DOCSLIB.ORG

Agenda of Shire Strategic Planning Committee

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Agenda of Shire Strategic Planning Committee Business Paper Shire Strategic Planning Committee Monday, 9 March 2020 6:30pm Council Chambers, Level 2, Administration Building, 4-20 Eton Street, Sutherland Shire Strategic Planning Committee 9 March 2020 ORDER OF BUSINESS 1. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY 2. APOLOGIES 3. DISCLOSURES OF INTEREST 4. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETINGS 5. PRESENTATIONS 6. REPORTS FROM OFFICERS PLN008-20 Development Contributions Plans S7.11 and S7.12 - Draft Amendment 3 to Works Schedules PLN009-20 Retention of Open Space in the M6 Corridor PLN010-20 Quarterly Report - Clause 4.6 Variations Register (October to December 2019) 7. QUESTIONS 8. CONSIDERATION OF BUSINESS IN CLOSED SESSION 9. CONFIDENTIAL REPORTS FROM OFFICERS Page 2 Shire Strategic Planning Committee 9 March 2020 20 PLN008-20 DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS PLANS S7.11 AND S7.12 - - DRAFT AMENDMENT 3 TO WORKS SCHEDULES Attachments: Appendix A (under separate cover), Appendix B (under separate cover) and Appendix PLN008 C (under separate cover) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Amendments are required to the two Development Contributions Plans (7.11 and 7.12) to align with their Works Schedules with decisions made by Council in relation to capital projects. The changes include:- removal of completed projects; corrections to delivery timeframes; removal of projects that are not proceeding; increases and decreases to budgeted works as a result of more detailed costing. The amendments also include substituting in new projects that are consistent with the intent of the plans, and the needs and priorities of the community. The two draft amended Contribution Plans (Section 7.11 Development Contribution Plan 2016 and Section 7.12 Development Contribution Plan 2016) must be publicly exhibited for community input for four weeks, as required by legislation. Any submissions received will then be reported to Council before the amendments are finally considered. This report seeks Council’s consideration and endorsement of the draft amended plans before they are placed on public exhibition. REPORT RECOMMENDATION THAT: The Draft Section 7.11 Development Contribution Plan 2016 (Amendment 3, Ed 4) and Draft Section 7.12 Development Contribution Plan 2016 (Amendment 3, Ed 4), be endorsed for public exhibition. Page 3 Shire Strategic Planning Committee 9 March 2020 20 PURPOSE - This report seeks endorsement of amendments to the Sutherland Shire Development Contribution Plans. PLN008 BACKGROUND Two Contribution Plans currently apply in the Sutherland Shire: “Section 7.11 Development Contribution Plan 2016” and “Section 7.12 Development Contribution Plan 2016”. The 7.11 and 7.12 plans both aim to fund acquisition and embellishment of land for additional open space; works that increase the carrying capacity of existing open space/recreation facilities to meet growing demand; new road and traffic works needed because of new development; and public domain improvements associated with demands from an increased population. Works funded by the 7.11 plan must clearly relate to the needs of a growing population, so the plan funds regional facilities that a growing population will seek out, or works located in the town centres where there is an increasing population due to the development of additional dwellings. Other augmentation works located outside the centres are funded by the 7.12 (levy) plan where the nexus between population growth and the need for the facility is not as direct. The plans cannot fund maintenance or environmental conservation. This report presents amendments to the Works Schedules of the Contribution Plans, which will be exhibited as Draft Amendment 3 (Edition 4) to the plans. DISCUSSION Contributions plans are prepared on the basis of Council’s assessment of the community’s needs and priorities as the population grows and changes. They are prepared at a point in time based on information that is available at that time. Just as the community is dynamic, Council’s various plans ought to be reviewed as the community’s needs evolve or are better understood. As more detailed strategy and action planning is undertaken, service plans and capital works programs are refined to better align with the community’s needs and expectations. These reviews can flow through to in changes to the capital works program. Where capital works are funded in whole or part by developer contributions, the contributions plan work schedules need to be amended to align. The amended works schedules do not affect contribution rates. All off the amendments proposed to the Works Schedules have been informed by the forward capital works planning. Page 4 Shire Strategic Planning Committee 9 March 2020 20 In summary, the proposed amendments to the plans incorporate the following changes: - Removal of completed projects including: bleachers at Sutherland Leisure Centre; Cricket wicket upgrades (various; Turriel Bay Rd Reserve Playground; Keiwa Place Reserve Playground; and Camellia Gardens shade structure. PLN008 Corrections to delivery time frames (based on commitments adopted in the Delivery Program). Removal of projects that were not feasible or not priority, including: Outdoor gym equipment at 196 Port Hacking Rd; embellishment of Darly St Park; Heritage Dr Oval Illawong cricket pitch upgrade (replaced by upgrades to Sutherland Oval). New Works: Castelnau St Reserve Amenities building ($500,000 – 7.12 plan); Cronulla Park/South end of Mall Public Toilets ($620,000 – 7.11 plan); Sutherland Oval floodlighting and upgrades to cricket pitch facilities ($200,000 – 7.11 plan); Woolooware Shared Pathway Additional Public Toilets ($620,000 – 7.11 plan); Increases to budgeted works as a result of updated cost estimates, including the following local and regional works to be funded by both the 7.11 and 7.12 plans:- Dunningham Park playground (increase from $50,000 to $900,000); Seymour Shaw Park Upgrades to allow greater utility of fields and netball courts, including possible relocation of 6 courts to Miranda Park (from $1,000,000 to $5,650,000); Yowie Bay Wharf upgrade (from $300,000 to $1,000,000); Western area all abilities playground (from $900,000 to $2,375,000); Playground shade structures in Caringbah (from $30,000 to $360,000); and regional playground upgrades ($2,210,000 to $4,500,000). Major increases to budgeted works – works to be funded by the 7.12 levy plan: - Como Pleasure Grounds frontage works (from $250,000 to $650,000); Cronulla Plaza Public Domain Upgrade incorporating features for play and social gathering (from $2,000,000 to $8,285,827). A significant reduction in funding shade structures in Cronulla (from $1,000,000 to $160,000). The amended Works Schedules are attached as Appendix A. The amended Contribution Plans, marked up with changes, are attached as Appendices B and C. At this time there are sufficient development contribution funds to fund the short term works in the works schedule. However, income from development is subject to market forces, and completion of all works in the works schedule may not be ultimately possible. The Development Contribution Plans will be reviewed again following Council’s consideration of detailed Play and Sports Strategies and/or as part of the future housing strategy and Local Environmental Plan review. RESOURCING STRATEGY IMPLICATIONS Management of Council’s Development Contribution Plans is conducted within the existing budget and resources of Strategic Planning. The plans themselves are critical in the resourcing of increased local infrastructure. Page 5 Shire Strategic Planning Committee 9 March 2020 20 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT - The draft amended Contribution Plans will be publicly exhibited for 28 days in accordance with legislative requirements. PLN008 STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT Community Strategic Plan Strategy Delivery Program (2017-2021) Deliverables Outcome 6: A liveable place with a high quality 1A Implement the 2017-2021 Delivery Program of life Strategy 6.3 Provide welcoming, safe and 3A Develop and implement plans to facilitate accessible spaces that encourage active healthy, connected, caring, inclusive, resilient, lifestyles and liveable communities POLICY AND LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENTS The Environmental Planning and Assessment Act and Regulations set out the legislative requirements for the making of amended development contribution plans. CONCLUSION The proposed changes to the Contribution Plans better align projects in the plans with expenditure allocations in Council’s capital works and land acquisition programs, which reflects Council’s and communities priorities. The amendments will ensure the works schedules reflect current priorities with respect to development-related infrastructure demand. RESPONSIBLE OFFICER This officers responsible for the preparation of this Report are the Manager Strategic Planning, Mark Carlon, who can be contacted on 9710 0523 and the Manager Asset Services, Peter Shields, who can be contacted on 9710 0247. File Number: 2020/363225 Page 6 Shire Strategic Planning Committee 9 March 2020 20 PLN009-20 RETENTION OF OPEN SPACE IN THE M6 CORRIDOR - Attachments: Appendix A⇩ and Appendix B⇩ PLN009 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this report is to advise Council on the practical maximum retention of open space with respect to future transport initiatives within the M6 (formerly F6) Corridor. Council is supportive of the M6 Motorway being constructed but many open space and community uses within the existing corridor which would be impacted if the motorway route was above ground from Captain Cook Bridge to Loftus. In order to preserve
Load more

Recommended publications
  • NRMA 2020-21 NSW Budget Submission
    NRMA NSW Budget Submission 2020–21 2 Table of Contents Centenary of the NRMA ........................................................................................................ 3 Priorities for the NRMA ......................................................................................................... 4 Regions .............................................................................................................................. 4 Mobility ............................................................................................................................... 4 Technology......................................................................................................................... 4 Sustainability ...................................................................................................................... 4 Key Recommendations ......................................................................................................... 5 Infrastructure & Services .................................................................................................. 6 Metropolitan........................................................................................................................... 7 Roads ................................................................................................................................. 7 Transport ............................................................................................................................ 8 Regional ................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • South East Sydney Transport Strategy
    Contents 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2 1.1 Vision and objectives 4 1.2 The problem 6 1.3 The response 7 1.4 Next steps 8 2 INTRODUCTION 10 2.1 What is the plan? 10 2.2 Strategic land use and transport plans 11 2.2.1 Why South East Sydney now? 12 2.3 Working with our stakeholders 15 3 SOUTH EAST SYDNEY 2026: THE CHALLENGE 16 3.1 Overview 17 3.2 Why not business as usual? 17 3.3 Problem statement 19 4 A VISION FOR SOUTH EAST SYDNEY 2056 23 4.1 Developing a vision for South East Sydney 23 4.2 Vision 23 4.3 Objectives and indicators 24 4.3.1 Why the South East Sydney Transport Strategy approach will work 26 4.4 Integrated land use and transport scenarios 27 4.4.1 Reference Case 27 4.4.2 Compact City 28 4.4.3 Economic 29 4.4.4 Mass Transit Corridors 30 4.4.5 Mass Transit Nodes 31 4.4.6 Dispersed 32 4.5 Development of the preferred scenario 33 5 PREFERRED LAND USE AND TRANSPORT FUTURE 34 5.1 Preferred scenario 35 5.1.1 Proposed land use changes 35 5.1.2 Policy change 38 5.1.3 Freight network improvement 43 5.1.4 Place development 45 5.1.5 Principal Bicycle Network 47 5.1.6 Randwick 49 5.1.7 Green Square – Waterloo Precinct 51 5.1.8 Sydney Airport and Port Botany Precinct 53 5.2 Co-dependency of catalytic transport investment and major redevelopment and uplift 55 5.3 The delivery 55 5.3.1 The cost 55 5.3.2 The benefits and trade-offs 57 5.3.3 Innovation and Technology 58 5.3.4 How will we measure success? 58 5.3.5 Next steps 59 List of figures Figure 1 – Study Area 3 Figure 2 – Preferred scenario and major initiatives listed in proposed priority for
    [Show full text]
  • M6 Stage 1 Design and Construction Deed
    M6 Stage 1 D&C Deed M6 Stage 1 Design and Construction Deed Transport for NSW (ABN 18 804 239 602) and CPB Contractors Pty Limited (ABN 98 000 893 667) Ghella Pty Ltd (ABN 85 142 392 461) UGL Engineering Pty Limited (ABN 96 096 365 972) Confidential Sensitive: NSW Government M6 Stage 1 D&C Deed CONTENTS CLAUSE PAGE 1. Definitions and Interpretation ................................................................................. 14 1.1 Definitions .............................................................................................. 14 1.2 Interpretation .......................................................................................... 62 1.3 Contra proferentem ................................................................................. 65 1.4 Business Day .......................................................................................... 65 1.5 Certification ............................................................................................ 65 1.6 Ambiguous terms..................................................................................... 65 1.7 Order of precedence ................................................................................. 66 1.8 Severability ............................................................................................. 66 1.9 Electronic file .......................................................................................... 67 2. D&C Documents ................................................................................................... 67
    [Show full text]
  • Public-Private Partnerships Best Practices Summary
    ADDENDUM - Public-Private Partnerships Best Practices Summary The United States Congress has passed legislation encouraging states to pursue public- private partnerships (PPPs) to meet their transportation needs. Specifically, congress has authorized a program allowing states to issue up to $15 billion in tax-exempt debt, for use in combination with private equity. This program offers an efficient finance plan for user fee-supported highway infrastructure. So far however, California has not passed the necessary State legislation to qualify for these funds. Until recently, most US transportation agencies (and their advisors) generally favored issuing tax-exempt debt to the exclusion of private equity. However, increasing market evidence suggests that private equity captures the “growth wedge” in future project revenues more effectively than tax-exempt markets. Thus, private equity offers agencies greater leverage on limited tax revenues in capital finance plans. California was once at the forefront of public-private partnership use in transportation. Led by the Orange County Transportation Corridor Agencies, California pioneered the successful development and implementation of these tools. Other states quickly realized the value of such partnerships, however, and today have moved ahead of California in identifying projects and preparing and submitting applications. This is a critical time for California. If our leadership commits to a long-term PPP program, it could attract billions of dollars in private investment for new construction. The following is a look at what vital tools are needed for California to “re-launch” PPPs, criteria that businesses look for in PPPs, and examples of best practices from successful PPPs around the nation and the world.
    [Show full text]
  • Alternatives to Non-Compete Clauses in Toll Development Agreements
    Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. Government 3. Recipient’s Catalog No. FHWA/TX-07/0-5020-1 Accession No. 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date Alternatives to Non-Compete Clauses in Toll Development October 2005 Agreements 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. 0-5020-1 Khali R. Persad, C. Michael Walton, and Julie Wilke 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) Center for Transportation Research 11. Contract or Grant No. The University of Texas at Austin 0-5020 3208 Red River, Suite 200 Austin, TX 78705-2650 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered Texas Department of Transportation Technical Report Research and Technology Implementation Office September 2004–August 2005 P.O. Box 5080 14. Sponsoring Agency Code Austin, TX 78763-5080 15. Supplementary Notes Project performed in cooperation with the Texas Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration. 16. Abstract Private investors in toll roads sometimes request restrictive covenants such as non-compete clauses, which could prevent the public sector from adding capacity in the region for the life of the toll agreement. This research project examined 20 case studies of toll agreements in the United States and internationally, and developed a set of best practices, which provide alternatives to non-compete clauses. In addition to this research report, three research products were generated. The first product, 5020-P1, is a detailed set of guidelines on best practices in toll agreements. The second product, 5020-P2, is a brochure summarizing alternatives to non-compete clauses.
    [Show full text]
  • Surface Transportation
    Reason Foundation April 2012 Annual Privatization Report 2011: Surface Transportation By Robert W. Poole, Jr. Edited by Leonard Gilroy and Harris Kenny Reason Foundation Reason Foundation’s mission is to advance a free society by developing, applying and promoting libertarian principles, including individual liberty, free markets and the rule of law. We use journalism and public policy research to influence the frameworks and actions of policymakers, journalists and opinion leaders. Reason Foundation’s nonpartisan public policy research promotes choice, competition and a dynamic market economy as the foundation for human dignity and progress. Reason produces rigorous, peer-reviewed research and directly engages the policy process, seeking strategies that emphasize cooperation, flexibility, local knowledge and results. Through practical and innovative approaches to complex problems, Reason seeks to change the way people think about issues, and promote policies that allow and encourage individu- als and voluntary institutions to flourish. Reason Foundation is a tax-exempt research and education organization as defined under IRS code 501(c)(3). Reason Foundation is supported by voluntary contributions from individuals, foundations and corporations. Copyright © 2012 Reason Foundation. All rights reserved. Reason Foundation Annual Privatization Report 2011: Surface Transportation By Robert W. Poole, Jr. Edited by Leonard Gilroy and Harris Kenny This is an excerpt from Reason’s Annual Privatization Report, which is available online at http://reason.org/apr2011
    [Show full text]
  • 24 May 2021 Cimic's Cpb and Ugl Selected for M6 Motorway, Revenue
    24 MAY 2021 CIMIC’S CPB AND UGL SELECTED FOR M6 MOTORWAY, REVENUE OF $1.95BN CIMIC Group’s CPB Contractors and UGL, in a joint venture with Ghella, have been selected by the New South Wales Government to deliver stage 1 of Sydney’s M6 motorway. The design and construct contract will generate revenue of approximately $1.95 billion to the CIMIC Group companies. The $2.5 billion M6 Stage 1 will connect Sydney’s south to the city’s wider motorway network. It will improve journey times, reduce congestion and remove trucks from local streets. CIMIC Group Executive Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Juan Santamaria said: “CIMIC Group companies are delivering major transport projects across Australia. Having successfully completed several WestConnex projects, our companies have specific expertise in delivering motorways in urban areas. This experience will be applied to safely and successfully deliver the M6 Stage 1 for the NSW Government.” CPB Contractors Managing Director Jason Spears said: “This is an important addition to the portfolio of road, rail and airport projects that CPB Contractors’ experienced teams are delivering across NSW. We are very pleased to have been selected to work closely with Transport for NSW to safely deliver this key piece of transport infrastructure for the people of Sydney.” UGL Managing Director Doug Moss said: “UGL is helping to improve transport infrastructure right across Australia, and we look forward to bringing our expertise to the M6 project. We pride ourselves on providing a high quality and safe outcome for our clients, our people and our communities.” The joint venture will deliver an underground motorway connection between President Ave, Kogarah and the M8, mainline tunnels, exit/entry ramps, shared cycle and pedestrian pathways and tunnel stubs for a future Stage 2 of the M6 (subject to obtaining relevant planning approvals).
    [Show full text]
  • European Public-Private Partnership Transport Market September 2017 European Public-Private Partnership Transport Market
    European Public-Private Partnership transport market September 2017 European Public-Private Partnership transport market Directors Javier Parada Partner in charge of the Infrastructure Industry, Spain Miguel Laserna Directing Partner of Financial Advisory- Infrastructures Coordinated by Karolina Anna Mlodzik Kate McCarthy Published by Deloitte University EMEA CVBA Contact Infrastructure Department Deloitte Madrid Torre Picasso - Plaza Pablo Ruiz Picasso 1, 28020 Madrid, Spain +34 91514 5000 www.deloitte.es September 2017 2 September 2017 Contents INTRODUCTION 5 1. OVERVIEW 1.1. The transport infrastructure gap 6 1.2. 2016 European PPP transport market 9 1.2.1.European greenfield PPP transactions that reached financial close in 2016 9 1.2.2. European greenfield PPP transport projects with a preferred proponent announced in 2016 14 1.2.3. European greenfield PPP transport projects with a pre-qualified or shortlisted proponent in 2016 16 1.2.4. European PPP transport refinancings in 2016 16 1.2.5. European PPP transport M&A transactions in 2016 19 1.3. Conclusions 22 2. THE MAIN PLAYERS 2.1. Top 35 ranking 24 2.2. Main players’ current strategy 25 Main players’ role in the infrastructure lifecycle 25 Sponsors 26 Operators 27 Institutional investors 27 3. CONTEXT FOR EUROPEAN PPPS 3.1. Policy and regulation trends 30 3.1.1. Regulatory changes: Directives 2014/23/UE, 2014/24/UE and 2014/25/UE 30 3.2. Funding and financing trends 32 3.2.1. An investment plan for Europe: the Juncker Plan 33 3.2.2. Europe 2020 Project Bond Initiative 39 4. EUROPEAN GREENFIELD PPP TRANSPORT PIPELINE 4.1.
    [Show full text]
  • PPP Wealth Machine
    European Services Strategy Unit Research Report No. 6 PPP Wealth Machine ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ UK and Global trends in trading project ownership Dexter Whitfield Financialisation of public infrastructure Market values imposed on public assets Growth of offshore infrastructure funds Secondary market trading UK and Global PPP equity databases PPP Wealth Machine: UK and Global trends in trading project ownership European Services Strategy Unit PPP Equity Database The database can be accessed and downloaded at http://www.european-services-strategy.org.uk/ppp-database/ppp-equity-database/ December 2012 Amended January 2014: Table 4: Annual rate and value of UK PPP equity transactions (1998-2012) Many thanks to Stewart Smyth, Lecturer, Queens University Management Schools, Belfast for advice and comments on the draft and to Jo Chadwick for design of the ESSU database. Dexter Whitfield, Director Adjunct Associate Professor, Australian Workplace Innovation and Social Research Centre, University of Adelaide Mobile +44 (0)777 6370884 Tel. +353 (0)66 7130225 Email: [email protected] Web: www.european-services-strategy.org.uk The European Services Strategy Unit is committed to social justice, through the provision of good quality public services by
    [Show full text]
  • M4 East Madness Have Your Say the M 4East Will Be a Disaster For
    Digital mischief by Greg Zhukov Greg by mischief Digital M o v i n g p e o p l e n o t c a r s r a c t o n e l p o e p g n i v o M All worth a good fight! good a worth All comprehensive public transport network for thewhole of Sydney. of thewhole for network transport public comprehensive [email protected] amenity. It also provides an opportunity to fight for a for fight to opportunity an provides also It amenity. www.ecotransit.org.au homes in the direct line of fire and preserve local neighbourhood local preserve and fire of line direct the in homes PO Box 630, Milsons Point NSW 1565 NSW Point Milsons 630, Box PO For further information: further For the RTA to back down. An emphatic NO is the best way to defend to way best the is NO emphatic An down. back to RTA the and says no to all motorway options, the Government will force will Government the options, motorway all to no says and on 9810 1916 or Email [email protected] Email or 1916 9810 on by debates over long versus short tunnel options, but stands firm stands but options, tunnel short versus long over debates by , call Jason call , Tollways Against Residents involved: If the community fights the M4 East and refuses to be sidelined be to refuses and East M4 the fights community the If Contact your local community group and get and group community local your Contact 5.
    [Show full text]
  • Australian Automobile Association
    PRE-BUDGET SUBMISSION 2021-22 JANUARY 2021 Introduction The Australian Automobile Association (AAA) is the peak organisation for Australia’s motoring clubs (NRMA, RACV, RACQ, RAA, RAC, RACT, AANT) and their 8.5 million members, and advocates for policies that can make transport safe, affordable, and sustainable. In the 2021-22 Budget, the AAA calls on the Australian Government to: 1. improve road safety outcomes via efficient investment in land transport infrastructure 2. improve consumer information regarding vehicle fuel consumption and emissions performance, which will save motorists and businesses money, while also helping the environment 3. support the transition to new vehicle technologies via motoring taxation reform 4. minimise the costs associated with the Government’s work to improve liquid fuel security and ensure that these costs are shared equitably amongst all beneficiaries. 1. SAVE LIVES AS WELL AS JOBS THROUGH INFRASTRUCTURE SPENDING Background The AAA welcomed the significant increase in spending on land transport infrastructure in the October 2020 federal Budget, with investment increasing from $9.25 billion in 2020-21 to $12.89 billion in 2023-24. Importantly, included within this funding boost were several initiatives with a focus on road safety. If fully realised, these initiatives will not only deliver vital safety improvements to Australia’s land transport network, but also build an important role for the Australian Government in road safety governance and leadership. AAA Pre-Budget Submission 2021-22 2 Maintain 100% spend of fuel excise for land transport Expend funds within set timeframes Building and maintaining a safe and efficient transport The AAA was pleased to see the Government’s system will be central to Australia’s economic recovery, announcement that funding under the new Road Safety which is why the AAA calls on the Government to Program will be provided to states and territories on a continue allocating 100 per cent of net fuel excise to land “use it or lose it” basis.
    [Show full text]
  • 2Pound-Breakfast-Deal.Pdf
    Store name Address Abingdon 39 Bury Street, Abingdon, Oxfordshire, OX14 3QY Abingdon Thameside 5, The Old Gaol, Abingdon, Oxfordshire, OX14 3HE Airdrie Unit 2, 52-54 Graham Street, Airdrie, North Lanarkshire, ML6 6BU 26/27 Anchor Parade, Aldridge Shopping Centre, Walsall , West Aldridge Midlands, WS9 8QP Allerton L'pool 123 Allerton Road, Liverpool, L18 2DD Allerton Road 2 5 Allerton Road, Liverpool, L18 1LG Alloa 48-50 High Street, Alloa, Clackmannanshire, FK10 1JF Atherstone 58 Long Street, Atherstone, Warwickshire, CV9 1AU Balsall Common Unit 2, Station Road, Balsall Common, Warkwickshire , CV7 7FE Bathgate 6 George Place, Bathgate, West Lothian, EH48 1NP Bedale 23 Market Place, Bedale, North Yorkshire, DL8 1ED 37 Jansel Square, Camborne Avenue, Bedgrove, Aylesbury, Bedgrove Buckinghamshire, HP21 7ET Bedworth Unit 2 Tesco Extra Retail Park, Mill Street, Bedworth, CV12 8SX Blue Boar Motorways Ltd - Roadchef Northampton North Drive Thru, M1 Junction 15a, Northampton North DTO Northampton, Northamptonshire, NN4 9QY Blue Boar Motorways Ltd - Watford Roadchef Services Watford Gap North, M1 between J16 & J17, Gap North DTO Northampton, Northamptonshire, NN6 7UZ Blue Boar Motorways Ltd - Watford Roadchef Watford Gap South Drive Thru, M1 Junction 16/17, Gap South DTO Northampton, Northamptonshire, NN6 7UZ Boldmere 57-59 Boldmere Road, Sutton Coldfield, West Midlands, B73 5XA Bootle 221 Stanley Rd , Bootle, Liverpool, L20 3DY Bourne End 67 The Parade, Bourne End, Buckinghamshire, SL8 5SB Bridge of Allan 8-12 Henderson Street, Bridge of Allan,
    [Show full text]