There ‘s a lot happening at the council on Tuesday night. You can download the agenda from here, but here’s the public questions and the call-ins:
First of all , two questions from members of the public:
1 QUESTIONS BY THE PUBLIC
1.1 the following question has been received from Mr J E Cripps of 5 Durham Way,
Rayleigh, Essex of the Deputy Leader of the Council, Cllr K H Hudson:-
‘On the 21st September 2013 Cllr Hudson issued an open letter making
various personal pledges in respect of the Local Development Framework-
Rayleigh & Rawreth. My question relates to the following “quoted”
“To facilitate this it will be necessary to relocate the Rayleigh Sports and
Social Club (a valued facility for our residents), they will receive new and
enhanced facilities in recognition of their contribution to Rayleigh life at no
cost to themselves – this is my pledge.”
Recently the Leader of the Council (Cllr Cutmore) has announced, via the
letters page of the Evening Echo, that there will not be any new and enhanced
facilities for RTSSC.
My question is, therefore, at what Council meeting was this discussed/agreed
1.1 the following question has been received from Mr R Lambourne of 7 Whitehouse
Court, 158 Eastwood Road, Rayleigh, Essex of the Leader of the Council,
Cllr T G Cutmore:-
‘I note from the latest edition of Rochford District Matters that the Council has
employed a barrister to defend an action by a local resident concerning the
Core Strategy and Allocation Plan.
Can you confirm who authorised the defence of this action and in particular
the considerable extra expense that is presumably budgeted for and will be
paid for out of the council tax and why that authorisation hasn’t been
sanctioned by the Full Council?’
And here are the four call-ins to council by the opposition. If the Tories get their way, this will be the last time anything can be called in to council! The first is an item regarding open spaces taht will be dealt with in private because it has been deemed confidential. The second and third are from UKIP. The fourth is a last-minute one regarding planning policies on density of housing developments, floorspaces etc.
REFERRAL OF DECISIONS TO COUNCIL
1 Draft Open Spaces Strategy
1.1 Pursuant to Overview and Scrutiny Procedure Rule 15(b) a requisition has
been received in the names of Cllrs C I Black, M Hoy, J R F Mason and R A
Oatham requiring that the decision under Minute 74 (Draft Open Spaces
Strategy) of the meeting of the Executive held on 2 April 2014 be referred to
Note: The report in relation to this decision was exempt, so this referral will
need to be considered following exclusion of the public and press and is
picked up at Item 18 of the Council agenda.
2 Collections Support Officer
2.1 a requisition has been received in the names of Cllrs J Hayter, J C Burton and N J Hookway
requiring that the Portfolio Holder decision on the post of Collections Support
Officer be referred to Full Council.
2.2 A copy of the decision and associated report is set out at Appendix A.
2.3 The reasons given for referral are that the further work envisaged could be
carried out more economically and reasonably by the existing workforce, in
particular without putting at risk £11,650. Further, as there is £11,650
available in case of no additional income, surely this money could be made
available to support our sorely neglected front line services. These include
the proper care and management of our parks and open spaces, the locking
of our park gates to reduce crime, and the Rayleigh car parking fees issue.
3 Essex County Council Call for Waste Sites Submission
3.1 a requisition has been received in the names of Cllrs J Hayter, J C Burton and N J Hookway
requiring that the Portfolio Holder Decision on a waste sites submission be
referred to Full Council.
3.2 A copy of the Decision and associated report is set out at Appendix B
3.3 The reasons given for referral are that this will not be a fair and equitable
service for the people who live in the East of Rochford District, and may
encourage fly tipping. The Council should consider the following options:-
(1) Two sites, one at Michelins Farm and one at the Eastern end of the
(2) Accept the Michelins Farm Site for the Rochford District but re-instate
the concession at Stock Road, Southend for Rochford District Eastern
COUNCIL – 29 July 2014 Item 8
(3) Provide one centrally located waste site in the Rochford District
accessible to all Rochford District Residents.
Development Management Plan Examination – Proposed Schedule of
Modifications to Development Management Submission Document
a requisition has been received in the names of Cllrs C I Black, T E Mountain and R A Oatham
requiring that the Portfolio Holder Decision on approval of the Proposed
Schedule of Modifications to Development Management Submission
Document (April 2013).
1.2 A copy of the decision and associated report is set out in Appendix A.
1.3 The reason given for referral is to allow the Full Council to discuss, amongst
Ref MM4 “The density across a site should be a minimum of 30 dwellings per
hectare, unless exceptional circumstances can be satisfactorily demonstrated”
Ref MM9 “New dwellings (both market and affordable housing) must adhere
to the minimum habitable floorspace standards set out in Table 3, unless it
can be clearly demonstrated to be unviable or undeliverable.”
Ref MM56 – “Regarding non-retail uses in primary shopping frontages.”
This post has already been read 39 times since Aug 2nd 2015