valid applications to buy is achieved as quickly as possIble.

RECOMMENDED: I That the Audit Panel be advised that the Committee suppoTts the philosophy, alms and objectives stated In this report. .

aw ROCHFORD DISTRICT COUNCIL

HEALTH AND HOUSING SERVICES COMMITTEE — 4TH JULY, 1985

REPORT OF TIlE CHIEF EXECUTIVE

CARING FOR EX-NENTAL PATIENTS IN TIlE COMMUNITY

The report of the Teach—In on this subject held earlier in the week is appended and an item will be included on the Agenda of all Standing Committees inviting them to identify what further consideration should be given with regard to their own terms of reference.

Both Dr. Winbow of Runwell Hospital and Mrs. Rhea of MENCAP felt that there was an urgent need for individual units of housing accommodation to establish group homes. Dr. Winbow further indicated that he had a group of four persons who could occupy a three bedroomed house. If one were to be made available by the Council it would be necessary to provide furnishings, domestic equipment and appliances, bed linen etc. and of course a telephone. The Chief Executive believes that if the Council were to give general approval now to the allocation of a house when a suitable unit becomes vacant, he and his colleagues could by approaching the various charitable organisations and the business community, raise the funds necessary to fully equip a comfortable home.

The Chief Executive would continue to have a personal involvement in the project.

It was clear from the Teach—In that a small contribution was significant and the Committee may wish to consider as a matter of policy whether one house a year should be allocated for this purpose, this year's project serving as a pilot scheme. If this suggestion is adopted) the HIPS Strategy Statement will need amendment and it would be appropriate to instruct the Officers in this regard to approach suitable housing associations with a view to increasing the number of such units available in the District, either by them completing new schemes or by them adopting the same policy as the Council.

RECOMMENDED (1) That one unit of Council housing accommodation be made available each year to serve as group homes for ex—mental patients, the project this year serving as a pilot scheme.

(2) That Council's HIPS Strategy Statement be amended accordingly and the concept extended to include housing association involvement.

(3) That the proposal to furnish and equip the first unit by voluntary subscription and donation be applauded. (15546). I 11 I iII !!PI u I iur ROCITFORD DISTRICT COUNCIL

POLICY AND RESOURCES COMMITTEE 16TH JULY 1985

REPORT OF THE SECRETARY TO THE COUNCIL

MEMBERS' TEACH—IN — CARING FOR EX—MENTAL PATIENTS IN THE COMMUNITY — 26TH JULY 1985

Present: Councillors A.J. Harvey (In the Chair), Cd. Black, Mrs. L.M.A. Campbell—Daley, Mrs. P. Cooke, B.A. Crick, TL. Dean, J.A. Gibson, Mrs. E.M. Hart, Mrs. L.A. Holdich, Miss B.G.J. Lovett, Mrs. J.M. Munson, B. Taylor, J.P. Taylor and Mrs. L. Walker.

The Chairman extended a welcome to the guest speakers, namely Doctor G.V. Griffin, the District Medical Officer, Doctor Adrian Winbow, Consultant Psychiatrist at Runwell Hospital and Mrs. L. Rhea, Homes Manager for MENCAP Homes Foundation, South East Essex area, to the partners of Councillors who were in attendance, to the representatives from Hockley Parish Council and Rayleigh Consultative Committee and Mr. & Mrs Patching who ran a group home in Westcliff. Unfortunately it had not been possible to fix a date which did not conflict with the Housing and A.D.C. Conferences and Councillor K. Cope and Mrs. Jo Jones, who had participated in the visit to Runwell, could not be in attendance.

Doctor Winbow began by identifying and defining the three main classifications of mental illness, namely psycho neuroses, psychoses (including schizophrenia) and personality disorders. He said that improvements which had been brought about by successive Mental Health Acts coupled with major breakthroughs in the provision of drugs treatment had led to a dramatic fall in the resident population of mental hospitals and the trend was continuing. Many of those patients who could now be treated within the community were sufferers from schizophrenia, who required a period of rehabilitation to counter the effects of long periods within institutions. The process did not stop on their release but required a network of social care within the community to prevent their regression. The "core/cluster" scheme provided for an intermediate staffed hostel with links to a number of houses in the area within which rehabilitated patients could be placed. Whilst the manpower requirements of providing mental care within the community were high they could be offset by the release of trained staff as hospital roles fell. The primary requirement however was for a number of houses to be made available within the area for allocation to groups of former mental patients.

Doctor Griffin then spoke on the subject of those individuals who had been born with a mental handicap, the effect of which was not to alter perception but merely to slow down the rate of intellectual development. There were some BOO sufferers within the Health District of whom some 135 were in hospitals, either at in the case of Southend and or at Bridge Hospital for those within Rochford. It was now generally recognised that hospital was not the best environment for such people and that they needed to be encouraged to lead as normal a life as possible by placing them into ordinary domestic accommodation. Both hospitals were due to close at some time in the future and there was a need for a programme to be prepared as an exercise involving Health Authorities, Social Services, District Councils and the voluntary bodies concerned, to provide for patients to be rehoused and cared for within the community. Finally Mrs. Rhea outlined the role played by the MENCAP Homes Foundation in providing small family sized homes within the community to enable mentally handicapped people to live independently of their parents, the method by which such houses were acquired and the level of help which was given to residents according to their needs.

A number of questions were then answered which related particularly to the existing experience of rehabilitation in respect of behavioural tendencies, the degree of acceptance of ex—mental patients by the community and the success of work placement noting MSC involvement; the level of monitoring which could be provided; the need to make provision within the HIPS Bid for the housing stock which was being sought and the extent to which the costs involved could be met out of existing resources.

At the conclusion of the presentation the Chairman noted that the subject matter would be giving rise to items for consideration by the various Committees concerned. He thanked the guest speakers for their specialist contributions to a very informative evening and those present for the degree of interest which they had shown.

.

a . '• Pr III:PI!Iru III !' hI!p!! I1

ROCRFORD DISTRICT COUNCIL

HEALTH AND ROUSING SERVICES COMMITTEE — 4TH JULY, 1985

REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE

LOCAL AUTHORITY MORTGAGE INTEREST RATES

The Director of Finance reports that under the provisions of Section 110(6) of the Housing Act 1980, the Council must declare for a period of six months, commencing 1st October 1985 the local average rate for Council mortgages to be calculated at k% above the estimated loans pool rate for that period. The loans pool rate is estimated to be lOU for the six months to 31st March 1986.

The Act further provides that the interest rate charged to borrowers is the higher of the local average rate or the standard national rate determined from time to time by the Secretary of State for the Environment. The Secretary of State last determined the standard national rate as being 14% with effect from 7th May 1985. Therefore the rate to borrowers will remain at 14% until such time as the Secretary of State declares a further rate or the standard national rate falls below the Local Average Rate.

RECOMMENDED That the Council declares its Local Average Rate to be 11% or the period to 31st March 1986.

3jJJ E'I' II P'I IpU PIP! t!IrPII!!II,!I!IrIr I!'

AGENDA ITEM 15

ROCLIFORD DISTRICT COUNCIL

HEALTH & ROIJSING SERVICES COMMITTEE — 4TH JULY, 1985

REPORT OF THE MANAGEMENT TEAM

HOUSING INVESTMENT PROGRAMME AND STRATEGY — 1986/97 (HIPS BID) 1. Introduction

HIPS is the means that the Central Government employs to control local authority capital investment in new build Council Rousing, in improvements to the stock, insulation grants, house purchase loans, etc. These controls are also exercised over housing association capital works financed through either local authority or the Housing Corporation. The HIPS submission to the DOE has four main elements:

(a) A numerical appraisal of the housing stock both public and private, of its condition and of housing needs (HIP1 and 111P4)

(b) A request for capital allocation for 1986/87 — the HIPS Bid (11122 and HIP3)

(c) A Strategy Statement outlining the housing situation' in the District and the way the Council has chosen to meet the needs, including the new build and improvements programme and its response to changes in Government policies (The Strategy).

Obviously the numerical appraisal and the Strategy Statement must fully support the Bid and the Management Team never recommend a Bid that the Council is not capable of achieving in the following year.

11122 deals with land acquisitions, new build housing, capital.ised repairs, etc., whilst HIP3 requires details of low cost home ownership schemes. It is said that Ministers will once again take particular account of such schemes in determining the Allocation for 1986/81. The Management Team would draw the attention of Members to the comment in Paragraph 4.02 of the appended Strategy Statement on the response to the Council's equity sharing scheme at Betta Farm.

The submission of the HIPS documents to the DOE must be made by 12th July and if the Committee approved the proposals in this report the Chief Executive will then exercise his powers under Standing Order 18 so that this deadline may be met.

2. HIPS — 1986/87 — Financial Constraints

It is usual at the time the Bid is invited for the DOE to give some indication of the general financial constraints to be applied. The only advice for next year and the year after has been that authorities can plan on the basis that they will receive in 1966/87 at least 7OZ of the allocation for 1984/85 (1,302,O0O) and in 1987/88 at least BOX of the 1985/86 Allocation (l,29O,4OO). The allocation itself is in the form of a permission to spend with a tolerance of plus or minus 10%. In addition to the allocation, the Council is also able to spend a proportion receipts generated. For 1985186 this proportion stands at

83u —II!I i i 1rIg II

The current capital programme (See Appendix 1) provides for three new build schemes (New Crested Court, I3uckingham Road and Lodge Close) to start in 1985/86. The expenditure forecast for 1986187 of implementing this programme would alone exceed the 1112 guideline figure of £1.3m. It would not allow for any capicalised repairs, discretionary renovation grants, house purchase loans, insulation grants or housing association advances.

The DOE have confirmed that the only guarantee as to the Allocation for 1986/87 is In relation to the advised figure of £1.3m and that authorities should not enter into commitments which would exceed that amount plus the permitted level of capital receipts and the tolerance of 10% of the year's Allocation. If the proportion of capital receipts available to supplement the allocation remains at 20%, the Council's spending will be increased by approximately Lim, giving a spending limit of £2.3m. Because the touncil may not have sufficient HIPS resources bY fund the new build programme in J986/87 it cannot commit all three schemes at the present time.

Management Team have discussed the alternatives available to the Council and suggest that whilst the Bid should be submitted on the basis that the schemes are committed, the contract for one scheme should not be let until the Allocation for 1986/87 is announced and it is known that sufficient funds are available. This is likely to be in December 1985.

Of the three schemes the New Greeted Court forms part oVa package deal and a larger development and thus must be given priority. The need for new family housing is well rehearsed and the Lodge Close scheme must, therefore, be the other scheme to proceed in the current year. This will mean that the Buckingham Road AP Scheme must b allowed to slip, it may be that this contract could be let in the New Year if the Allocation so permits. Alternatively, if the DOE do not approve the Lodge Close PCi tender stage submission, the Buckingham Road scheme could be re—introduced in the current year. the Council must appreciate that by the same token it may not be possible to make a start on the Orange schemes in 1986/87 or the Buckingham Road project.

A further factor supporting this cautious approach is that a national 0 survey of the conditions of municipal housing stock is under way and it is thought that this might possibly result in a redistribution of resources to capitalised repairs at the disadvantage of new build schemes.

Any underspend on the current capital programme as a result of deferring a new build scheme would be carried forward into 1986/87.

3. Council Strategy Statement (appended)

There have been no material changes in the Council's housing strategy over the past year but minor drafting changes have been made to the Statement so as to reflect the advance of time. One of the major concerns in the past has been the need to acquire land to sustain the building programme. 4 Provision is made in the Draft District Local Plan for the release of a number of Council owned sites for housing use after 1990. Principally these are located at Rochford (Romney Marsh) and in Rayleigh (the existing allotment sites). 0 •j 8 I As will be seen from the building programme (Appendix 1 to the Statement) the Council's current housing land holdings will be developed by 1987/88 and new land purchases have therefore been included from 1986/87 so as to allow for the lead time on the design and tendering arrangements. No AP site acquisition is proposed for 1986187 as it is suggested that the opportunity be taken in 1987/88 to extend Pembroke House and Spa Court at that time. However, it will be recalled that the policy on A? units is that they should be dispersed throughout the District so that within reason the tenants can continue to live in the same localities and that with new family housing for rent, the policy is for a number of small developments, again spread throughout the District. It has been assumed therefore that the Council would continue to seek to purchase suitable sites if land came onto the market in an area where a need had been identified elsewhere than in the townships of Rayleigh and Rochford where a land supply will exist after 1990. The proposals for improvements and repairs to the Council's housing stbck are set out in Appendix 2 to the Strategy Statement.

Details of the components of the Bid for 1986/87 are set out after Appendix 2.

As in previous years the Bid assumes that HIPS funds will be available for the whole of the programme and as the release of housing sites will not occur until after the programme period, no mention of this possibility has been made in order that funds for land acquisition might be allocated in the interim. A Bid has also been made for the local Abbeyfield Scheme although it is still hoped that this will be funded by the Housing Corporation.

4. 1986/87 RIPS Bid

As mentioned a breakdown showing the main heads of expenditure in the Bid is appended. The total Bid amounts to £6,074,000 whereas Members will recall that the Allocation for the current year was only £1,613,000, which) after the addition of the prescribed proportion of capital receipts and the use of tolerance (totalling £24,000), gives a spending limit of £2,437,000. However, the Bid for the current year was £4.9m at current prices. The main reason for the increase is the third new build scheme.

RECOMMENDED (I) That the revised Strategy Statement and the 1986/87 Bid be approved.

(2) That the Buckingham Road scheme be deferred until HIP resources are available either in the 1986/87 Allocation or as a result of either of the other two schemes failing to secure PC]. approval. (881)

833 PU'' — ''''''' ''P'' !1!hI r uEuF r1'' U'IP • 1 •ii'rp II

R.OCKFORD DISTRICT COUNCIL

HOUSING STEATEGY STATEMENT — 1986/87

1.00 General

1.01 The programme and policies have altered little over the past year.

1.02 Land available for development in this area is mainly in the private sector. This Authority is therefore in a position of having to negotiate for appropriate sites with developers. The Government initiative of allowing Authorities to purchase low cost homes front builders is being pursued although the opportunities are limited.

1.03 ilis Authority is aware that even with the completion on target of the present housing programme there will continue' to be a buildup of the numbers on the Council's waiting list. Every effort is being made to encourage alternative means of housing in accordance with the Government's policies but again opportunities are limited.

1.04 Some of the Council's housing stock is on well established estates and consequently many of the tenants are reaching retirement age and units are in need of improvement.

200 Background

2.01 The Council's revised building programme for the next 10 years envisages 25 two bedroomed houses and one ÀY scheme to be built annually.

2.02 Analysis of the general needs waiting list reveals that 81% of families registered are unemployed, single parent families or low paid who are assessed as being unable to purchase a home of their own and are totally reliant on rented accommodation.

2.03 The results of the 1981 Census show that over 15% of the population is already of pensionable age and the largest age group is that between 45 and pensionable age. It follows that there will be a sustained demand for AP housing until the turn of the century.

2.04 The private sector still continues to provide the majority of housing within the District but this will in accordance with the County Structure Plan decline over the next 10 years as land becomes more difficult to obtain. The Plan requires the identification of land for a further 716 K residential units and this exercise is being undertaken.

2.05 The Rochford District waiting list as at April, 1985 is as follows:— S Ordinary list (including homesless, demolition orders and closing order cases — 529

OAF waiting list (including owner/occupiers) — 436

Ordinary list (including homeless, demolition orders and closing order cases) assessed to b in real housing need — 325.

-4

13jj 2.06 The local policy in the past has been to concentrate local authority house building in the areas of Rayleigh and Rochford with smaller areas of development in the outlying villages. Restrictions in the availability of suitable sites and the future development of general housing, will possibly mean more movement of families to areas outside their preferred District. With old persons however it is considered necessary to re—house them in the areas to which they have become accustomed.

2.07 With some exceptions, the present housing stock, both private and local authority, is generally in a reasonable condition, although there are a number of properties throughout the area built during the l930s as holiday bungalows and now lived in throughout the year, which are in a poor state of repair and lack basic amenities. These dwellings are in the owner/occupier sector, the majority of cases being elderly people. Requests for re—housing are frequently received from them.

2.08 Older local authority dwellings have been improved or are being brought up to standard.

2.09 There are a number of privately owned caravan sites in the area from which applications are received for re—housing and sheltered accommodation in close proximity to these sites will be required although no land has been identified for the purpose.

3.00 Policy Alternatives

4 3.01 Alternatives for the future house building programme are fairly restricted because of land availability and the type of household requiring the housing as on the Waiting List. Every opportunity must be pursued to provide housing where the demand exists.

3.02 As mentioned above, the land available for new house building is mainly in the private sector. Many of these sites are also in prime areas suitable for Al' development. Housing associations continue to show an interest in building in this area although they suffer the same land supply difficulties as local authorities.

4.00 Local Housing strategy

4.01 The Council's capital programme is set out in Appendix 1 hereto.

4.02 As can be seen from the programme, the Council has only 4 small sites in its ownership which are available for development in the immediate future and it is essential that further sites or accommodation are acquired in order to achieve the capital programme. The Council has no leasehold for the elderly, equity sharing or low cost home ownership schemes in prospect although every opportunity wi1l be pursued. It must be said however that some initial difficulty was experienced in disposing of the starter units on the Bette Farm Estate, possibly because of the availability of cheaper mature stock in the region. The sites mentioned at The Grange, Rayleigh, will be obtained by an exchange of land with a private consortium who are developing the area. Whilst the Council's A? housing programme has provided for a 38 unit scheme annually it is proposed instead in 1986/87 to extend two existing schemes. Housing associations undertaking new AP schemes will be counted against the Council's 10 year programme.

4.03 The Council fully supports selling houses to existing tenants. U P11111! III ! III JIpIq!! I' •Iu!9' ! — —

4.04 The Council would hope to resun1 thtir support of housing associations wishing to provide accommodation in the District.. There is a continued need for sustained activity in this area both by Ihe Council and the Housing Corporation. The keenest area of interest is in assisting associations who provide extra care facilities which are not available in Council schemes at the present rime. Negotiations are under way to establish an Abbeyfield Scheme in the District as soon as possible.

4.05 Work of improvement to existing properties will continue as set out in Appendix 2 hereto.

4.06 The Council allocates accommodation for key workers in support of its policy for employment initiatives in the District.

4.07 The Council has become increasingly aware of the problems of the physically handicapped and of their housing needso With the increase in the numbers of elderly (especially those over 75 years old) has come a corresponding increase in the numbers of physically handicapped. Rather than building mobility units, it has been thought preferable to adapt existing dwellings in line with Circular 59/78.

4.08 Consultations are taking place with the Health Authority and the Social Services on the Care in the Community Circular with particular regard to the housing needs of the mentally handicapped and ex—psychiatric patients. *

4.09 The Council wishes to continue to be sympathetic to the local demand for a loans for young married couples to purchase their first homes and although they have been able in the past to give only limited help to these applicants through the Building Society Support Lending Scheme, this Authority feels that this scheme should be encouraged to give as many young applicants as possible the opportunity to purchase their own house and cousquently help to reduce the waiting list. It was regretted that the allocation for 1985/86 was insufficient to allow the Council to continue with its House Purchase Loans Scheme but a bid for funds has been included for 1986/87.

4.10 The Counci])s AP waiting list includes all elderly persons in the District irrespective of their tenure. By this policy it is hoped to assist elderly owners/occupiers unable to afford to maintain their property. in certain cases, the Council will acquire the owner/occupier's property at a discounted price for sale for improvement.

4a41418b) 4.o5 I i-h, rtpd.. me CoundL has deod4 1x man ont fcunj Witt CMtiLtOb(Q. &ILh yeof ae hot&q a 9mup borne 11w. cuch hcmq. pa tbcAvtaso.piM pcojtcL. tcLwaa Ui hOucC4 Wh000kionG opciczthg ih th€ bk&kt fot tiwm th adopt & 6114tu pokaj.

0- S. 10.6.85. Rev. 3 ROGEFORD DISTRICT CODNOIL HOUSThG flTVESIT PR0GRA APF2fl I

1984/85 1985/86 1986/67 1987/86 1988(69 LAND ACQUISITION — — 2 Bed. IMelling Site 2 Bed The11ing Sate 2 Bed. Thaxelling Site .75h .75h .75k CAP Site .45k OAF .45k

WELLIGS COT NENCED 1. General Housing — Lodge Olose,Rayleigb. The Grange,Rayleigth. 25 No. 2 Bed Units 25 No. 2 Bed. Units 22No. 2Bed 24No. 2BedBung- alows 38 + 2W OAF 2. 0.A.P. Extension to Buokxngham Road, The Grange,Rayleigh. Spa Court l4No.OAP Bntton Court, Hockley. Rayleigh. 38 + 2W OAF 38 + 2W OAF Pembroke 18 No. House 141coAP New Crested Court, Rocblord. 38+2WOAP — TOTALS 1 22 24 25 25 2 18 38 + 2 Wardens 38 ÷ 2 Wardens 28 OC,A.P. 38 ÷ 2 Wardens 38 ÷ 2 Wardens

CINEDTOTAL 18 102 64 53 65

ThIELLINGS CCTLE?PED 1. General Housing — — Lodge Close,Rayleigh. 25 No. 2 Bed. Units 22 No. 2 Bed 2. O.A.P. Saucerfield, Extension to BuckingSm Road, The Grange,EayleIgla. 28 OAF RocbIord. Button. Court Hookley0 (Spa Court 14) 38+2WOAP 18 38+2WOAP 38÷2WOAF (Pembroke House 14) New Greeted Court, The Grange,Rayleigh. Roohford. 24 No. 2 Bed. Bungalows 38 + 2W OAF

TOTALS 1 — — 22 25 2 38 2 Wardens 18 38 + 2 Wardens 38 + 2Wardens 28 0.A.P. 38+2Wardens 24 COMBINE]) TOTAL 40 18 102 64 53 p p . S a S. S a - a a. • - S . . 'I.e APPENDIX 2

DIRECTORATE OF HEALTH & HOUSING

CAPITAL PROGRANNE 1986 /87 IMPROVEMENTS AND REPAIR £000

1. Programmed window replacement schemes 218

2. Programmed re—roofing and associated works 82

3. Improvements to dwellings with condensation problems 44

4. Part 2 Accommodation

(a) lift 54 (b) upgrading of Fire Alarm circuits 33

5. Electrical improvements and replacement 33

6. Adaptations for disabled persons 22

7. Improvements to rendered surfaces 16

8. Underpinning etc. 44

9. Kitchen improvements 27

10. Central Heating programme 54

11. Energy Conservation 10

12. Environmental improvements 22

659 .

¼

0

I . c i U '.i '. HIPS BID 1986/87

84/85 Bid at 85/86 Bid at 86/87 Bic at Components of Bid 86/87 Prices 86/87 Prices 86/87 Praces £000 £000 £000 Land £107 £ 402 £334

New Build £1742 £2658 £3786

Low Cost Home Ownership £ 334 £ 320

Improvement & Repair £ 443 £ 441 £ 65Q

Insulation Grants £ 47 £ 66 £ 65

Renovation Grants £ 235 £ 406 £ 210

House Purchase Loans £ sqo £ 468 £ 450

Housing Association £ 167 £ 250

£3164 £4942 £6074

8i4 AGENDA ITEM 18

ROCUFORD DISTRICT COUNCIL

HEALTH & HOUSING SERVICES COMMITTEE — 4TH JULY, 1985

REPORT OF THE SECRETARY TO THE COUNCIL

TERMS OF REFERENCE AND DELEGATION OF POWERS

Following the absorption by the Policy and Resources Committee of the functions of the Finance and Personnel Committee and the decision to include the Terms of Reference of Sub—Committees in the Council's Year Book, the current entry is being amended appropriately.

On reviewing the Terms of Reference and Delegation of Powers (copy appended) to this Committee as part of the overall exercise, the Director of Health & Housing has suggested the following amendments to recognise formally the current functions of the Committee.

Terms of Reference

17. Amend to read "House Renovation Grants"

New 26 — "To deal with allegations of harassment under the Prevention of Eviction Act 1977".

Dejation of Powers

2. Add "(xx) Certificate of Registration of persons engaged in ear piercing and electrolysis treatment".

3. Amend to read "To issue, amend, transfer, refuse, revoke....4"

11. Delete (repeat of Paragraph 1.)

Re—number remaining paragraphs.

Existing 15 — amend to read "To deal with House Renovation and Roof Insulation Grants".

New 15 — "To issue Notices under the Housing Act 1957, Section 9 as amended, concerning the repair of houses not owned by the Council."

RECOMMENDED That the Policy and Resources Committee be asked to recommend the foregoing revision of this Committee's Terms of Reference and Delegation of Powers to accord with current practIce. (4500) C. 1-ILALTI! AND HOUSING SLR VICES COMMIflEE Terms of Reference I General public health maiters, including pest control, food h)riene r1J corn &, \laughterhouces, smoke control, animal &lart cannon sites no;se abatement noatmen and pica- sure hoai, infectious diseases public conveniences, pubi c caietv and statutory nuisances 2 Waier supples wth1n the dctrict 3 Houce reiuce and salvage coliection arid night soil collection 4 Coa;i proicction and sea defences. 5 To deal with all matters relating to the licensing of places of public and private entertainment 6 'To deal with all matters relating to house-to-house and Street collections 7 To dcal witn all matters relating to the Council's functions under the Factories Act 1961, and tne Shops Act 1950 or any Acts amending inc Same, or any regulations, rules or orders made thereunder 8 To deai with all matters relating to the health, welfare and safety of all employees whicn arc enforced by a local authority under the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 9 Sections 47 and 50 of the National Assistance Act, 1948 as amended 10. To deal with all matters relating to the following services of the Council (a) cemeteries, cremalona and mortuaries, (b) markets. 11 All matters connected with litter control. 12 Home and Water Safety 13. The acquisition of land and/or property for housing pur- poses and the design and erection of new Council dwellings 14 The care, maintenance, management and improvement of the Council's housing accommodation 15. The maintenance of the Housing Waiting List, 16. Guarantees under Section 45 of the Housing (Financial Provisions) Act 1958 and Housing Act, 1980 17 improvements Grants 4 18. Roof insulation Grants. 19 Agricultural i-loustng Subsidies 20 Athances to housing associations providing accommodation for letting 21 Responsibility for all matters relating to slum clearance and unfit houses and for repairs to all properties not in tne ownership of the Council 22.. The selection of tenants for vacant Council dweliings and the rehousing of homeless families 23 House Purchase Loans to private persons and arrears of repayments 24. Consultation procedures and publication of information under the Housing Act 1920 25 The appointment of deleaates to conferences on matters within the purviewof this committee

Delegation of Powers I Authority to institute legal proceedings for matters v,ithm the terms of reference of the Committee 2 To refuse, revoke or suspend licences, registrations, etc, for 4 mtterc within the terms of reference of tue Comrniitce The various types of licences are et out below — (i) Music and Dancing (full and occasional) (ii) Sunday Entertainments, -4 (iii) Boxine and Wrestling. (iv) Late Night Refreshment Houses: (vi Registration of Theatrical Employers (vi) House to House collections. 0 (vii) Street Collections, ci (viii) Dogs; 0 .4 - (ix) Game, (x) Money Lenders, On) Pawn Bdkers; (xii) Bett;ng Gamtng and Lotteries, (xiii) C'nematograph and children s exemptions. (xiv) The keeping of pet shops, animal boarding establish- ments riding establishments and dog breeding estab- lishments the keeping of dangerous wild animals, (xv) Slaughterhouses and Licences to slaughter animals. (xvi) the use of special designations for milk and registra- tion of dairy premises 'and distribut&s of milk (xvii) toe registration of hawkers of food and their pre- mises (xviii) certiticates of registration and licencec under the Rag Rock and Other Filling Materials Act 1951 as amended, (XIX) certificates of registration under the Scrap Metal Dealers Act 1964 as amended 3 To issue refuse revoke or suspend licence', registrations, etc. in respect of all matters relating to Carasari Sites 4 To determine applications for exemmions tinder the Offices Shops and Railway Premises Act 1963 as amended. Food Hygiene (market stalls and dcliserv sehicles) Regulations 1966 and Food Hygiene (General) Regulations 1970 5, To determine applications unocr Section 6, Clean Air Act 1968 in relation to chimney heights. 6 Authority to determine tees wnere not set by Statute. 7 Decision as to whether obiection shall be made to any appli- cation for reg stration 01 ciun premises under me Liccnsing Act 1964 as amended 8 The selection of tenants for vacant Council dwellings and the rehous*ng of homeiecs families 9 Consent under the Housing Tenancs Conditionc to use a Counc,l dwelliniz for tie nurposes of child minaing. where the application relates io the reception of a number of children. which in addition to the existing chilaren of the applicants, would result in more than si's children being on tile premises. and toe refusal of (lie application if consi- dered to be appropriate 13 The issue of notices to landlords and tenants under the Rent Acts 1957-65 concerning Qualification Certiiicates 11 The institutioti of proceedings under legislation within the terms of reference of thi commitiee 12 To maKe Demolition and Closine Orders to revoke or sub- stitute such orders as ncccssarv and to accept or refuse underlakines and oiler' for repair', reconstruction and improvement under the Housing Act 1957 and to issue notices of procedure 13 General Manaremeni of Council dwellings in accordance with the CounciPs policy 14 To give all necessary approsals to and instructions for new Council housing deveiopmeni v,orks beisseen the time when inc Council give general instructions for inc prenaration of a scheme and the time wnen inc iinal scneme is reatis for approval 15 To deal with improvement and roof insulation grants

uAP AGENDA ITEM 19

ROCHFORD DISTRICT COUNCIL

HEALTH & HOUSING SERVICES COMMITTEE — 4TH JULY 1985

REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF HEALTH & HOUSING

DRAFT PROPOSALS TO EXTEND LOCAL AUTHORITY ENFORCEMENT RESPONSIBILITIES FOR HEALTH AND SAFETY LEGISLATION 1. Introduction

A consultation document on proposals for revising the Health and Safety (Enforcing Authority) Regulations 1977 has recently been received from the Association of District Councils. The proposals are to extend local authority enforcement responsibilities to include a number of new non— industrial activities as originally recommended by the Robens Committee report of 1972. I

2. Scope of the Proposals

The 1977 Regulations gave comprehensive occupational health and safety enforcement responsibilities to local authorities in premises where the main activity is:—

(a) the sale or storage of goods for retail or wholesale distribution, with some exceptions;

(b) office activites;

(c) catering services;

(d) provision of residential accommodation;

(e) consumer services provided in shop premises, with some exceptions;

(f) dry cleaning in coin—operated units in launderettes and similar premises.

The proposals have been drawn up as a result of work done by a joint Health and Safety Executive/Local Authority Association working group. The Association of District Council's Housing and Environmental Health Committee has already given approval in principle to the proposed changes, subject to detailed comments being made during the formal consultation period.

The draft proposals extend local authority enforcement responsibilities to the following new areas:—

1. private motor vehicle repair;

2. personal services and theraputic treatments e.g., saunas, solaria, ear piercing etc;

3. sporting, leisure and cultural pursuits; the care of animals with some exceptions;

4. undertakers; ,, p• 'Ill

5. religious activities. 3. Effect of the Proposals It is estimated that the implementation of these proposals will result in responsibility for an additional 250 premises. This represents an increase of approximately 327..

The Assoçiation of District Councils and other Local Authority Associations have accepted that the additional workload could be absorbed within current resources for the time being by District Councils, given proper prioritisation of work. Given the current financial restraints, this is the only basis upon which a transfer can go ahead. Environmental Health Officers already have cause to visit a number of the premises concerned by virtue of their responsibilities under public health and other legislation. However, given no change in resothrces applied to the enforcement of occupational health and safety, a transfer of additional premises wilt reduce the frequency with which all premises can be inspected. In addition, Members should be aware that the transfer will require an initiative to identify the new premises and to assess risks, in order that the overall pattern of relating inspections to the degree of risk may continue. This initiative will inevitably reduce the time available for other planned environmental health activities.

The Association of District Councils has invited the comments of the Council by 31st July 1985.

I.

.*

0

4

KJ — bATE: --______U A ROCHFORD DISTRICT COUNCIL

Minotes of the Leisure Services Committee

At a Meetingheld on 9th July; 1985; Present: Councillors B. Taylor (Chairman), M.N. Anderson, P.A. Beckers, C.I. Black, W.H. Budge, T.IL. Burt, Mrs. p. Cooke, R.D. Foster, J.A. Gibson, A.J. Harvey, D.R. Helson, Mrs. L.A. Holdich, M.J. Jones, Miss B.G.J. Lovett, Mrs. J.M. Muflson, J.A. Sheaf, Mrs. L. Walker and D.C. Wood.

Apologies: Councillors T.L. Dean and Mrs. P.R. Ha.wke.

Visiting: Councillor B.A. Crick.

435. MINUTES

Resolved that the Minutes of the Meeting held on 16th May, 1985 be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

436. MONITORINGO PERFORMANCE TINOS-OrZlTH-NOVEMBER;'1984-AND-12t11 FEBRUARY 1985

The Committee were satisfied that all necessary action had been taken. Minutes 38/84, 125/84, 128/84, 133/84, 373/84, 616/84, 91/85 and 93/85 were carried forward. In response to a Member's question the Director of Leisure reported that discussions were continuing on the Grove Road Open Space planning application (Minute 373/84) and that a report would be made in clue course. On Minute 617/84 he advised that of the funding available for play schemes, seven schemes had received a grant of £60 and one for £25 leaving a balance of £55 for any late applications. Further to Minute 804184 it was noted that the Ashingdon Parish Council no longer wished to pursue a BMX track in that locality. In respect of the provision of facilities for the disabled (Minute 91/85) the Director advised that a report would be submitted to the next Meeting of the Committee.

437. REPORT OF A MEETINGWITH REPRESENTATIVES FROWTUE ROCHFORD ANDDISTRICT SPORTS COUNCIL

The Committee noted the report of the Meeting held on 30th May, 1985. (701)

438. RAYLEIGH GRANGE COMMUNITY CENTRE MANAGEMENT -COMMITTEE

The Committee considered the report of the Meeting held on 25th June, 1985 and agreed the recommendation in paragraph 6 which provided on a six month trial basis for the Association to be exempt from the requirement to pay 50% of booking fees in advance on the understanding that they would make their reservations by block booking and remit the fees by monthly account. With regard to the provision of a club room facility at the Centre which was discussed in paragraph 3(a) of the report, a Member mentioned an approach from Rayleigh Wyverns RFC who were seeking a permanent hone ground and club facility. It was thought that as the Rayleigh Orange Commmunity Centre was an opportune site, the Director of Leisure might consider making further investigations.

RECOMMENIDED1That the report and recommendation be adopted and a further report made in due course. (2) Tha1 tht Thiethoi Le,a mxia j-wrThQc ,MJth3cthons tOJdL13 ajItj$ W3vvns IZFC and rna.kQ &jttrthci vzpxb ih OLLC. cowst. (vswk(bt) n Leisure Services

439. ROCKLEY W00DSFUTURE US0PLAflNG-FIELD-AT-TfW-REAR-OF THE FORMER 'ROCKLEY- COUNfl PRIMARYSHOOL (MinuteEO6/84)

The Committee noted the use of this area as a bird garden was, in the Solicitor to the Council's opinion, precluded by a Covenant and that the Director of Development regarded the change of use as an incursion into the Green Belt. Doubts existed as to the desirability of encouraging any significant increase in traffic to the main car park because of the difficult exit on to the main road.

RECOMMENDED That no further action be taken on the proposal. (245)(DL)

440. ROCHFORD RESERVOIR

(1) Miniature Railway

The Director of Leisure reported upon a request from a group of individuals known to each other through the common membership of the South East Essex Railway Society to site a miniature railway within the above area. They had prepared an outline survey of the Reservoir site from which it wag evident that the scheme could be accommodated without disturbing any existing trees or shrubs or the public's access to the whole area.

The Director of Leisure gave a slide presentation which illustrated the type of project and Members expressed enthusiasm for the proposal which w they felt would enhance considerably the attraction of this open space.

P RECOMMENDED That approval to the principle of a miniature railway being sited on the open space at Rochford Reservoir be given. (133)

(2) Managemenrof-theiiaters(Minute 320/85)

The Solicitor to the Council reported on the responses from both the Rochford Angling Club and the Essex Angling Consultative Association on the comments raised by Members when this subject was last considered by the Committee. e The Rochford Angling Club maintained they should be permitted to continue managing the Reservoir in view of their past association with the waters. An application had also been received from an individual prepared to take over the management of the Reservoir on a rental basis.

Members agreed that more information was required before reaching a decision and that further negotiations should take place with the Club and the other interested party.

RECOMMENDED That the Director of Leisure in conjunction with the Solicitor to the Council discuss further with the interested party, and the Rochford Angling Club, the suggested terms for a Lease of Rochford Reservoir and report to a future Meeting. (133)(DL & Sot)

441. KING tEORGE Vi?LAYING FIELD, RAYLEIGU — PARKING

The Committee considered the report of the Director of Leisure on the problem of indiscriminate parking within King George V Playing Field near Leisure Services

the Bull Lane entrance. Currently unauthorised parking was on occasions extending well on to the greensward of the Park and seemingly was not even confined to users of the facilities. The hardetanding within this area was originally designated for use by the Parks Section's maintenance vehicles and Members agreed that this should be the only use that could be allowed to continue, particularly as adequate car parking for users of the facilities of King George's Playing Field existed within Webster's Way Car Park.

RECOMMENDED That the parking facility within the Bull Lane entrance of KingGeorge V Playing Field, Rayleigh, be restricted to Council vehicles only. (6486)(DL) 2tbtn-ai buE ii, PoGc aM Qa,¼,uictc, C&mn4tn 24th. EtØantbv K5, MLAats. 'Soé/a'3 442. CASTLE HALL— USE BY'-CO}ThfUNITYPOLICE

The Director of Leisure reported on an application from the Rayleigh Community Police Department for free use of facilities at one of the Council's halls in Rayleigh for a disco one night per month for the teenagers of the District. Members were pleased to note that it would be possible to provide accommodation on a regular monthly basis at Castle Rail on Tuesday evenings and that in view of the community benefit arising from this use it was

RECOMMENDED That subject to the concurrence of the Policy and Resources Committee the Council make a grant equivalent to the hire charge to the Rayleigh Community Police Department for the use of Castle Hall for this purpose. (6l56)(DL & DP)

443 • ASHINCDOItPLAflNGFflLIYPAVILION— USE BY YoUtli-CENTRE-(Minute-331/85)

The Committee noted the report of the Director of Leisure that, following a meeting with the Warden of Rocheway Youth Centre, an agreement had been made to use the Ashingdon Pavilion as a youth club for a trial period between September to December subject to funding by the Ashingdon Parish Council. The facilities would be available on Tuesday evenings each week between 7.OOp.m. and lO.OOp.m. for use as a general meeting point for up to 45 persons within the 13 to iS age bracket. The Warden, although keen to establish a youth centre in the area, had advised that the Pavilion did not warrant large sums of expenditure by the Council as its size prevented it being a viable unit as a long term facility.

Members expressed concern about the suitability of the Pavilion for such a use and were disappointed that no offer of help had been forthcoming from either the Ashingdon Memorial Hail or the Church Hall. The Committee hoped that alternative accommodation could be found in. the area which was suitable long term for the provision of a full facility.

RECOMMENDED That the Director of Leisure investigate and report on the alternative accommodation available to provide a long term full youth facility in the area. (865)(DL)

444. CLEMINTSIIALL -a- SPZNCERSNURSERY (Minnte—807/84)

The Committee were reminded of undertakings given at the Public Inquiry regarding the future use of this site. The view of both the Director of Development and the Solicitor to the Council was that small—scale

a I. Leisure Services

facilities which were necessary to support outdoor participatory sport and recreation would be acceptable but that any use which encouraged large numbers of people regularly on to the site might be considered a contravention of the assurances given at the Inquiry.

In noting the advice and the earlier suggestions for the use of the area, Members were aware that the demands for particular sporting activities s were likely to change over the years and agreed that no specific facility should be pursued at this time. In addition, faced with the current financial situation, the Council could only implement a programme of basic landscaping at this open space for which financial provision was available in the current year.

I I RECOMMENDED That the Director of Leisure commence within the present year ilandscaping programme for the Clements Hall — Spencers Nursery site. (20785)(DL)

445. TURRET HOUSE PUBLICOPENSPACL(Minnte 808/84)

The Solicitor to the Council reported on applications from adjoining landowners to purchase an additional area of land for inclusion in their gardens. One such request related to a small strip of land to the rear of 95, Nelson Road and adjoining 83, Victoria Road which would allow beneficial boundary adjustments to these properties and would not affect the use of the Council's open space in any way. Another proposal involved an area of land to the rear of 31, 33 and 35, Albert Road, Rayleigh. This S was a considerable parcel of land where the gardens of the three properties would be almost doubled in size. It would also require additional land If the boundaries were to be kept in a sensible manner. The Director of Leisure considered that area, which was wooded and not unattractive, should be retained by the Council.

RECOMMENDED That the Solicitor to the Council be authorised to negotiate for the sale of the strip of land at the rear of 95, Nelson Road, and the strip of land adjoining 83, Victoria Road, to the respective owners of those two properties on such terms and conditions as may be approved by the District Valuer, but that no action be taken on the request to purchase the land at the rear of 31/35 Albert Road, Rayleigh. (7059)(SOL)

446. CLEMENTS HALLLEISURECENTRE NA11INcO!-SECOND-AceESrROAJY (Minute 381/85

The Committee considered the various suggestions of both flawkwell Parish Council and the Chairmants Panel for the naming of this new road and after a full debate agreed that "Clements Hall Way" was the most appropriate as it specifically identified the Leisure Centre.

Members also gave preliminary consideration to the methods by which sign— posting to this Leisure Centre could be improved and felt that the Council should look to providing prestigeous signs for each of its sports centres as well as improved directional signposting.

RECOMMENDED (1) That the Development Services Committee be asked to consider the name of "Clements Hall Way" for the second access to those premises. (J) Leisure - Services

(2) That the Director of Leisure investigate further the possibility of providing prestigeous signs for all Council sports centres and improve signposting generally. (923)(DL)

447. ROCIIPORD DISTRICT SPORTS COUNCIL — FESTIVAL OF SPORT

The Chief Executive reported that he had exercised his powers under Standing Order 18 to allow the Rochford District Sports Council use of Rochford Recreation Ground for a dance to be held from 8.00 p.m. to 12.00 p.m. on Saturday 6th July 1985. As the dance was a programmed event within the Festival of Sport, no charge would be made for this use.

As this was an annual function the Director of Leisure requested delegated authority to process similar applications in future years.

RECOMMENDED That the Director of Leisure be granted delegated authority to appro'ifuture applications for similar events. (870)(DL)

448. LEISURE-BuSES ESSEX GAMES

The Director of Leisure reported upon a request from the Sports Council for the use of both Leisure Buses on Sunday, 8th September to transport Rochford athletes to Chelmsford to participate in the Essex Games. The major element of the expenditure involved would be in respect of the wages of the bus drivers and it was suggested therefore that the Sports Council's request be allowed subject to it providing suitably qualified drivers. This would satisfy the Council's insurance requirements. On this particular occasion the District Council could meet the fuel cost. The Coimnit tee were asked to consider the general principle of making the buses available for this and similar purposes.

Members expressed concern over the fact that whilst a driver might hold a Public Service Vehicles Licence, that person might not possess the degree of expertise the Council would expect and that it was unacceptable to them that the Council's Leisure Buses should be made available on that basis, when the consequences of an accident could be so serious.

The Committee were unanimous in approving the use of both buses by the Sports Council on 8th September and agreed that the vehicles should be driven by the Council's drivers and that on this occasion the whole cost be met by this Authority. Furthermore they felt that any similar requests should be determined by the Committee.

RECOMMENDED That the Council provide the two Leisure Buses and drivers for the Essex Games 1985 at no cost to the Sports Council. (790)(DL)

449. EASTERN AUTHORITIES ORCHESTRAL ASS0CIATI0N

The Director of Leisure reported that the Arts Council had proposed to cease contributing to the EAOA and replace it by a Nottingham based 'Eastern Orchestra" and a new touring mechanism — the "Regional Orchestral Touring Agency". Members expressed concern over this proposal noting the additional expense required to bring the orchestra to Rochford, the more limited programme than was currently available and the reduction in Arts Council funding to ROTA resulting in increased costs to promoters. The Committee were mindful of the benefits from the existing EAOA and agreed Leisure- Services

the Council should oppose the Arts Council's proposals.

RECOMMENDED That the Council do oppose the proposal by the Arts Council to cease fithding the Eastern Authorities Orchestral Association and replacing it with an "Eastern Orchestra" and "Regional Orchestral Touring Agency". (576)(DL)

450. TERMS OF REFERENCE AND DELEGATION OF POWERS

The Committee considered the appended report of the Secretary to the Council and agreed the amendments as suggested by the Director of Leisure.

RECOMMENDED That the Policy and Resources Committee be asked to recommend Ehrevis1Ión of this Committee's Terms of Reference and Delegation of Powers to accord with current practices as set out in the appended report. (4500)

451. REVIEW OF LEISURE SUVICESbIRECTORATE

The Committee noted that the Staffing Sub—Committee had approved changes in the staffing of the Leisure Directorate to improve efficiency and standards of service, to provide additional administrative support and career progression and to develop the use of facilities. In this latter respect a new post of Sports Development Officer had been created which would be undertaken by Mr. J. Foster, who was currently the Manager of Park Sports Centre. (194)

452. CARING FOR EXMENTAL PATIENTS IN THE COMMUNITY

The Director of Leisure reported that since the last Meeting a visit by residents of Crowstone Hotel to Cleiaents Hall Leisure Centre had proved very successful and the Committee agreed that discussions should continue with the Hospital Administrators in respect of both Runwell and Rochford psychiatric unit as to how best the Leisure Services Committee can assist In rehabilitation programmes.

A further possibility was to use the Leisure Bus to collect ex—mental patients on a regular basis to make similar visits to Clements Halt Leisure Centre as educational groups although it was appreciated that this could only be considered if it could be accommodated within the Leisure Bus timetable and the existing budget allocation. (15546)

453. LEISURE EVENTS * The Director of Leisure reminded Members of two forthcoming events. The Rochford Show was being held on 13th and 14th July, and would include a performance at 3.00 p.m. at The Lawns, Rochford, by the Texas Girls Choir currently in the U.K. to participate in the Weekend's "Live Aid" concerts in support of the Ethiopian Famine Appeal.

The Rochford and District Sports Council Festival of Sport which commenced on 6th July would continue until 20th July and Members were most welcome to attend. S III rE,p I IVi!IU!1 IIPII1!!!I!I

Leisure -Services

454. EXCLLJSIQN-ormrruBLIc

Resolved that, in accordance with Section 1(2) of the Public Bodies (Admission to Meetings) Act 1960, the public be now excluded from the Meeting for the reason that publicity would be prejudicial to the public interest, the business about to be discu8sed being the subject of confidential reports.

- 455 • SECURITY OF PUBLIC BUILDINGS

The Director of Leisure reported in confidence on the action taken to reduce break—ins and vandalism at the Council's public buildings, with particular emphasis on the arrangements implemented at Clements Hall Leisure Centre.

RECOMMENDED That the action taken by the Director of Leisure be endorsed and that arrangements be made for the security of buildings to be kept under constant review. (28310)(DL)

— bAit

bn j r U ''l! IU IIF 1 'nFl

AGENDA ITEM 18 ROCIJIORD DISTRICT COUNCIL

LEISURE SERVICESCOMNITTEE — 9TH JULY, 1985

REPORT OF TEE SECRETARY TO TiLE COUNCIL

TERMS OF REFERENCE AND DELEGATION 0F POWERS

Following the absorption by the Policy and Resources Committee of the functions of the Finance and Personnel Committee and the decision to include the Terms of Reference of Sub—Committees in the Council's Year Book, the current entry is being amended appropriately.

On reviewing the Terms of Reference and Delegation of Powers (copy appended) of this Committee as part of the overall exercise, the Director of Leisure has suggested the following amendments to recognise formally the current functions of the Committee.

Terms of Reference

2. Amend to read "The hiring and letting of all sports areas."

Delegation of Powers

Add "4. The engagement of artistes and entertainers and the preparation of a programme of entertainments and activities.

5. Negotiations and agreements with potential sponsors.

6. The control of the Council's licensed bars and catering operations."

RECOMMENDED That the Policy and Resources Committee be asked to recommend the foregoing revision of this Committee's Terms of Reference and Delegation of Powers to accord with current practice. (4500)

D. LEISURE SERVICES COMMiTTEE Terms of Reference I The care, maintenance and development of recreational and sports facilit'es. pleasure grounds, Commons and Open Spaces 2 The hiring and letting of sports pitches 3 The provision of centres for public, social and recreational purposes 4 Official Ceremonies, Entertainments and Exhibitions, say- iui the rights of the Chairman of the Council. 5 All matters connected with Tourism 5 The care, control, management, maintenance and develop- ment of museum and other public facilities 7 The control arid letting of allotments with the Council's jurisdiction 8 The commissioning of all public relations arrangements except routine advertisements 9 The appointment of delegates to attend conferences on matters within the purview of this Committee Delegation of Poners I 1. The hire and letting of sports pitches and the use of the Council's Pleasure Grounds and Open Spaces for local functions 2 The hire and letting of all the Council's pubPc buildings 3 The control and letting of allotments within the Council's r jurisdiction U i I .

S

I.

S a

IMIE: 42-"o'Qf S bJJ