The District Council have now published the minutes of the last full council meeting, (256k) so we can now give you the full answers to the questions that Chris Black asked:
(1) Of the Portfolio Holder to the Environment:-
?Have any bookings been taken yet for the new sports pitches near Rayleigh Leisure Centre? If so, by which clubs and for how many hours per week? Are there any bookings for evenings??
The Portfolio Holder for the Environment, Cllr M G B Starke, was attending an Awards ceremony in London associated with the Council having been shortlisted for a national recycling award. The Leader of the Council, Cllr T G Cutmore, responded on behalf of the Portfolio Holder as follows:-
?The ground works for the new sports pitches near Rayleigh Leisure Centre were completed in September. It is anticipated that they may be available for light usage from spring 2010, dependant upon weather conditions.
An inspection of the pitches will, therefore, be arranged in May to assess whether they can be released for such purposes and whether the turf has grown sufficiently to sustain the heavy usage that can be anticipated during the football season. The resilience of the turf will largely be dependent upon weather conditions during the interim period and it would clearly not be in our long-term interests to release this facility too early.
Bookings for all of our pitches can only be made on Saturday afternoons and on Sunday mornings and afternoons during the football season, such requests are considered in June each year. No bookings are currently taken at other times, although this can be considered should the need arise.
Under our current policy, no restriction is placed upon which clubs can book any of our sports pitches.?
(2) Of the Portfolio Holder to the Environment:-
?In September the District Council received complaints about the poor state of the Council-owned sports pitches in Rawreth. What steps have been taken to remedy the matter and what is the current situation??
The Leader of the Council responded on behalf of the Portfolio Holder as follows:-?Problems with the conditions of the sports pitches at Rawreth are due to the preponderance of shrinkable clay and date back to the 1980?s. As a result of complaints about the cancellation of matches due to water-logged pitches, a decision was taken to install land drainage in 2003.
Cracks form on the ground in autumn each year due to the low levels of rainfall and these are located immediately above the original land drains. These cracks can be as wide as 15 cm.
Because of these ground conditions, the pitches are subject to an increased level of inspection and contractors are employed to remedy the situation. Since September, 25 tonnes of top soil has been inserted into the cracks that have formed on these pitches and a further 10 tonnes is shortly to be utilized. 10 tonnes of soil, together with the associated labour, represents in the order of ?500 of expenditure.
This situation will improve over time and the only alternative would be to put in a water irrigation system. This is clearly not a practicable solution because of the thousands of litres of water that would be required.?
The Leader confirmed that the 25 tonnes of topsoil had applied solely to the sports pitches in Rawreth.
(3) Of the Portfolio Holder to the Environment:-
?Approximately how many problems per month are reported to the District Council via the fixmystreet.com website? Does the Council have any particular procedure or protocol for dealing with them??The Leader of the Council responded on behalf of the Portfolio Holder as follows:-
?We receive only occasional emails from fixmystreet.com and estimate that since April we have only received five service requests.
The procedure is for these emails to be sent to our general enquiry email account information@rochford.gov.uk. This email box is checked on a daily basis and enquiries are forwarded to the appropriate department for action.?
(4) Of the Portfolio Holder for Planning and Transportation:-
?The District Council has recently agreed to allow a maximum of 53,300 aircraft movements per year at Southend Airport, which works out at an average of one movement every 6.9 minutes in daytime hours. Who proposed this figure, how was it arrived at and how will it be enforced?The Portfolio Holder for Planning and Transportation, Cllr K H Hudson, responded as follows:-
?The proposal for the introduction of a maximum number of aircraft movements is related to negotiations between the airport operator, Southend Borough Council and ourselves based on what could already take place under the current leasing arrangements between Southend and the airport operators and taking account the public feedback to the Joint Area Action Plan between the two Councils. It represents the basis of a way forward and seeks to balance residents concerns against the aims and aspirations of the airport and the employment potential it offers. It should be remembered that, at its currently relatively low level of activity, the airport generates some 42,000 aircraft movements, and there are no controls over the total number of daytime flights and only minimal controls over night flights.
The negotiations between the two councils and the airport represent a potential way forward and the agreement is likely to form the basis of a series of new controls that may be attached to the lease the airport has with the Borough Council.
Southend Borough Council has recently received a planning application to extend the runway, and Rochford District Council will be consulted for its views on the planning application and will be able to make comments on the principle of the proposal and the suggested control measures. It is expected that any proposed controls emanating from the planning application and revised lease agreement will be considered by the Joint Area Action Plan Committee for inclusion in the London Southend Airport and Environs Joint Area Action Plan in due course.
It should be noted that further controls may be negotiated as a standard part of the town and country planning process for the determination of the planning application for the runway extension, including operating hours, passenger, flight, noise and other limits and other operational controls. The precise mechanisms for monitoring and enforcement of issues such as noise and air quality will be specified as part of any relevant planning permission.?
Am I missing something here concerning the Priory Chase football pitches. If these pitches are going to be used during the football season which starts late August, and bookings will not be taken until June for this purpose – how are they going to get light usage in May?
Also what measures have been put into place to prevent these pitches from being used between now and May to allow the seed to germinate and give the grass best possible chance of survival? If there is no fencing erected, what is to stop youths on bikes from riding around on it, dogs and other animals from digging and fouling. Is this just going to be a waste of tax payers money, when the ground works will need to be done again in spring?
The field is already being used for a kick about every so often and kids from the skate park seem to drift over onto the field with some of them being on bikes.
On the fencing front, I pushed the idea of a perimeter raised mound to shield the houses opposite from sound and vision, particularly for match days that can be quite noisy. Disappointingly I was told that only foliage planted around the edges will be provided. This hasn’t been done yet and now even more disappointingly you can see that the field is about 5 feet above the level of the roadside meaning that the sound and vision issue for the house residents will be magnified!!!
So RDC ARE going to be wasting taxpayers money as they will have to redo the ground works next year.
It is clearly obvious that RDC have no comprehension of our legal right to peaceful enjoyment of our homes.
David, I too wrote to RDC to object to the original planning application and made the point that IF the football pitches were to be built then a mound of earth around the perimeter of the pitches should be built and trees planted to help to mask the inevitable noise pollution coming from the pitches.
I also said that a mound of earth would help to prevent parents etc… from parking on Priory Chase and watching their children from the comfort of a nice warm dry car instead of making the effort to stand pitch side. Leisure Centre users already use Priory Chase to park on because it is closer to the entrance than using the car park!
I seem to remember that RDC agreed to build a mound of earth and plant trees etc… as a result of residents objections so why hasn’t this happened?
The contractors did build a mound of earth but then back filled it and raised the level of the pitches!
Why did they do this?
Did the contractors misunderstand the purpose of the earth barriers?
I assume that RDC has signed off the work as satisfactory BUT it is not to the standards that residents expected and need.
I also wrote that there should be a perimeter fence (in addition to the sound proofing earth mound and trees)to prevent the abuse of the pitches.
I too have already seen people using the pitches for recreational purposes that may well be damaging the pitches – i.e. Kids on bikes, dog walkers, kids and adults having a kick around etc…
It is obvious that RDC have learnt nothing from the vandalism of St Nicholas Primary and Sweyne Park and their inappropriate planning applications and approvals are simply adding to the problem of anti-social behaviour both by kids and by adults (parking/driving offences)
Admin, can you please establish what was originally agreed to reduce the nuisance and noise pollution for residents? And ask RDC when this work is going to be satisfactorily completed? Thank You!
I did go along to the planning meeting in October last year and unfortunately no decision was made to commit to the erecting an earth mound. At the time it was decided to approve pitches but that the local residents would be consulted about the perimeter nearer the time.
Once the construction of the field was under way it did appear that earth mounds were formed however I think it was the just earth being pilled onto the sides in order to create the drainage, and once put in place the earth was laid flat.
At the time when it was obvious that the height of the pitches was concerning I raised the issue and have since been present when Chris arranged a site visit with the council. Unfortunately the decision seemed to have been made to just have foliage around the sides. I stressed my opinion but decision made! I would add that Chris was very helpful though.