The planning application by Rayleigh Boys Youth Football Club for a storage container and eight additional youth football pitches in Old London Road, Rawreth has been refused by the district council. You can see the full decision notice here.
The council officers put forward six reasons for refusal.
The first reason for refusal was that, although football pitches are a normally suitable for the Green Belt, the sheer scale of the pitches and the adjoming car parking would be detrimental to the openness of the Green Belt. And because this was a reason for refusal on Green Belt grounds, the officers have delegated powers to refuse the application without councillors discussing it – and this is what has happened , it did not come to committee or the ‘weekly list’.
The other reasons given by officers were:
So, Rayleigh Boys still need a home base. A while ago the District Council were intending to offer to lease the new pitches near Rayleigh Leisure Centre to a club. Rayleigh Boys put in a carefully prepared bid, including inviting two local residents onto their commitee to ensure good neighbourliness, but the council got cold feet about the idea and decided simply to rent them out to anybody who wanted them.
However, no bookings have been taken yet for these pitches. The District Council could do a U-turn and offer the site as Rayleigh Boys homebase. Although we’re sure there would be a lot of resistance to the idea from the adminstration.
We’d be interested to know your views on the idea…..
It’s ironic isn’t it? There’s several conversations on here about teen shelters, facilities for youngsters and so on. Then what appears to be a natural, logical use for a facility for youngsters which gets turned down. I do appreciate it’s a different issue about teen shelters etc but surely the disctrict council aren’t helping themselves with this decision are they?
I’m sure it won’t be long before we have the usual nimby conversation either.
No!
Because all of these points also apply to Priory Chase!
•Poor road access for so many vehicles
•Lack of visibility splays on the road
•Increased traffic methods (against planning policies about ‘sustainability’)
•The number of players and spectators would create enough noise to affect the amenity of nearby residents.
As far as “public transport access” is concerned I have already raised the issue of the inappropriate No 24 bus terminus in Priory Chase… Priory Chase is not suitable for public transport FULL STOP!
TWR – perhaps I should point out that there are junior sports pitches being created right now, (to fulfil the requirements of the original land deal that removed the previous existing school sports pitches.
When the pitches are ready they will be used for football, and the planning consent that the council gave itself allows use any day of the week, leaving things at the discretion of the the council’s contractor.
Would Rayleigh Boys manage things better than having them rented out by the contractor to all sorts of clubs, which is the council’s current intention?
I am just very very interested in the last point of refusal being –
‘ •The number of players and spectators would create enough noise to affect the amenity of nearby residents ‘
How does this refusal compare to the Priory Chase site with regards to vicinity of pitches to houses? Does anyone know because I doubt the pitches can be any closer to the houses along Priory Chase.
There is a real need for more football pitches in Rayleigh. You only need to visit Fairview Park on a Saturday morning to see how every last inch of grass is being used. There is a lovely atmosphere down there. girls and boys of all ages running around, a real team spirit. Great for their physical health and great for building up a really good attitude to team sport.
Park school site used to have many football/hockey pitches, I played there many times as a child myself. Unfortunately due to the housing we all desire all that has now gone.
I do feel the pitches on the old Park School site should be fully utilised and managed well, with the least impact to the local community (of which I am one). My son also plays for Rayleigh Boys and it is a real shame there wasn’t some open democratic discussion about the use of the land already purchased in Rawreth. After all it would only be for a maximum of two days a week. I don’t fully understand the proximity to the local houses but maybe some restrictions could have been placed on when and how the pitches were used rather than a complete point blank refusal.I’m not sure any of the local pitches currently used would fulfill the criteria listed above for refusal. Not many have good parking or public transport access!
We are living in an era when obesity levels are rising at an alarming rate and antisocial behaviour in teenagers is high. A local club such as Rayleigh Boys, run by volunteers within our community are trying very hard to support our children and teenagers continuing their football. I feel they should be encouraged to continue this good work.
David – the houses are slightly further away than where you are, however if passed there would have been a total of 11 pitches there, (8 controlled by Rayleigh Boys, 3 operated by someone else) so there would be more people than at Priory Chase.
Deanne – you are 100 percent right, we need more pitches, and this issue won’t go away. In order to get the Park School deal through, the District Council deliberately adopted a policy that the number of sports pitches per head of population in Rayleigh be lower than the Sport England recommendation.
As I understood it, and as stated above, the pitches were all a part of the original done deal and as such there is very little that can be done about that – other than to provide a valuable resource for the young people of this area.
Guys, Chris has posed a question so whilst answering, please bear in mind the information you have been given: the pitches have been seeded in preparation for next year, they need to be marked and goals errected but it’s a done deal football will be played there from next year sometime. There is little point writing that pitches shouldn’t be there as they will be here far longer than we will be residents of temple way / priory chase.
The question is: Do you want the pitches used by any team so rules of use will be difficult to establish? OR do you want a club to have sole use so they can establish rules of use by their members, manage the area and consult with residents to work through any issues or questions that arise. With a club using the facility their is a mechanism for control which wouldn’t exist if club ABC used the pitches on an adhoc basis.
Away from the politics of who should control the pitches, I for one am looking forward to the summer when I take my three children there for a kick about and I also look forward to seeing many of the other parents of this estate with their children as well. It will be far more pleasant than the mud bath of last winter and weed infested field of the summer.
The Committee behind Rayleigh Boys are doing a fantastic job in entertaining the youth, keeping them from knocking about the streets, giving them something to focus on and have pride in. Exactly what has the District Council done that comes anywhere close to this?
I keep reading that Rayleigh is in desperate need of football pitches, if this is the case, then why has there been no interest or bookings in these pitches? I would be interested to know how long the book has been open for bookings to be made. If this trend continues, it is safe to say that these pitches will go to ruin, wasting tax payers money in the process, and Priory Chase have yet another eyesore to look out on!
RDC have repeatedly shown no regard for the local residents on this development, and wouldn’t care how much noise is being made. However, Rayleigh Boys’ offer of 2 local residents on the committee is a clear indication that they would listen to the needs of the local residents and due consideration given to the local residents. We currently have a good body of people with nowhere to go and play, it makes sense that these pitches be passed to Rayleigh Boys and I wish them every good luck in securing it.
Thanks for this Cjav . Actually we understand that the council hasn’t taken any bookings yet because they are not close yet to being ready for use.
But this means they are still ‘up for grabs’ if – and it’s a BIG if – the council is willing to reconsider on this.
Chris, no need to point that out to me thanks, as I have posted numerous comments and in deed rants on your website about this very subject over the last year or so. Maybe I was wasting my time?
I was simply pointing out the inconsistency of planning consents as all of the points raised for the Old London Road site apply equally if not more to the Priory Chase site…
“Poor road access for so many vehicles
Lack of visibility splays on the road
Increased traffic methods (against planning policies about ‘sustainability’)
The number of players and spectators would create enough noise to affect the amenity of nearby residents.
As far as “public transport access” is concerned I have already raised the issue of the inappropriate No 24 bus terminus in Priory Chase… Priory Chase is not suitable for public transport FULL STOP!”
My specific concern with Rayleigh Boys Club taking over Priory Chase is the sheer number of teams that it has and therefore the number of games and training sessions that are likely to be played on the pitches every week…
Can anyone offer any real figures? i.e number of teams, number of home fixtures every week, number of training sessions per team per week, average number of spectators frequenting each game and training session, number and type of vehicles used to transport players/spectators….
Incidentally still people abusing the virginal pitches this week….
Kris / TWR / Cjav : after getting an OK from officers , Ron and I have asked if we could meet up with Rayleigh Boys to discuss things in general….