View report page

129
anachronism from the past and provide accommodation of a type
hardly commensurate with the year 1967. Years ago they could
be found much more frequently, especially in industrial areas, to
which itinerant labour was attracted.
The accommodation although generally of a communal and
minimal character has nevertheless to be in accordance with Byelaws,
and the premises must be registered under Section 238, Public
Health Act, 1936.
It is, perhaps, surprising to find 2 such establishments within
the London Borough of Bromley. One at Arpley Road, Penge,
accommodating 33 persons and the other at Poverest Road, St.
Mary Cray, with 24 persons—all men. They are contained in old
premises and have been registered for many years.
Neither is likely to continue for long as one has already been
declared unfit and is part of a Clearance Area under the Housing
Act. The other is in a district scheduled for redevelopment.
Some of the men living in these two Lodging Houses are
itinerant workers but in both cases several of them have lived there
for many years and the accommodation affords the only home
they know. The lodgings furnish a type of accommodation suited
to the needs of these particular men and for that reason can be
said to serve a useful purpose.
Regular inspections are made to ensure that the Byelaws are
being observed and, having regard to the nature of the structures,
the premises appear to be adequately run.
MOVEABLE DWELLINGS
The Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act, 1960,
prohibits the use of land as a caravan site without a site licence.
Licences are issued by Local Authorities who may attach conditions
to them to enforce a high standard of environment for the
caravan dwellers.
At the end of the year there were five licences in force. In
addition, one site licence was being considered for renewal and an
application for another was receiving attention.
One licence, for one caravan, expired on the 31st July, 1967.
as the temporary planning permission was not renewed.
In another case enforcement action was considered because
certain conditions attached to a new licence had not been complied
with within the time specified. Negotiations were continuing at