Birmingham Electoral Ward Boundaries Submission September 2015

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Birmingham Electoral Ward Boundaries Submission September 2015 BIRMINGHAM ELECTORAL WARD BOUNDARIES SUBMISSION SEPTEMBER 2015 Birmingham Conservative Group Boundary Submission Contact:- Cllr Robert Alden, Leader of the Conservative Group Page 1 of 60 Introduction The following submission has been prepared by the Conservative group. In putting together our proposals we have carried out consultations and worked with local communities to try and deliver a set of proposals for Birmingham City Council ward boundaries that best represent the local communities of Birmingham. The process we went through to put together these process is outlined below. The first consideration of all our proposals was what guidelines we would use to put the boundaries together. The guidelines we used followed the statutory guidance:- 1. Equality of representation 2. Reflecting community identities and interests 3. Providing for convenient and effective local government In addition to this we also felt it was vital to consider the Commission’s guidance in the letter to Mark Rogers, 21st July 2015, which stated “any three member wards proposed would need to be individually and specifically evidenced”. Taking this into account our final proposals does not include any three member wards. We felt by the end of the process it was possible to produce a map without a three member ward and given the clear indication that the preference was for no three member wards this should be the basis on which we proceeded. We started the process by setting up a working group with a member of each Constituency association on it to ensure all parts of the city, even areas without Conservative Councillors had an equal voice. This group pulled together a communities map to show the natural communities of Birmingham (see appendix 1). These natural communities formed the base of wards that we then put together having a view to meeting the three statutory criteria. Looking at communities we also highlighted the main barriers in the city. In a number of places rivers, train lines, canals, main roads and motorways are major barriers to community ties. However we did not allow a barrier to prevent a ward being created if there where community ties spanning that barrier E.G. sometimes a railway line can be a unifying feature for local communities. Page 2 of 60 Having outlined the measures by which we would carry out producing our proposals with, we consulted on our list of all the natural communities in Birmingham with Associations to ensure that we had got a complete list. After we had produced this list we considered the electorate for each community and produced a first draft map of boundaries which we felt represented communities. After this first draft we carried out a first stage consultation internally within the Conservative Group and with Conservative Associations from each constituency. This first stage consultation allowed us to determine if the proposals where picking up all the local community ties through a range of 2 and 1 member wards. Following this we made minor changes to the boundaries, particularly focused on ensuring the boundary went alone the middle of a road or at the back of a road depending on what was most appropriate for that community. This allowed us to produce a more complete draft boundary map. At this point we carried out a second stage consultation, with members of the group talking to local community groups, residents etc to see if the proposals were sensible for local communities. This then led us to a final draft of the map, the version which has been submitted with this document. At this point the Conservative Group carried out a third stage consultation talking to community groups and local residents. Time restraints limited this process to being run by each local association so it was not a uniform process. What this meant was in some parts of the City members went door to door talking to residents, others contacted community groups, churches etc to discuss the proposals, some delivered leaflets to residents homes to give them a chance to comment on the proposal for their specific area. This has resulted in significant levels of support for our proposals from local residents in the forms of petitions and supporting letters. We have included all of these in the appendix attached to this submission. Page 3 of 60 Proposed Warding Patterns for Birmingham All our proposals for new warding patterns across Birmingham follow the statutory criteria where our evidence and rationale is clearly stated in line with the following: 1. Equality of representation 2. Reflecting community identities and interests 3. Providing for convenient and effective local government Our proposals are based on 99 Councillors as it was felt 99 better fitted the communities that exist within Birmingham than 100 did, once we had worked through the first stage of our proposal. The electorate of the City is proposed to be 813,401 in 2021. This therefore meant the average electorate per a Councillor on this scheme is 8216.17 we rounded this to 8216 as clearly you can’t have part an elector. This meant that the upper and lower limits for wards were 9037.78 and 7394.55. We rounded these to be figures of 9037 and 7395 so that both were rounded to within the 10% tolerance not over the limits. We propose 67 wards of which 32 are two member wards and 35 single member wards. All of the wards that we propose are within 10%+/- of the electorate of 8216 per a Councillor (ie 14789-18074 for 2 member wards). This has been done to ensure that the equality of representation criteria, number 1 above, of the commission is met. Within these parameters we have generally prioritised ensuring communities ties are best represented. The three wards with the lowest electorate per a Councillor each have specific reasons behind this; we briefly highlight these below for your information and expand on these within the main table of the report. Royal Sutton Four Oaks – 14889 (-9.4%) Royal Sutton Walmley and Minworth – 14881 (-9.4%) Both of these seats have clearly defined communities. In the case of Four Oaks the ward takes the Four Oaks and Mere Green community which have interconnected history and community links with Mere Green High Street providing the shopping community for Page 4 of 60 the ward. While in Walmley and Minworth the area is a very clear community in Sutton Coldfield which was all built around the same time and is clearly connected. We expand on the community links of these two wards in the table below. These two wards are also significantly larger, geographically, than any other ward in the city having an area of 14.91 and 16.81 Sq Km almost twice the area of the next largest ward Royal Sutton Rectory at 8.65 Sq Km (see appendix 33). Therefore them being on the smaller size but still within the criteria prevents the wards being excessively large for communities and the Council to work across. However in addition these wards have significant space for new house building, much of which is planned for post 2021. The fact that these wards, based on community links, are on the lower end of the scale allows for this future house building to take place without making the ward become oversized. In effect future proofing the ward against expected future developments post 2021. Castle Vale – 7409 (-9.8%) In the case of Castle Vale, which we cover in detail in the table below, is a clear community in its own right. Castle Vale is roughly surrounding on the eastern border, the railway line, River Tame and then M6 motorway on the Southern border, the Kingsbury Road on the Northern border and a railway line on the Western border. We explain in the table below all the community ties that exist locally and how the estate is clearly separate to other parts of the City both by its design and by community links. No other wards proposed are under 9% from the average electorate and no wards proposed in our plan are over 9% of the upper limit. Major Retail Centres Across Birmingham there are two major retail and business centres. These are Birmingham City Centre and Sutton Coldfield Town Centre. Both of these are considered major regional centres and therefore carry a number of specific issues, have very labour intensive work with Business groups and dealing with night time economies. It was felt that the introduction of single member wards gave an opportunity for both these areas to get a dedicated Councillor who was able to focus on the Regional centre issues in a way that was not possible when they formed small parts of much larger wards previously. Page 5 of 60 Proposed Names of Wards for Birmingham All our proposals for wards have been given a name. We have tried to ensure names of areas or historic buildings are used where ever possible to ensure maximum community link to the proposed wards. In the Royal Town of Sutton Coldfield we have reflected the recently reconfirmed Royal status of the town by changing the naming structure from Sutton x Ward last time to Royal Sutton x Ward this time. It is felt this would again reflect the wishes of local community which had fought long and hard to have the Royal Status again recognised officially. Page 6 of 60 Public consultations for proposed Birmingham ward boundaries We carried out significant public consultation of local residents, which is attached in the appendixes of this report. The consultation We carried out ranged from public events on local High Streets to surveys or going door to door with a map and petition.
Recommended publications
  • Warding Arrangements for Legend Ladywood Ward
    Newtown Warding Arrangements for Soho & Jewellery Quarter Ladywood Ward Legend Nechells Authority boundary Final recommendation North Edgbaston Ladywood Bordesley & Highgate Edgbaston 0 0.1 0.2 0.4 Balsall Heath West Kilometers Contains OS data © Crown copyright and database right 2016. $ Bournville & Cotteridge Allens Cross Warding Arrangements for Longbridge & West Heath Ward Legend Frankley Great Park Northfield Authority boundary King's Norton North Final recommendation Longbridge & West Heath King's Norton South Rubery & Rednal 0 0.15 0.3 0.6 Kilometers Contains OS data © Crown copyright and database right 2016. $ Warding Arrangements for Lozells Ward Birchfield Legend Authority boundary Final recommendation Aston Handsworth Lozells Soho & Jewellery Quarter Newtown 0 0.05 0.1 0.2 Kilometers Contains OS data © Crown copyright and database right 2016. $ Small Heath Sparkbrook & Balsall Heath East Tyseley & Hay Mills Warding Balsall Heath West Arrangements for Moseley Ward Edgbaston Legend Authority boundary Final recommendation Sparkhill Moseley Bournbrook & Selly Park Hall Green North Brandwood & King's Heath Stirchley Billesley 0 0.15 0.3 0.6 Kilometers Hall Green South Contains OS data © Crown copyright and database right 2016. $ Perry Barr Stockland Green Warding Pype Hayes Arrangements for Gravelly Hill Nechells Ward Aston Legend Authority boundary Final recommendation Bromford & Hodge Hill Lozells Ward End Nechells Newtown Alum Rock Glebe Farm & Tile Cross Soho & Jewellery Quarter Ladywood Heartlands Bordesley & Highgate 0 0.15 0.3 0.6 Kilometers Bordesley Green Contains OS data © Crown copyright and database right 2016. $ Small Heath Handsworth Aston Warding Lozells Arrangements for Newtown Ward Legend Authority boundary Final recommendation Newtown Nechells Soho & Jewellery Quarter 0 0.075 0.15 0.3 Ladywood Kilometers Contains OS data © Crown copyright and database Ladywood right 2016.
    [Show full text]
  • X21 Bus Time Schedule & Line Route
    X21 bus time schedule & line map X21 Birmingham - Woodcock Hill via Weoley Castle View In Website Mode The X21 bus line (Birmingham - Woodcock Hill via Weoley Castle) has 2 routes. For regular weekdays, their operation hours are: (1) Birmingham: 5:11 AM - 11:44 PM (2) Woodcock Hill: 6:20 AM - 11:40 PM Use the Moovit App to ƒnd the closest X21 bus station near you and ƒnd out when is the next X21 bus arriving. Direction: Birmingham X21 bus Time Schedule 42 stops Birmingham Route Timetable: VIEW LINE SCHEDULE Sunday 5:59 AM - 10:54 PM Monday 5:11 AM - 11:44 PM Shenley Fields Drive, Woodcock Hill Tuesday 5:11 AM - 11:44 PM Bartley Drive, Woodcock Hill Wednesday 5:11 AM - 11:44 PM Cromwell Lane, Bangham Pit Thursday 5:11 AM - 11:44 PM Moors Lane, Birmingham Friday 5:11 AM - 11:44 PM Moors Lane, Bangham Pit Hillwood Road, Birmingham Saturday 5:10 AM - 11:44 PM Woodcock Lane, Bangham Pit Draycott Drive, Bangham Pit Long Nuke Road, Birmingham X21 bus Info Direction: Birmingham Shenley Academy, Woodcock Hill Stops: 42 Long Nuke Road, Birmingham Trip Duration: 39 min Line Summary: Shenley Fields Drive, Woodcock Hill, Fulbrook Grove, Woodcock Hill Bartley Drive, Woodcock Hill, Cromwell Lane, Somerford Road, Birmingham Bangham Pit, Moors Lane, Bangham Pit, Woodcock Lane, Bangham Pit, Draycott Drive, Bangham Pit, Marston Rd, Woodcock Hill Shenley Academy, Woodcock Hill, Fulbrook Grove, Austrey Grove, Birmingham Woodcock Hill, Marston Rd, Woodcock Hill, Quarry Rd, Weoley Castle, Ruckley Rd, Weoley Castle, Quarry Rd, Weoley Castle Gregory Ave, Weoley
    [Show full text]
  • The VLI Is a Composite Index Based on a Range Of
    OFFICIAL: This document should be used by members for partner agencies and police purposes only. If you wish to use any data from this document in external reports please request this through Birmingham Community Safety Partnership URN Date Issued CSP-SA-02 v3 11/02/2019 Customer/Issued To: Head of Community Safety, Birmingham Birmi ngham Community Safety Partnership Strategic Assessment 2019 The profile is produced and owned by West Midlands Police, and shared with our partners under statutory provisions to effectively prevent crime and disorder. The document is protectively marked at OFFICIAL but can be subject of disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 or Criminal Procedures and Investigations Act 1996. There should be no unauthorised disclosure of this document outside of an agreed readership without reference to the author or the Director of Intelligence for WMP. Crown copyright © and database rights (2019) Ordnance Survey West Midlands Police licence number 100022494 2019. Reproduced by permission of Geographers' A-Z Map Co. Ltd. © Crown Copyright 2019. All rights reserved. Licence number 100017302. 1 Page OFFICIAL OFFICIAL: This document should be used by members for partner agencies and police purposes only. If you wish to use any data from this document in external reports please request this through Birmingham Community Safety Partnership Contents Key Findings .................................................................................................................................................. 4 Reducing
    [Show full text]
  • Planning and Highways Minutes | Tues 5Th June 2018 Planning And
    Planning and Highways Meeting Tuesday 5th June 2018 Sutton Coldfield Town Hall 7pm Present Cllrs D Allan (Chairman), L. Allen, Hodgins, Horrocks, Jolley & McDonough In Attendance Olive O’Sullivan - Town Clerk, Natalia Gorman - Administrative Officer & James Peppiatt – Student Placement. There were 2 members of the public and no press present. 1 Election of Chairman The Town Clerk asked for nominations from committee members. Resolved that Cllr Allan was nominated as Chairman of the Planning & Highways Committee. 2 Election of Deputy Chairman Resolved that Cllr Horrocks was nominated Deputy Chairman of the Planning & Highways Committee. 3 Apologies For Absence The Clerk had received apologies from Cllrs Puri & Simper. Resolved to accept the apologies received. 4 Declarations of Interest Cllr Hodgins declared a non-pecuniary interest on planning application 2018/02941/PA Boldmere St Michaels Football Club. Cllr Hodgins is an active volunteer at this club. 5 Minutes of Last Meeting Resolved that the minutes of the meeting of Planning & Highways Committee Meeting held on Tuesday 1st May 2018 be signed as a true record of the meeting. 6 Matters Arising Four Oaks Road Traffic Restrictions The Clerk confirmed that Birmingham City Council (BCC) will be notifying residents via letter of an Experimental Traffic Regulation Order on Tuesday 5th June. BCC aim to introduce the signs and markings of the Traffic Regulation Order on 12th June 2018. Page | 1 Planning and Highways Minutes | Tues 5th June 2018 Driver Feedback Signs Driver Feedback Signs have now been installed. Matters around electronic configuration means that the signs have not yet gone live. Resolved to note the Clerks update.
    [Show full text]
  • Mapping of Race and Poverty in Birmingham
    MAPPING OF RACE AND POVERTY IN BIRMINGHAM Alessio Cangiano – ESRC Centre on Migration, Policy and Society (COMPAS, University of Oxford) II Table of contents Executive Summary p. 1 1. Introduction p. 3 2. Population characteristics and demographic dynamics p. 3 3. Geographical patterns of deprivation across the city p. 5 4. Socio-economic outcomes of different ethnic groups at ward level p. 7 4.1. Access to and outcomes in the labour market p. 7 4.2. Social and health conditions p. 9 4.3. Housing p.10 5. Public spending for benefits, services and infrastructures p.11 5.1. Benefit recipients p.11 5.2. Strategic planning p.11 6. Summary and discussion p.13 6.1. Data gaps p.13 6.2. Deprivation across Birmingham wards p.14 6.3. Deprivation across ethnic groups p.14 6.4. Relationship between poverty and ethnicity p.15 6.5. Consequences of demographic trends p.15 6.6. Impact of benefits and local government’s spending p.16 References p.17 III List of figures Figure 1 – Population by ethnic group, Birmingham mid-2004 (%) p.18 Figure 2.1 – Population change, Birmingham 2001-2004 (thousand) p.18 Figure 2.2 – Population change, Birmingham 2001-2004 (Index number, 2001=100) p.19 Figure 3 – Foreign-born population by ethnic group, Birmingham 2001 (%) p.19 Figure 4 – Age pyramids of the main ethnic groups in Birmingham, 2001 (%) p.20 Figure 5 – Distribution of the major ethnic groups across Birmingham wards, 2001 (absolute numbers) p.25 Figure 6 – Population by ethnic group in selected Birmingham wards, 2001 (%) p.27 Figure 7 – Indices of Deprivation,
    [Show full text]
  • Strategic Needs Assessment
    West Midlands Violence Reduction Unit STRATEGIC NEEDS ASSESSMENT APRIL 2021 westmidlands-vru.org @WestMidsVRU 1 VRU STRATEGIC NEEDS ASSESSMENT CONTENTS 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1. Executive Summary ..................................................................................................................................3 Violence has been rising in the West Midlands for several years, a trend - sadly - that has been seen across 2. Introduction and Aims .............................................................................................................................4 much of England & Wales. Serious violence, such as knife crime, has a disproportionately adverse impact on some of our most vulnerable 3. Scope and Approach ................................................................................................................................5 people and communities. All too often, it causes great trauma and costs lives, too often young ones. 4. Economic, Social and Cultural Context ...............................................................................................6 In the space of five years, knife crime has more than doubled in the West Midlands, from 1,558 incidents in the year to March 2015, to more than 3,400 in the year to March 2020, according to the Office for National Statistics. 5. The National Picture – Rising Violence ...............................................................................................8 Violence Reduction Units were set up to help prevent this rise in serious violence
    [Show full text]
  • Final Recommendationsанаwest Midlands Contents 1. Initial/Final
    Final recommendations ­ West Midlands Contents 1. Initial/final proposals overview p1 6. Sub­region 1: Coventry and Warwickshire p13, recommendations p15 2. Number of representations received p4 7. Sub­region 2: Solihull p16, recommendations p17 3. Campaigns p5 8. Sub­region 3: Herefordshire, Shropshire (including Telford and Wrekin), and Worcestershire: p17, recommendations p22; and West Midlands (less Coventry and Solihull) p23, recommendations p29 4. Major issues p6 9. Sub­region 4: Staffordshire and Stoke­on­Trent p30, recommendations p33 5. Final proposals recommendations p8 Appendix A Initial/revised proposals overview 1. The West Midlands region was allocated 53 constituencies under the initial and revised proposals, a reduction of six from the existing allocation. In formulating the initial and revised proposals the Commission decided to construct constituencies using the following sub­regions: Table 1A ­ Constituency allocation Sub­region Existing allocation Allocation under initial Allocation under revised proposals proposals Staffordshire (and 12 11 11 Stoke­on­Trent) Herefordshire, Shropshire 47 42 n/a (including Telford and Wrekin), Warwickshire, West Midlands, and Worcestershire Herefordshire, Shropshire n/a n/a 32 (including Telford and Wrekin), West Midlands (excluding Coventry and 1 Solihull), and Worcestershire Coventry and Warwickshire n/a n/a 8 Solihull n/a n/a 2 2. Under the initial proposals seven of the existing 59 constituencies were completely unchanged. The revised proposals retained six of the existing constituencies unchanged. Under the initial proposals there were four constituencies that crossed county boundaries. These were: one cross­county constituency between Worcestershire and Warwickshire (Evesham and South Warwickshire), one between Herefordshire and Shropshire (Ludlow and Leominster), one between Herefordshire and Worcestershire (Malvern and Ledbury), and one between West Midlands and Warwickshire (Shirley and Solihull South).
    [Show full text]
  • Ward Meetings and Ward Plans Update
    Date updated: 23.02.2021 Ward Meetings and Ward Plans Update 1. Ward Forum Meetings 1.1 Number of Virtual Meetings and Attendance (April 2020-March 2021) *Meeting arranged but not yet taken place **The NDSU YouTube Channel was set up in November 2020 (Q3) Year Meetings Total Average Number of Total Average (2020- that were YouTube YouTube Meetings Attendance Attendance 2021) joint Views** Views Q1 (Apr- 7 230 33 145 21 Jun) Q2 (Jul- 23 1 587 27 235 11 Sep) Q3 (Oct- 31 6 723 23 811 29 Dec) Q4 (Jan- 21 & 20* 1 & 4* 601 29 977 75 Mar) Grand 102 12 2,141 26 2,168 31 Total (82 & 20*) (8 & 4*) 1.2 Total Number of Meetings by Ward *Meeting arranged but not yet taken place ***Meeting arranged but not completed (technology error) April 2020- May 2018-April May 2019- Ward March 2021 2019 March 2020 (Virtual) Acocks Green 4 5 2 & 1* Allens Cross 2 1 1 Alum Rock 3 0 2 & 1* Aston 2 2 1 Balsall Heath West 3 5 1 & 1* Bartley Green 3 3 0 Billesley 1 1 1* Birchfield 5 4 2 & 1* Bordesley & Highgate 1 0 2 Bordesley Green 1 0 1* Bournbrook & Selly Park 3 1 2 Bournville & Cotteridge 3 3 2 & 1* Brandwood & Kings Heath 3 2 0 Bromford & Hodge Hill 5 2 6 Date updated: 23.02.2021 April 2020- May 2018-April May 2019- Ward March 2021 2019 March 2020 (Virtual) Castle Vale 2 0 0 Druids Heath & Monyhull 5 3 2 & 1* Edgbaston 2 3 0 Erdington 3 1 1 Frankley Great Park 2 1 2 Garretts Green 2 0 1 Glebe Farm & Tile Cross 6 2 1 Gravelly Hill 3 3 1 & 1* Hall Green North 4 4 2 & 1* Hall Green South 2 1 0 Handsworth 4 3 3 Handsworth Wood 4 3 1* Harborne 4 2 2*** & 1 Heartlands
    [Show full text]
  • Birmingham City Council Notes of the Meeting of the Weoley Ward Forum on 29 January 2018 at 6.30Pm at Weoley Castle Community Church, Quarry Road
    Birmingham City Council Notes of the meeting of the Weoley Ward Forum on 29 January 2018 at 6.30pm at Weoley Castle Community Church, Quarry Road Present: Councillor Julie Johnson & Councillor Peter Douglas Osborn Sergeant Richard Fryer, West Midlands Police Damon Walsh, Street Work Manager David Miller, Service Manager, Waste Management Kay Thomas, Community Governance Manager There were 11 residents who attended the meeting In the absence of Councillor Booton, Councillor Johnson took the Chair. 1. Notice of Recording – Noted 2. Apologies – Councillor Steve Booton, Richard Burden M.P. 3. Notes of Last Meeting – Noted LIF - Councillor Johnson advised that she believed groups had received the funding and would be presenting updates on the progress of the projects to the next meeting. Action: LIF updates to next meeting. Fortem – Councillor Douglas Osborne advised that boiler issues were being investigated and Fortem made aware of concerns regarding trainees being sent to repairs. Buses – no outcome to the consultation had been received yet but successful petitioning by residents, the BID and councillors had secured the re-instatement of the bus stop at the Grosvenor Centre. Residents commented that National Express focused journey times on start to finish times and had removed stops to increase journey time, however now that new bus pass reader equipment had been installed there was no need to remove stops and create difficulties for users who now had to walk further. Parking, Bristol Road – Councillor Johnson said that the District Committee was to arrange a working group but this had not yet happened. Issues around the Orthopaedic Hospital were still ongoing but double yellow lines were to be installed.
    [Show full text]
  • NHS Birmingham and Solihull Clinical Commissioning Group Primary
    NHS Birmingham and Solihull Clinical Commissioning Group Primary Care Networks April 2021 PCN Name ODS CODE Practice Name Name of Clinical GP Provider Alignment/ Director Federation Alliance of Sutton Practices M85033 The Manor Practice Dr Fraser Hewett Our Health Partnership PCN M85026 Ashfield Surgery M85175 The Hawthorns Surgery Balsall Heath, Sparkhill and M85766 Balsall Heath Health Centre – Dr Raghavan Dr Aman Mann SDS My Healthcare Moseley PCN M85128 Balsall Heath Health Centre – Dr Walji M85051 Firstcare Health Centre M85116 Fernley Medical Centre Y05826 The Hill General Practice M85713 Highgate Medical Centre M85174 St George's Surgery (Spark Medical Group) M85756 Springfield Medical Practice Birmingham East Central M85034 Omnia Practice Dr Peter Thebridge Independent PCN M85706 Druid Group M85061 Yardley Green Medical Centre M85113 Bucklands End Surgery M85013 Church Lane Surgery Bordesley East PCN Y02893 Iridium Medical Practice Dr Suleman Independent M85011 Swan Medical Practice M85008 Poolway Medical Centre M85694 Garretts Green M85770 The Sheldon Practice Bournville and Northfield M85047 Woodland Road Dr Barbara King Our Health Partnership PCN M85030 St Heliers M85071 Wychall Lane Surgery M85029 Granton Medical Centre NHS Birmingham and Solihull Clinical Commissioning Group Primary Care Networks April 2021 Caritas PCN M88006 Cape Hill Medical Centre Dr Murtaza Master Independent M88645 Hill Top Surgery (SWB CCG) M88647 Rood End Surgery (SWB CCG) Community Care Hall Green Y00159 Hall Green Health Dr Ajay Singal Independent
    [Show full text]
  • Health for Life Report Year 1
    Report to Mondelēz International Foundation Year 1: May 2012 – May 2013 Contents Introduction ............................... 3 Program delivery ..................4-6 Delivery team............................. 7 Challenges ..................................8 Success Stories.................... 9-10 Media/Cause Marketing......... 11 Publicity ......................................12 Case studies ........................13-14 Publicity ......................................15 The Phone App ....................... 16 Facebook ...................................17 Community Portal ...................18 Twitter .........................................18 COMPLETED BY Debra Nixon West Midlands Operations Manager 01624 560146 07740899565 [email protected] Grant received: May 2012 Period covered by grant: May 12-May 13 Locations where program was oered: South Birmingham: Longbridge, Weoley, Kings Norton, Northfield, Bournville Published by The Conservation Volunteers, Sedum House, Mallard Way, Doncaster DN4 8DB. Registered Charity (England) 261009, (Scotland) SCO39302 2 Introduction The Health for Life in the community program is designed to develop, with local community members, amenities and activities that will facilitate health and environmental improvements to local community members of the five wards of South Birmingham: Bournville, Kings Norton, Weoley Castle, Northfield and Longbridge. This program is one of three programs in the five year Health for Life program funded by Mondelēz International Foundation. OBJECTIVES The program’s objectives
    [Show full text]
  • Sitetype Buildingname Ward Comments Place Sutton Coldfield Town Hall Sutton Four Oaks Place
    SiteType BuildingName Ward Comments Place Sutton Coldfield Town Hall Sutton Four Oaks Place - External Operated Leisure Centres Wyndley Leisure Centre Main Building Sutton Trinity Subject to Leisure Framework contract Place - External Operated Leisure Centres Wyndley Swimming Pool Main Sutton Trinity Subject to Leisure Framework contract ECO - Commercial - Other Committee Rents Pype Hayes Golf Club Sutton New Hall Subject to golf operator agreement Place - Memorial War Memorial King Edward Square Sutton Vesey Place - Memorial War Memorial Walmley Place - Memorial War Memorial Four Oaks Sutton Four Oaks Place - Parks Boldmere Golf Course (Part of Sutton Park) Sutton Vesey Subject to golf operator agreement Place - Parks Sutton Park Sutton Four Oaks May be elements within Park to be excluded? Place - Parks Rectory Park Sutton Trinity Place - Parks Newhall Valley Country Park Sutton New Hall Place - POS Plants Brook Nature Reserve Sutton New Hall Place - POS Hill Hook Nature Reserve Place - POS Jones Wood POS (Walmley Village) Sutton New Hall Place - Parks Tudor Road Sports Ground Sutton Trinity Place - POS Blake Street/Hill Hook Road/Balmoral Road POS Sutton Four Oaks Place - Parks Mossybank/Warden Road Recreation Ground Sutton Vesey Place - Parks Monmouth Drive Playing Field Sutton Vesey Place - Parks Ley Hill Recreation Ground (Sutton) Sutton Four Oaks Place - Parks Newdigate Recreation Ground Sutton Trinity Place - POS Maney Gardens Sutton Trinity Place - POS Bodington Gardens Sutton Trinity Place - POS Vesey Gardens Sutton Trinity Place
    [Show full text]