DOCSLIB.ORG

Derbyshire County Council

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Derbyshire County Council DERBYSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL Further Electoral Review of Derbyshire County Council Submission of Proposals for New Patterns of Divisions to the Local Government Boundary Commission for England 2 Table of Contents Page 1. INTRODUCTION ..........................................................................................5 2. GUIDANCE ON PROPOSING A PATTERN OF DIVISIONS.......................5 3. THE COUNCIL’S APPROACH.....................................................................6 4. THE COUNCIL’S PROPOSALS...................................................................7 4.1. AMBER VALLEY .......................................................................................8 4.1.1. ALFRETON AND SOMERCOTES.........................................................9 4.1.2. ALPORT AND DERWENT...................................................................10 4.1.3. BELPER...............................................................................................11 4.1.4. DUFFIELD AND BELPER SOUTH ......................................................11 4.1.5. GREATER HEANOR ...........................................................................12 4.1.6. HEANOR CENTRAL............................................................................13 4.1.7. HORSLEY............................................................................................13 4.1.8. RIPLEY EAST AND CODNOR ............................................................14 4.1.9. RIPLEY WEST AND AMBERGATE.....................................................14 4.1.10. SWANWICK AND RIDDINGS..............................................................15 4.2. BOLSOVER.............................................................................................17 4.2.1. BARLBOROUGH AND CLOWNE........................................................18 4.2.2. BOLSOVER WEST..............................................................................19 4.2.3. ELMTON AND WHITWELL .................................................................19 4.2.4. HARDWICK..........................................................................................20 4.2.5. SHIREBROOK .....................................................................................21 4.2.6. SOUTH NORMANTON AND PINXTON ..............................................22 4.3. CHESTERFIELD .....................................................................................23 4.3.1. BIRDHOLME........................................................................................24 4.3.2. BRIMINGTON ......................................................................................25 4.3.3. BOYTHORPE AND BRAMPTON SOUTH...........................................25 4.3.4. LOUNDSLEY GREEN AND NEWBOLD..............................................26 4.3.5. SPIRE ..................................................................................................27 4.3.6. ST. MARYS..........................................................................................27 4.3.7. STAVELEY NORTH AND WHITTINGTON..........................................28 4.3.8. STAVELEY...........................................................................................28 4.3.9. WALTON AND WEST..........................................................................29 4.4. DERBYSHIRE DALES: ...........................................................................30 4.4.1. ASHBOURNE ......................................................................................31 4.4.2. BAKEWELL..........................................................................................32 4.4.3. DERWENT VALLEY ............................................................................32 4.4.4. DOVEDALE..........................................................................................32 4.4.5. MATLOCK............................................................................................33 4.4.6. WIRKSWORTH....................................................................................33 4.5. EREWASH ..............................................................................................35 4.5.1. BREADSALL........................................................................................36 4.5.2. BREASTON .........................................................................................37 4.5.3. ILKESTON WEST................................................................................37 4.5.4. ILKESTON EAST.................................................................................38 3 4.5.5. ILKESTON SOUTH..............................................................................38 4.5.6. LONG EATON......................................................................................39 4.5.7. PETERSHAM.......................................................................................39 4.5.8. SANDIACRE ........................................................................................40 4.5.9. SAWLEY ..............................................................................................40 4.6. HIGH PEAK.............................................................................................42 4.6.1. BUXTON NORTH AND EAST .............................................................43 4.6.2. BUXTON WEST...................................................................................44 4.6.3. CHAPEL AND HOPE VALLEY ............................................................44 4.6.4. ETHEROW...........................................................................................45 4.6.5. GLOSSOP NORTH AND RURAL........................................................46 4.6.6. GLOSSOP SOUTH..............................................................................46 4.6.7. NEW MILLS .........................................................................................47 4.6.8. WHALEY BRIDGE ...............................................................................47 4.7. NORTH EAST DERBYSHIRE.................................................................49 4.7.1. APPERKNOWLE .................................................................................50 4.7.2. CLAY CROSS NORTH ........................................................................51 4.7.3. CLAY CROSS SOUTH ........................................................................51 4.7.4. DRONFIELD EAST..............................................................................52 4.7.5. DRONFIELD WEST AND WALTON....................................................53 4.7.6. KILLAMARSH AND SPINKILL.............................................................54 4.7.7. SUTTON ..............................................................................................54 4.7.8. WINGERWORTH AND SHIRLAND.....................................................55 4.8. SOUTH DERBYSHIRE ...........................................................................56 4.8.1. ASTON.................................................................................................57 4.8.2. ETWALL AND REPTON ......................................................................58 4.8.3. HILTON................................................................................................59 4.8.4. LINTON................................................................................................60 4.8.5. MELBOURNE ......................................................................................60 4.8.6. SWADLINCOTE CENTRAL.................................................................61 4.8.7. SWADLINCOTE NORTH.....................................................................62 4.8.8. SWADLINCOTE SOUTH .....................................................................62 5. CONCLUSIONS .........................................................................................64 Appendix A - Current Electoral Divisions December 2011................................65 Appendix B - Proposed Electoral Divisions.......................................................67 Appendix C - Maps Showing Proposed Electoral Division................................69 Appendix D - Proposed Electoral Division Definition ........................................77 4 1. INTRODUCTION In April 2011, the Boundary Commission confirmed that an electoral review of the county electoral divisions in Derbyshire would commence on 11 July 2011. The Commission’s analysis of the 2010 electorate data for Derbyshire confirmed that significant imbalances exist in the county which meet their criteria for carrying out a Further Electoral Review to improve electoral equality. The analysis showed that 24 of the 64 divisions (38%) had an electoral variance of greater than 10% from the county average and one division, Hatton and Hilton, had an electoral variance of 39%. Details of the electorate and electoral variance for the current electoral divisions are included in Appendix A. The Review covers the entire Council not just the electoral divisions where there is evidence of electoral inequality and consists of three phases: 1. Preliminary period – information gathering; 2. Stage 1 - council size i.e. proposals for the total number of councillors/electoral divisions; 3. Stage 2 – area definition i.e. proposals for revised boundaries and names of electoral divisions. On 11 August 2011, Derbyshire County Council’s Cabinet approved the Council’s response to Stage 1 of the Review which proposed that the current council size
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Electoral Review of Salford City Council
    Electoral review of Salford City Council Response to the Local Government Boundary Commission for England’s consultation on Warding Patterns August 2018 1 1 Executive Summary 1.1 Salford in 2018 has changed dramatically since the city’s previous electoral review of 2002. Salford has seen a turnaround in its fortunes over recent years, reversing decades of population decline and securing high levels of investment. The city is now delivering high levels of growth, in both new housing and new jobs, and is helping to drive forward both Salford’s and the Greater Manchester economies. 1.2 The election of the Greater Manchester Mayor and increased devolution of responsibilities to Greater Manchester, and the Greater Manchester Combined Authority, is fundamentally changing the way Salford City Council works in areas of economic development, transport, work and skills, planning, policing and more recently health and social care. 1.3 Salford’s directly elected City Mayor has galvanised the city around eight core priorities – the Great Eight. Delivering against these core priorities will require the sustained commitment and partnership between councillors, partners in the private, public, community and voluntary and social enterprise sectors, and the city’s residents. This is even more the case in the light of ongoing national policy changes, the impending departure of the UK from the EU, and continued austerity in funding for vital local services. The city’s councillors will have an absolutely central role in delivering against these core priorities, working with all our partners and residents to harness the energies and talents of all of the city.
    [Show full text]
  • Derbyshire and Derby Minerals Plan
    CONTENTS Page 1. INTRODUCTION 4 Background 4 Spatial Context 7 National and Sub-National Aggregate Guidelines 8 2. AGGREGATE RESOURCES 9 Primary Aggregates 9 Secondary and Recycled Aggregates 10 3. ASSESSMENT OF LOCAL RESERVES & PRODUCTION 12 Sand & Gravel Resources & Reserves 12 Recent Production 15 Crushed Rock Resources & Reserves 17 Recent Production 21 Secondary & Recycled Aggregates 23 4. CALCULATING FUTURE PROVISION OF AGGREGATES 25 Future Provision of Sand & Gravel 25 Recent sales 25 Imports and Exports 25 Marine Won Sand and Gravel 27 Supply from adjacent areas 27 Future Economic Growth 28 Conclusions 31 Future Provision of Crushed Rock 33 Recent sales 33 Imports and Exports 33 Supply from adjacent areas 36 Future Economic Growth 36 Progressive Reduction in Quarrying in the Peak Park 37 Conclusions 38 2 LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Permitted sand and gravel quarries in Derbyshire 12 Table 2: Sales of sand and gravel in Derbyshire 2006-2015 15 Table 3: Use of sand and gravel 2015 15 Table 4: Active hard rock quarries in Derbyshire & Peak District 19 Table 5: Permitted but inactive hard rock quarries in Derbyshire & the Peak District 20 Table 6: Sales of aggregate crushed rock 2006-2015 22 Table 7: Use of crushed rock 2015 22 Table 8: Distribution of Sand and Gravel from Derbyshire, 2009 26 Table 9: Distribution of Crushed Rock from Derbyshire and Peak District 34 Quarries, 2009 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Derbyshire, Derby and the Peak District National Park 7 Figure 2: Sand and gravel resources in Derby and Derbyshire 14 Figure 3: Sales of sand and gravel in Derbyshire 2006-2015 against past and current provision rate 16 Figure 4: Limestone resources in Derbyshire & the Peak District 18 Figure 5: Sales of aggregate crushed rock 2006-2015 against past and current provision rate 22 Figure 6: Crushed rock inter-regional flows 2009 35 Cover photos: Tunstead and Old Moor Quarry, Buxton and Swarkestone Quarry, Barrow upon Trent 3 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Rapid Health Impact Assessment of the Avenue Development August 2016
    Rapid Health Impact Assessment of the Avenue development August 2016 Author Richard Keeton, Public Health Manager, Derbyshire County Council Contributors Steering group members Julie Hirst, Public Health Principal, Derbyshire County Council Mandy Chambers, Public Health Principal, Derbyshire County Council Jim Seymour, Transport Strategy Manager, Derbyshire County Council Alan Marsden, Project Officer - Transportation Projects, Derbyshire County Council Tamsin Hart, Senior Area Manager, Homes & Communities Agency Martyn Handley, Economic Development Projects Officer, North East Derbyshire District Council Sean Johnson, Public Health, Lincolnshire County Council Steve Buffery, Derbyshire County Council Andrew Grayson, Chesterfield Borough Council Community consultation leads Susan Piredda, Public Health Development Worker, Derbyshire County Council Louise Hall, Public Health Development Worker, Derbyshire County Council Fiona Unwin, Public Health Development Worker, Derbyshire County Council Lianne Barnes, Public Health Development Worker, Derbyshire County Council Appraisal panel members Joe Battye, Derbyshire County Council Councillor Allen, Cabinet Member, Health and Communities (Public Health), Derbyshire County Council Neil Johnson, Economic Growth and Regeneration Lead, Chesterfield Borough Council Allison Westray-Chapman, Joint Assistant Director Economic Growth, Bolsover District Council & North East Derbyshire District Council Steve Brunt, Assistant Director Streetscene, Bolsover District Council & North East Derbyshire District
    [Show full text]
  • 21 Day Road Trip of the UK for Families
    12 11 139 10 14 9 8 15 67 6 1616 1 4 5 17 2 3 21 day Road trip of the UK for Families The UK is full of exciting, interesting and historical places to visit so it can be hard to know where to start! Just go has put together a 3 week itinerary stopping off at the most popular places to visit in the UK. Whether you want an extensive tour of the UK or just need a little advice on where to go, what to see or campsites local to your destination this will take away some of the work for you so you can sit back and enjoy your holiday! Quick reference 1. Ivinghoe (local campsite) 10. Hadrians’s Wall (Alternative Route) 2. Salisbury via Stonehenge 11. Loch Lomond 3. Devon (Salcombe) 12. Inverness 4. Cornwall 13. Edinburgh Via Stirling 5. Bath 14. Durham Via Alnwick 6. Hereford Via Gloucester 15. York 7. Snowdonia Via Shropshire 16. Cambridge Via Nottingham 8. Buxton 17. Windsor 9. Lake District (Windemere) Just go have compiled the following campsite details within each of the suggested locations. Just go has made every effort to maintain the accuracy of the following information in this pack but cannot be held responsible if any details are incorrect. Any discrepancies you may have are between yourself and the campsite. Just go do not endorse any of the facilities, Just go have approached each campsite within the chosen area and have obtained their permission to be included within this itinerary. www.justgo.uk.com 21 day Road trip of the UK, Families Day 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Derbyshire Parish Registers. Marriages
    942.51019 M. L; Aalp v.4 1379092 GENEALOGY COLLECTION ALLEN COUNTY PUBLIC LIBRARY 3 1833 00727 4241 DERBYSHIRE PARISH REGISTERS. flDarriagea, IV. phiiximore's parish register series. vol. xc. (derbyshire, vol. iv.) One hundred and fifty only printed. I0.ip.cj : Derbyshire Parish Registers, flftat triages. Edited by W. P. W. PHILLIMORE, M.A., B.C.L., AND LL. LL. SIMPSON. £,c VOL. IV. ILon&on Issued to the Subscribers by Phillimore & Co., 124, Chancery Lane. 1908. — PREFACE. As promised in the last volume of the Marriage Registers of Derbyshire, the marriage records of St. Alkmund's form the first instalment of the Registers of the County Town. The Editors do not doubt that these will prove especially interesting to Derbyshire people. In Volume V they hope to print further instalments of town registers in the shape of those of St. Michael's and also some village registers. It will be noticed that St. Alkmund's register begins at the earliest possible date, 1538, but of the remainder, two do not start till the seventeenth century and one, that of Quarndon, synchronizes with the passing of Lord Hardwicke's Marriage Act. 1379092 It will be convenient to give here a list of the Derby- shire parishes of which the Registers have been printed in this series: Volume I. Volume II. Dale Abbey Boulton Brailsford Duffield Stanton-by-Dale Hezthalias Lownd Volume III. Stanley or Lund Duffield Spondon Breaston Church Broughton Mellor Kirk Ireton Sandiacre Hault Hucknall Volume IV. Risley Mackworth Derby— St. Alkmund's Ockbrook Allestree Quarndon Tickenhall Foremark It has not been thought needful to print the entries — verbatim.
    [Show full text]
  • Lowland Derbyshire Biodiversity Action Plan 2011-2020
    Published by the Lowland Derbyshire Biodiversity Partnership 2011 Biodiversity Lowland 2011 Derbyshire ‐ 2020 Action Plan Contents Click links to go the various sections of the LBAP Section Quick start Guide Introduction Generic Action Plan Area Action Plans and Targets Action Area 1: Magnesian Limestone Action Area 2: Rother and Doe Lea Valleys Action Area 3: Peak Fringe Action Area 4: Erewash Valley Action Area 5: Claylands Action Area 6: Derby Action Area 7: Trent and Dove Valleys Action Area 8: National Forest area Cumulative Targets UK Priority Habitats—Background Information Farmland Grassland Heathland Wetland Woodland List of Lowland Derbyshire LBAP Partners Appendix 1: Detailed Maps of All Eight Action Areas (with Priority Habitats) these are available as eight 4MB files on CD or from www.derbyshirebiodiversity.org.uk Cover photos, clockwise from top left: Bulfinch. Credit: Laura Whitehead White Admiral. Credit: Debbie Alston Green Lane, north‐east Derbyshire. Credit: Debbie Alston www.derbyshirebiodiversity.org.uk Quick Start Guide 2 Quick Start Guide This Local Biodiversity Action Plan (LBAP) covers the Lowland Derbyshire region for the period 2011 to 2020. It identifies the basic actions we must collectively take if we are to protect and enhance the key biodiversity of this region. The UK Government recognises its international obligations and the economic urgency to protect biodiversity and ecosystems. This LBAP is part of that delivery and local reporting mechanism. Only those habitats and species meeting the UKBAP definitions of ‘Priority Habitat’ or ‘Priority Species’ are included in the targets for the Lowland Derbyshire Action Plans. The history and rationale behind the Local Biodiversity Action Plan is given in the Introduction.
    [Show full text]
  • Church Broughton Parish, Derbyshire
    Church Broughton Parish, Derbyshire: An oral history, 1900-1940 Thesis submitted in partial fulfilment for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Janet Arthur De Montfort University June 2019 Abstract This study is an oral history of a Derbyshire dairying parish during the first forty years of the twentieth century. The aim was to discover the nature and cohesion of society in a parish with no resident lord of the manor, the effects on the parish of changes in agricultural practice and the impact of government interventions on the lives of individuals. The lives of residents were affected by the history and layout of the parish, based on the geography and previous ownership. Having no resident lord of the manor generated a social structure with three layers: firstly, seven key people, outsiders who did not own land, secondly, networks of small landowners and artisans, who had lived there for generations, finally, labourers, many also families of long standing. Religion was important in supporting this social structure. Being an ‘open’ parish had enabled a chapel to be built and the provision of a school, though not all children attended this school. Through widespread ownership, there was a freedom to live and work without being beholden to neighbouring estates, as alternative employment could be found elsewhere for any surplus workers. Mechanisation improved farming practice, but, though government intervention during the First World War helped, the downturn afterwards and competition between farmers meant dairying was precarious, until the foundation of the Milk Marketing Board in 1933 to control production and price. The sale of the Duke of Devonshire’s farms in 1918 to the occupiers and the County Council removed the prestige that his tenants had enjoyed.
    [Show full text]
  • Der Europäischen Gemeinschaften Nr
    26 . 3 . 84 Amtsblatt der Europäischen Gemeinschaften Nr . L 82 / 67 RICHTLINIE DES RATES vom 28 . Februar 1984 betreffend das Gemeinschaftsverzeichnis der benachteiligten landwirtschaftlichen Gebiete im Sinne der Richtlinie 75 /268 / EWG ( Vereinigtes Königreich ) ( 84 / 169 / EWG ) DER RAT DER EUROPAISCHEN GEMEINSCHAFTEN — Folgende Indexzahlen über schwach ertragsfähige Böden gemäß Artikel 3 Absatz 4 Buchstabe a ) der Richtlinie 75 / 268 / EWG wurden bei der Bestimmung gestützt auf den Vertrag zur Gründung der Euro­ jeder der betreffenden Zonen zugrunde gelegt : über päischen Wirtschaftsgemeinschaft , 70 % liegender Anteil des Grünlandes an der landwirt­ schaftlichen Nutzfläche , Besatzdichte unter 1 Groß­ vieheinheit ( GVE ) je Hektar Futterfläche und nicht über gestützt auf die Richtlinie 75 / 268 / EWG des Rates vom 65 % des nationalen Durchschnitts liegende Pachten . 28 . April 1975 über die Landwirtschaft in Berggebieten und in bestimmten benachteiligten Gebieten ( J ), zuletzt geändert durch die Richtlinie 82 / 786 / EWG ( 2 ), insbe­ Die deutlich hinter dem Durchschnitt zurückbleibenden sondere auf Artikel 2 Absatz 2 , Wirtschaftsergebnisse der Betriebe im Sinne von Arti­ kel 3 Absatz 4 Buchstabe b ) der Richtlinie 75 / 268 / EWG wurden durch die Tatsache belegt , daß das auf Vorschlag der Kommission , Arbeitseinkommen 80 % des nationalen Durchschnitts nicht übersteigt . nach Stellungnahme des Europäischen Parlaments ( 3 ), Zur Feststellung der in Artikel 3 Absatz 4 Buchstabe c ) der Richtlinie 75 / 268 / EWG genannten geringen Bevöl­ in Erwägung nachstehender Gründe : kerungsdichte wurde die Tatsache zugrunde gelegt, daß die Bevölkerungsdichte unter Ausschluß der Bevölke­ In der Richtlinie 75 / 276 / EWG ( 4 ) werden die Gebiete rung von Städten und Industriegebieten nicht über 55 Einwohner je qkm liegt ; die entsprechenden Durch­ des Vereinigten Königreichs bezeichnet , die in dem schnittszahlen für das Vereinigte Königreich und die Gemeinschaftsverzeichnis der benachteiligten Gebiete Gemeinschaft liegen bei 229 beziehungsweise 163 .
    [Show full text]
  • Consultation Statement
    DERBYSHIRE DALES DISTRICT COUNCIL Consultation Statement The Shopfronts and Commercial Properties Design Guidance Supplementary Planning Document Consultation Proposed Revisions to ‘Paint Colours’ This statement has been prepared in order to comply with Regulation 17 of the Town and Country Planning (Local Development) (England) Regulations 2004 (as amended 2008 & 2009), for the adoption of Supplementary Planning Documents by Local Planning Authorities Director of Planning and Housing Services Paul Wilson MCD, Dip TP, Dip Mgmt, MRTPI, MIMgt Derbyshire Dales District Council Town Hall Matlock Derbyshire DE4 3NN Tel: 01629 761100 Email : [email protected] Preamble Design guidance in the existing Shopfront and Commercial Properties SPD, specifically that relating to ‘Paint Colours’ on pages 16 and 17, was intended to ensure that the colours used on individual properties reflected the historic period from which the property originated. More recently this guidance has been reviewed in the light of architectural paint research undertaken by English Heritage, and other heritage paint manufacturers, including Little Greene (English Heritage), Dulux (Heritage range), and Farrow and Ball with reference also made to the paint ranges set out in the British Standards. This research has identified that many shop fronts from the period 1780 to 1840 (Georgian/Regency) were painted in lighter, more neutral ‘stone’ coloured shades including greys, creams, beige/fawn along with imitation wood, and shades of brown and green. Shop fronts from the period 1840 to 1920 (Victorian/Edwardian) generally used darker, richer colours including blues, greens, reds and black. However the neutral shades of grey, beige/fawn and dark cream from the previous era may also have been used.
    [Show full text]
  • 51 Bus Time Schedule & Line Route
    51 bus time schedule & line map 51 Chesterƒeld - Danesmoor View In Website Mode The 51 bus line (Chesterƒeld - Danesmoor) has 3 routes. For regular weekdays, their operation hours are: (1) Chesterƒeld: 5:44 AM - 10:30 PM (2) Clay Cross: 11:54 PM (3) Danesmoor: 5:23 AM - 8:45 PM Use the Moovit App to ƒnd the closest 51 bus station near you and ƒnd out when is the next 51 bus arriving. Direction: Chesterƒeld 51 bus Time Schedule 48 stops Chesterƒeld Route Timetable: VIEW LINE SCHEDULE Sunday 7:58 AM - 11:00 PM Monday 5:44 AM - 10:30 PM Cemetery, Danesmoor Tuesday 5:44 AM - 10:30 PM Linden Avenue, Danesmoor Kenmere Close, Clay Cross Civil Parish Wednesday 5:44 AM - 10:30 PM Springvale Road Allotments, Danesmoor Thursday 5:44 AM - 10:30 PM Friday 5:44 AM - 10:30 PM Beresford Close, Danesmoor Springvale Road, Clay Cross Civil Parish Saturday 6:13 AM - 10:30 PM Penistone Gardens, Danesmoor Penistone Gardens, Clay Cross Civil Parish Springvale Close, Danesmoor 51 bus Info Dunvegan Avenue, Clay Cross Civil Parish Direction: Chesterƒeld Stops: 48 Gentshill, Danesmoor Trip Duration: 41 min Line Summary: Cemetery, Danesmoor, Linden 75 Cemetery Road, Danesmoor Avenue, Danesmoor, Springvale Road Allotments, Danesmoor, Beresford Close, Danesmoor, Penistone Pilsley Road, Danesmoor Gardens, Danesmoor, Springvale Close, Danesmoor, Gentshill, Danesmoor, 75 Cemetery Road, Bertrand Avenue, Clay Cross Danesmoor, Pilsley Road, Danesmoor, Bertrand Avenue, Clay Cross, Commonpiece Road, Clay Cross, Commonpiece Road, Clay Cross Broadleys, Clay Cross, Bus Station,
    [Show full text]
  • A6 Corridor Study Final Report Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council
    A6 Corridor Study Final Report Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council August 2014 A6 Corridor Study Final Report Notice This document and its contents have been prepared and are intended solely for use in relation to the A6 Corridor Study. Atkins Limited assumes no responsibility to any other party in respect of or arising out of or in connection with this document and/or its contents. This document has 202 pages including the cover. Document history Job number: 5115815 Document ref: Final Report Revision Purpose description Originated Checked Reviewed Authorised Date Rev 1.1 Draft - Client comment AB PB GR GR 14/12/12 Rev 1.2 Draft - Client comment GR AB NM NM 26/2/13 Rev 1.3 Draft - Client comment GR AB NM NM 26/6/13 Rev 1.4 Draft - Client comment GR AB NM NM 31/7/13 Final Draft – Client Rev 1.5 GR NM NM NM 20/12/13 comment Rev 1.6 Final Draft GR NM NM NM 20/02/14 Rev 2.0 Final GR NM NM NM 04/07/14 Rev 2.1 Final GR NM NM NM 31/07/14 Rev 2.2 Final GR NM NM NM 13/08/14 Atkins Final Report | Version 2.2 | August 2014 | 5115815 A6 Corridor Study Final Report Table of contents Chapter Pages 1. Introduction 4 Study Brief 4 Background to Commission 4 2. Setting the Context for an A6 Corridor Transport Strategy 6 SEMMMS 6 A6 to Manchester Airport Relief Road 7 A6MARR Traffic Model 7 Traffic Growth/ A6MARR Scheme Impact 9 Existing Traffic Conditions 12 Understanding Travel Demands 23 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Derby to Manchester Railway Matlock to Buxton / Chinley Link Study Main Report Volume 1A: Version: Final
    Derby to Manchester Railway Matlock to Buxton / Chinley Link Study Main Report Volume 1A: Version: Final June 2004 Derbyshire County Council Volume 1A: Main Report Version: Final Derby to Manchester Railway Matlock to Buxton / Chinley Link Study Derbyshire County Council ON BEHALF OF THE FOLLOWING FUNDING PARTNERS: • AMBER VALLEY BOROUGH COUNCIL • BUXTON AND THE PEAK DISTRICT SRB 6 PARTNERSHIP • COUNTRYSIDE AGENCY • DERBY CITY COUNCIL • DERBYSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL • DERBYSHIRE DALES DISTRICT COUNCIL • EAST MIDLANDS DEVELOPMENT AGENCY (EMDA) • EUROPEAN REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT FUND (ERDF) • GOVERNMENT OFFICE FOR THE EAST MIDLANDS (GOEM) • HIGH PEAK BOROUGH COUNCIL • PEAK DISTRICT NATIONAL PARK AUTHORITY • PEAK PARK TRANSPORT FORUM • RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME • STRATEGIC RAIL AUTHORITY • TARMAC PLC DERBY TO MANCHESTER RAILWAY MATLOCK TO BUXTON / CHINLEY LINK STUDY Volume 1A: Main Report File Ref Volume 1A Main Report Final Issue A010338 Scott Wilson Railways Derbyshire County Council Volume 1A: Main Report Version: Final Derby to Manchester Railway Matlock to Buxton / Chinley Link Study DERBY TO MANCHESTER RAILWAY MATLOCK TO BUXTON / CHINLEY LINK STUDY Volume 1A: Main Report REPORT VERIFICATION Name Position Signature Date Prepared Bob Langford Study Manager 08/6/04 By: Checked Project Keith Wallace 08/6/04 By: Director Approved Project Keith Wallace 08/6/04 By: Director VERSION HISTORY Date Changes Since Last Version Issue Version Status 19 March None – Initial Issue for Comment by Advisory Draft Final 1 2004 Group 8 June 2004 Revised based on comments from Advisory Group FINAL 1 File Ref Volume 1A Main Report Final Issue A010338 Scott Wilson Railways Derbyshire County Council Volume 1A: Main Report Version: Final Derby to Manchester Railway Matlock to Buxton / Chinley Link Study DERBY TO MANCHESTER RAILWAY MATLOCK TO BUXTON/CHINLEY LINK STUDY Volume 1A: Main Report CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.
    [Show full text]