Just a reminder that Rawreth Parish Council meets on Wednesday at 7:30 in the village hall. As usual there will be a public question time, and the public and press are welcome.
One of the biggest items will be the planning application for “North of London Road” which is entirely in Rawreth.
My apologies for non-attendance last night , due to being unwell at present, it was a
meeting I wanted to take part in , a take heart from this extract from the Standard free paper item :-
PLANS FOR 140 GREEN BELT HOMES REJECTED –
(Extracts )
“Cross party Councillors joined forces to throw out proposals..Glebelands in Benfleet”
“..the last remaining Green Belt site…..earmarked in the Councils draft local plan…”
“….I was very surprised all the Councillors sided with us after the site was allocated..”
“Concerns have raised about increased traffic on roads, pressure on schools and GP
practices, the strain on sewage systems………..”
Does all that sound familiar………?
Sorry you’re not well Jim, hope you feel better soon. The meeting was well attended and fairly vocal in respect of the outline planning application.
Jim,
hope you you will be able to attend thE Rayleigh town council planning committee on. Monday evening
Is it confirmed as ” the ” planning meeting dealing with North of London Rd?, thanks – JIM.
Any news on FACEBOOK – about Linda Kendall’s date in court today please
To quote from the Rayleigh Action Group Facebook page:
“We had a reasonably day with my excellent Legal team doing all they could with the hand they had. We know very well that RDC did the crossing of the ‘T’s and dotting of the ‘i’ s to thwart any challenge when shoving their schemes through but they might just have missed something. We will see. Judgement when Mr Justice Lindblom has considered everything put before him.”
Thanks Chris ( I don’t do FB ), and can you confirm that Mondays Planning Meeting will be covering ” Land North of the London Rd ” ?……Tar – JIM.
To add to Admins quote from Rayleigh action groups FB note on the High Court hearing. The basis of my case was that RDC did not consult in a meaningful way with the people they serve. From a possible 33,000 residents in Rayleigh/Rawreth, in one instance quoted in their submissions to court, they got just 195 replies to their consultation exercise. 194 rejected their proposals 1 (one) person supported them. The plan went ahead! When RAG consulted for just three weeks last summer 5067 (5680 without those removed due to course comments) rejected their plans. Still RDC claim placing crucial information on their ‘porridge like’ website is sufficient to obtain our consent to their schemes. It may be RAG will be proved not to be able to beat the system, in which they operate, but morally RDC are without any defence and need exposing to the community for this total lack of either ‘due diligence’ or ‘neglect’ in managing to connect with the people they are elected by and/or are paid to serve. To contemplate build 1379 houses, the only municipal huge traveller site and two Industrial complexes on the roads into Rayleigh is not acceptable. I will never regret or apologise for trying to stop this appalling act of vandalism on the town in which I and my extended family live. Judgement will be in 2-8 weeks.
Just been chatting on the phone to Town Councillor Chris Lumley about the Town Council meeting tonight. He remarked there were about 35 members of the public there, all very well behaved….
Yes CHRIS I did behave myself and we got a Town Council on our side , by that I mean they are anti the Countryside OPA on the grounds that the road access and egress proposed is inadequate. In fact there were several motions passed based around the fact that the existing local road network is already inadequate and needs to be solved before any construction starts.Specifically Rawreth Lane / London Rd / Downhall Road and Hullbridge Rd.
Now whether the ruling Junta will take any notice is another matter………..
i couldn’t attend last nights meeting but it sounds positive that the town council didn’t approve the application. were all councillors agreed or were the conservative councillors for it or split? I was looking and other than 1 UKIP councillor and 1 LIb Dem councillor, all the others appear to be conservatives.i know its RDC who will have the final say, but some of them are RDC councillors too aren’t they?
Yes they are, but I don’t know how many, if any, of them are on the Planning Committee. If any are it will be interesting to see if they fall in line like good little boys and girls or actually stick with their convictions and vote against.
I was there and it was universal opposition , some more vocal than others but all agreed that Rayleigh/ Rawreth road system is already overloaded and unsustainable –
And that it has to be resolved before any additional loading ( Construction & Domestic traffic ) can be envisaged.
Yesterday was the first time I have entered the Rayleigh Town Council Pavilion. Off a dark alleyway the entrance has a buzzer access system. Business is conducted in a meeting room which accommodates about 40 people, with no facilities for the public, whatsoever. Not even seats! It is up a steep flight of stairs so the disabled and infirm would not be able to participate.
During the High Court case I discovered, from evidence presented by RDC, this was the very venue RDC chose to present the only public meeting on their Local Plan, for the public of Rayleigh, one winter evening at 7.30pm. This was their main meeting laid on for the public when deciding to adopt their Core Strategy. Rayleigh has 33,000 residents 30% over 65 years of age. Given the location, accessibility, space for the public and timing of the said meeting, everyone can perhaps judge for themselves how much RDC wished to ‘connect’ with the people they are required to serve in the process of developing their policies on future development in our town.
Little Rawreth manages to provide seats AND a free hot drink for visiting residents…
Maybe the 195 replies had something to do with them only writing to a handful of people directly regarding the planning application. I live in Laburnum Way in the cul de sac which backs on to the ‘non-residential use’ part of the plan and I DID NOT get a letter, nor did several of my neighbours. In my rejection letter I included a complaint about this, and asked for it to be investigated why we were not written to. I also sent a copy of my letter to Mark Francois. Just how many immediate residents did they not write to?!
Not sure about the “little”!Rawreth is going to grow by 1200 houses! And then come to a complete standstill .
And the Councillors do the washing up afterwards
Linda, whilst you and I share a broader political view, I do feel your comments regarding Rayleigh Town Council are incorrect and misleading, and I have to correct you so that others who visit Chris Black’s site are not mis-informed.
The Town Council offices are not located off of a dark alleyway. The are located and accessed at Websters Way Car Park, using the very short footpath that leads to King George’s Playing Fields. Whilst it was dark(ish) at around 7.30pm, the car park has lighting and the Town Council offices also have external lighting. Your description of it’s location implies it is difficult to find and un-safe which is not the case.
Business is conducted in a meeting room that accommodates 45 people. For a Town/Parish council, this room is more than sufficient in size. As you well know, seating IS provided and many of the public who arrived in good time, prior to the meeting sat in the chairs provided. For those who arrived later (yourself included) it was necessary to stand as all the chairs had been taken. Some members of the public also chose to stand, and, had you arrived earlier, you would have heard the chair of the committee ask members of the public who were standing if any of them required a seat. I am sure several councillors and/or members of the public would have given up their seat if any member of the public had indicated they needed one.
The room is located on the first floor so there is a staircase which most people have no problem ascending. There IS also a lift provided which anyone who visits the council office can use as an alternative to the stairs, so actually the disabled and infirm could participate, and do! There is a toilet provided which members of the public are free to use which again, includes disabled facilities. You may also not have noticed, but there were also tea and coffee making facilities located directly behind you.
It is worth mentioning that Rayleigh Town Council (Council of the Year 2014) has never had as many members of the public attend a meeting as did so on Monday evening, so I think the facilities provided are more than adequate and meet the demands required of the Council on a daily basis. Monday’s meeting was an exception and often in exceptional circumstances, things are never perfect. Records taken on Monday night show that 10 members of the public were not seated. I have seen many more than this stand at District Council meetings and in fact ‘RAG’ meetings, so I am sure you can appreciate that sometimes, it just isn’t possible to seat everyone who attends and unfortunately, those who arrive later than others often have to stand. Something all of us have to do from time to time.
I hope that visitors to this site who have not attended a Town Council meeting in the past will not be put off from doing so, by comments which frankly, are not accurate. The Town Council welcomes members of the public to attend meetings and encourages them to speak when attending. We hope to see more public at our meetings in the future.
Hi Chris
I have read your blog and must comment on some of the misinformation contained in some of the responses to the Planning Meeting held on Monday night. Firstly the Town Council is only a consultee and there are 3 district councillors on it but have to make a declaration at the start of the meeting that their comments here are separate to their judgement at the district council ( who is the planning authority).
Secondly the planning committee on the Town Council is non political so any analysis of the state of political parties at the meeting is meaningless. For the record there were 2 Liberals at the meeting plus myself who is INDEPENDENT.
Thirdly in answer to the claim that the meeting room is inaccessable there is a lift beside the staircase which I sometimes use myself.
In the interests of fair play I hope you publish my comments.
regards Chris Lumley
Re: 19 and 20 – frankly I would rather see you guys posting on here about the upcoming disaster of the overwhelming of Rayleigh / Rawreth by more housing
without infrastructure and the ludicrous Countryside interpretation of their own traffic assessment.
Rayleigh Town Council would not normally comment on this site but this has become necessary in order to correct inaccurate statements made by Mrs Kendall. I can endorse the earlier comments made by Cllrs C Lumley and J Burton. The Pavilion was built in 2006 and is a modern building which meets all disability requirements including a lift, toilets, width of doorways/pathways/exterior gates etc. The approach to the door is not dark as it is well lit by lights on the building and from the large adjacent car park, which provides free parking to the public after 7.00pm. The buzzer system is necessary as the office and Chamber are on the first floor. The building is covered by CCTV. Seats are provided for the public. This Planning Committee meeting was held at 7.30pm, which is a normal time for Council meetings. RDC does not hold meetings at this venue.
Further to my comments above I did say it was the first time I had visited the Pavilion and I did not notice the lift that is apparently available, apologies for that oversight. I arrived JUST ON TIME along with 6 other members of the public who also were unable to find the entrance. Jamie is right, there were about 15 seats for the public but my whole point appears to be misunderstood. This meeting room is designed to hold a total of 45 people to include officers and Councillors. The Rochford District Council chose this venue for their ONLY public meeting on the 29th March 2010 to give the total population of Rayleigh of 33,000 residents an opportunity to comment on the Core Strategy that would transform our town. Just how committed were they in consulting the public? I was not attacking the Town Council who made the right call on Monday night in rejecting the Planning Application from Countryside. Everyone must be aware, I assume Councillors understand this, an agreement on the Outline Planning Application will serve to secure development on this greenbelt. It is not a simple application for road access.
Like the vast majority of Rayleigh residents I knew nothing about RDC meetings regarding the mass building programme proposed for this district. The details of the Public Meeting in the Town Council Pavilion @ 7.30pm on the 29th March 2010 was submitted to the High Court as evidence of RDC ‘consultation’ process. Was this perhaps a meeting of the Town Council and if so is there a record of how many members of the public attended from the 33,000 residents entitled? If it was a Town Council meeting was there perhaps a recorded vote by the Town Councillors on the proposals? Perhaps Online Focus contributors would also like to know that Countryside are claiming their development of 500 houses will only generate an extra 6 vehicles an hour on our roads which might prove more interesting to them than most of the content of the rest of this thread.
Kerry, Jamie, Chris, I am glad you did explain how accessible Rayleigh Town council offices are (apart from being so central) Rayleigh Town Council supported a voluntary project I ran from there years ago and it was a perfect venue for disabled to be able attend and take part. I would hate to think residents could be ‘put off’ visiting the town council offices with the misleading information given above.
I am sorry but despite all the protests to the contrary my impression of the green metal fenced Pavilion facing the King Georges Playing field was that it was the Public Conveniences for the users of the King Georges Park and Websters Way car park, the site for the ice-cream booth in the summer months and the changing rooms for the ‘Bowls Club’ that meets there. I have now seen the plaque on the wall and know the third metal green door, past the toilets along the same alleyway, is, in fact, the entrance to an ‘important’ civic building housing the Town Council offices and their meeting room, which accommodates a maximum of 45 people. Evidently a head count was done on Monday in case we exceeded the number allowed due to fire regulations.
I really wonder how many of the 33,000 Rayleigh people knew that and have visited this building? Rawreth Parish meetings (population 250 approx.) are in their Village Hall and Hullbridge (population 6500 approx.)I believe use the Community Centre. BTW Does anyone know how many of the 23 Rayleigh Town Councillors wear two hats and are also Rochford District Councillors? Its a funny old world when you think about it!
I don’t understand the comment about rawreth parish council using the village hall and hullbridge using the community centre? they use those as they don’t have a parish council office. Rayleigh town council uses the town council offices?
also I’ve had a look. I think there are 9 councillors who are town councillors and district councillors. why does that matter? are you saying its because some of the are conservatives? one of them is ukip and 2 of them are lib dem? and 4 of them have only just been elected onto the district council so I assume they’ve not even voted on anything to do with the houses yet?
Rayleigh Town Councillors should act with the interests of the people of the town but District Councillors have to take what is best for the District into account. The two are not always the same thing. I reiterate there is an urgent need for a new road to Hullbridge or at least a slip road from Rawreth Lane to Hullbridge.