DOCSLIB.ORG

Final Recommendations on the Future Electoral Arrangements for Redditch in Worcestershire

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Final Recommendations on the Future Electoral Arrangements for Redditch in Worcestershire Final recommendations on the future electoral arrangements for Redditch in Worcestershire Report to The Electoral Commission July 2002 THE BOUNDARY COMMITTEE FOR ENGLAND © Crown Copyright 2002 Applications for reproduction should be made to: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office Copyright Unit. The mapping in this report is reproduced from OS mapping by The Electoral Commission with the permission of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, © Crown Copyright. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings. Licence Number: GD 03114G. This report is printed on recycled paper. Report no: 312 2 THE BOUNDARY COMMITTEE FOR ENGLAND CONTENTS page WHAT IS THE BOUNDARY COMMITTEE FOR ENGLAND? 5 SUMMARY 7 1 INTRODUCTION 11 2 CURRENT ELECTORAL ARRANGEMENTS 13 3 DRAFT RECOMMENDATIONS 17 4 RESPONSES TO CONSULTATION 19 5 ANALYSIS AND FINAL RECOMMENDATIONS 21 6 WHAT HAPPENS NEXT? 33 APPENDIX Final Recommendations for Redditch: 35 Detailed mapping A large map illustrating the proposed ward boundaries for Redditch is inserted inside the back cover of this report. THE BOUNDARY COMMITTEE FOR ENGLAND 3 4 THE BOUNDARY COMMITTEE FOR ENGLAND WHAT IS THE BOUNDARY COMMITTEE FOR ENGLAND? The Boundary Committee for England is a committee of The Electoral Commission, an independent body set up by Parliament under the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000. The functions of the Local Government Commission for England were transferred to The Electoral Commission and its Boundary Committee on 1 April 2002 by the Local Government Commission for England (Transfer of Functions) Order 2001 (SI 2001 No 3692). The Order also transferred to The Electoral Commission the functions of the Secretary of State in relation to taking decisions on recommendations for changes to local authority electoral arrangements and implementing them. Members of The Committee are: Pamela Gordon (Chair) Professor Michael Clarke CBE Kru Desai Robin Gray Joan Jones Ann M Kelly Professor Colin Mellors Archie Gall (Director) We are required by law to review the electoral arrangements of every principal local authority in England. Our aim is to ensure that the number of electors represented by each councillor in an area is as nearly as possible the same, taking into account local circumstances. We can recommend changes to ward boundaries, the number of councillors and ward names. We can also recommend changes to the electoral arrangements of parish councils. This report sets out our final recommendations on the electoral arrangements for the borough of Redditch in Worcestershire. THE BOUNDARY COMMITTEE FOR ENGLAND 5 6 THE BOUNDARY COMMITTEE FOR ENGLAND SUMMARY The Local Government Commission for England (LGCE) began a review of Redditch’s electoral arrangements on 31 July 2001. It published its draft recommendations for electoral arrangements on 26 February 2002, after which it undertook an eight-week period of consultation. As a consequence of the transfer of functions referred to earlier, it falls to us, The Boundary Committee for England, to complete the work of the LGCE and submit final recommendations to The Electoral Commission. • This report summarises the representations received by the LGCE during consultation on its draft recommendations, and contains our final recommendations to The Electoral Commission. We found that the existing arrangements provide unequal representation of electors in Redditch: • in six of the 11 wards the number of electors represented by each councillor varies by more than 10 per cent from the average for the borough and three wards vary by more than 20 per cent; • by 2006 this situation is expected to worsen, with the number of electors per councillor forecast to vary by more than 10 per cent from the average in seven wards and by more than 20 per cent in two wards. Our main final recommendations for future electoral arrangements (see Tables 1 and 2 and paragraphs 69-70) are that: • Redditch Borough Council should have 29 councillors, as at present; • there should be 12 wards, instead of 11 as at present; • the boundaries of 11 of the existing wards should be modified, resulting in a net increase of one; • elections should continue to take place by thirds. The purpose of these proposals is to ensure that, in future, each borough councillor represents approximately the same number of electors, bearing in mind local circumstances. • In ten of the proposed 12 wards the number of electors per councillor would vary by no more than 10 per cent from the borough average. • This improved level of electoral equality is forecast to continue, with the number of electors per councillor in all wards, expected to vary by no more than 7 per cent from the average for the borough in 2006. THE BOUNDARY COMMITTEE FOR ENGLAND 7 All further correspondence on these final recommendations and the matters discussed in this report should be addressed to The Electoral Commission, which will not make an Order implementing them before 10 September 2002: The Secretary The Electoral Commission Trevelyan House Great Peter Street London SW1P 2HW 8 THE BOUNDARY COMMITTEE FOR ENGLAND Table 1: Final Recommendations: Summary Number of Ward name Constituent areas Map reference councillors part of Abbey ward; part of Batchley ward; part of Map 2 and Large 1 Abbey 2 Central ward Map Astwood Bank & Feckenham parish; part of Crabbs Cross ward; part Map 2 and Large 2 2 Feckenham of Feckenham ward Map Map 2 and Large 3 Batchley 3 part of Batchley ward Map part of Batchley ward; part of Central ward; part of Map 2 and Large 4 Central 2 Lodge Park ward Map Map 2 and Large 5 Church Hill 3 part of Abbey ward; Church Hill ward Map Map 2 and Large 6 Crabbs Cross 2 part of Crabbs Cross ward; part of Feckenham ward Map Map 2 and Large 7 Greenlands 3 part of Greenlands ward; part of Lodge Park ward Map part of Central ward; part of Crabbs Cross ward; Headless Cross & Map 2 and Large 8 3 part of Greenlands ward; part of Lodge Park ward; Oakenshaw Map part of West ward Map 2 and Large 9 Lodge Park 2 part of Lodge Park ward Map Map 2 and Large 10 Matchborough 2 part of Matchborough ward Map Map 2 and Large 11 West 2 part of Crabbs Cross ward; part of West ward Map Map 2 and Large 12 Winyates 3 part of Matchborough ward; Winyates ward Map Notes: 1 The parish of Feckenham is the only parish in Redditch and is contained within the proposed Astwood Bank & Feckenham ward. 2 Map 2 and the large map in the back of the report illustrate the proposed wards outlined above. THE BOUNDARY COMMITTEE FOR ENGLAND 9 Table 2: Final Recommendations for Redditch Ward name Number Electorate Number of Variance Electorate Number of Variance of (2001) electors per from (2006) electors per from councillors councillor average councillor average % % 1 Abbey 2 4,149 2,075 -1 4,149 2,075 -4 Astwood Bank & 2 2 4,363 2,182 4 4,381 2,191 1 Feckenham 3 Batchley 3 4,693 1,564 -26 6,264 2,088 -4 4 Central 2 4,121 2,061 -2 4,298 2,149 -1 5 Church Hill 3 6,463 2,154 3 6,342 2,114 -3 6 Crabbs Cross 2 4,377 2,189 4 4,377 2,189 1 7 Greenlands 3 6,149 2,050 -2 6,094 2,031 -6 Headless Cross & 8 3 6,945 2,315 10 6,975 2,325 7 Oakenshaw 9 Lodge Park 2 3,909 1,955 -7 4,059 2,030 -6 10 Matchborough 2 4,707 2,354 12 4,625 2,313 7 11 West 2 4,326 2,163 3 4,609 2,305 6 12 Winyates 3 6,724 2,241 7 6,736 2,245 4 Totals 29 60,926 – – 62,900 – – Averages – – 2,101 – – 2,169 – Source: Electorate figures are based on information provided by Redditch Borough Council. Note: The ‘variance from average’ column shows by how far, in percentage terms, the number of electors per councillor varies from the average for the borough. The minus symbol (-) denotes a lower than average number of electors. Figures have been rounded to the nearest whole number. 10 THE BOUNDARY COMMITTEE FOR ENGLAND 1 INTRODUCTION 1 This report contains our final recommendations on the electoral arrangements for the borough of Redditch in Worcestershire. The six districts in Worcestershire have now been reviewed as part of the programme of periodic electoral reviews (PERs) of all 386 principal local authority areas in England started by the LGCE in 1996. We have inherited that programme, which we currently expect to complete in 2004. 2 Redditch’s last review was undertaken by the Local Government Boundary Commission for England, which reported to the Secretary of State in October 1979 (Report no. 356). We expect to begin reviewing the County Council’s electoral arrangements towards the end of the year. 3 In making final recommendations to The Electoral Commission, we have had regard to: • the statutory criteria contained in section 13(5) of the Local Government Act 1992 (as amended by SI 2001 No 3692), i.e. the need to: a) reflect the identities and interests of local communities; b) secure effective and convenient local government; and c) achieve equality of representation. • Schedule 11 to the Local Government Act 1972. 4 Details of the legislation under which the review of Redditch was conducted are set out in a document entitled Guidance and Procedural Advice for Local Authorities and Other Interested Parties (LGCE, fourth edition, published in December 2000). This Guidance sets out the approach to the review. 5 Our task is to make recommendations on the number of councillors who should serve on a council, and the number, boundaries and names of wards.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Examinations of the Bromsgrove District Plan (BDP) and Borough of Redditch Local Plan No.4 (BORLP4)
    Examinations of the Bromsgrove District Plan (BDP) and Borough of Redditch Local Plan No.4 (BORLP4) Hearing Statement: Response to Inspector’s Matters, Issues and Questions Matter XB1: Cross-boundary Allocations 5YHLS Joint Statement prepared by Bromsgrove District and Redditch Borough Councils 4th March 2016 Bromsgrove District Council and Redditch Borough Council Response to the Inspector’s Matters, issues and Questions Matter XB1 - Cross-boundary Allocations XB1.2 Do the Foxlydiate and Brockhill Urban Extensions represent the most appropriate locations for meeting Redditch’s housing needs within Bromsgrove District, having regard to the provision of the necessary infrastructure, affordable housing and other facilities, and taking account of environmental constraints? Is the methodology for selecting these sites robust and transparent? Has appropriate consideration been given to alternative locations? Have exceptional circumstances been demonstrated to justify the removal of land from the Green Belt? 1. In addition to the previous comments made in the previous Hearing Statements XB1/1a and XB1/1b dated 3 rd December 2014 and 8th June 2015 Bromsgrove District Council (BDC) and Redditch Borough Council (RBC) would like to take the opportunity to re-emphasise and add the following comments. 2. The Councils’ consider that the Foxlydiate and Brockhill East urban extensions represent the most appropriate locations for meeting Redditch’s housing needs within Bromsgrove District. The analysis that informs this view can be found in the Housing Growth Development Study (HGDS) [CDX1.1], and further explanation is found in the more recent Narrative on the Site Selection Process for the Growth Areas at Redditch January 2016 [“The Narrative”] which were completed jointly by BDC and RBC officers.
    [Show full text]
  • Arts and Culture Centre Task Group
    This page is intentionally left blank CONTENTS Page Number Chair’s Foreword 1 Summary of Recommendations 2 Introduction/Background Information 6 Chapter 1 Recommendations that could be Implemented in the 11 Short to Medium Term Chapter 2: Recommendations that could be Implemented in the 24 Long Term Conclusion 37 Appendix 1 - Terms of Reference 38 Appendix 2 - Witnesses 42 Appendix 3 - Timeline of Activities 43 Appendix 4 - Public Consultation Methods 45 Appendix 5 - Arts Activities in Redditch 46 Appendix 6 - Background Papers and Website Sources 62 Membership of the Task Group Councillors Hopkins (Chair), Baker, Clayton and Witherspoon. Mr M Hall (co-opted member, Chair of the Arts in Redditch Network) Support Officer Jess Bayley, Democratic Services Officer, Tel: (01527) 64252 Extn: 3268 [email protected] Completed April 2013 Contact Further copies of this report are available on request from: Address: Overview and Scrutiny Team, Democratic Services, Redditch Town Hall, Walter Stranz Square, Redditch, B98 8AH Email: [email protected] FOREWORD When I started this review I was absolutely convinced that Redditch needed an arts centre. I hoped that this Task and Finish scrutiny would uphold this view and investigate how, where and when we could look to do this very thing. My colleagues, Councillor Brandon Clayton, Councillor Pat Witherspoon and Councillor Joe Baker and our co-opted member, Malcolm Hall, were all of the same mindset. The Task and Finish scrutiny has, however, had a life of its own and we have followed all the twists and turns of the investigation only to come up with a completely different outlook.
    [Show full text]
  • 5 Year Housing Land Supply in Redditch Borough
    5 Year Housing Land Supply in Redditch Borough Updated November 2015 (Published December 2015) 1911 BA0800 HOUSING SUPPLY IN REDDITCH BOROUGH – 1 November 2015 to 31 October 2020 1. Introduction 1.1 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (para 47) states that local planning authorities should identify and update annually a supply of specific deliverable sites sufficient to provide five years’ worth of housing against their housing requirements with an additional buffer to ensure choice and competition in the market for land. 1.2 This document sets out an assessment of whether there is a five year supply of deliverable housing land in the Borough of Redditch. This assessment will inform decisions on planning applications for housing development. 2. The Existing Development Plan Position in Relation to Housing Provision 2.1 The adopted development plan is the Borough of Redditch Local Plan No.3 (adopted 31 May 2006) (selected policies saved in May 2009). The NPPF (para 215) indicates that the weight applied to these policies will diminish from March 2013 if they are inconsistent with the NPPF. Following the change of Government in May 2010, proposals emerged to abolish Regional Spatial Strategies (RSS) and the housing targets embedded in them and return spatial planning matters and decision making to the local level. The Localism Act (2011) made provision for the abolition of the regional planning tier, and the West Midlands RSS was formally revoked on 20 May 2013. The revocation of the RSS placed the responsibility on Redditch Borough Council to determine its own objectively assessed housing need. The Council submitted its submission draft of the Borough of Redditch Local Plan No.4 for Examination on 12 March 2014, which contains an objectively assessed housing need for the period 2011 to 2030.
    [Show full text]
  • RLP Design 2
    Borough of Redditch Local Plan No.4 ADOPTED JANUARY 2017 www.redditchbc.gov.uk/localplan 1 Contents Contents Introduction 3 Local Challenges 4 Duty to Cooperate 5 What has influenced this Local Plan? 6 More information 6 Local Portrait 7 Vision 13 Objectives 15 Policy 1 Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development 16 Key Diagram 17 Sustainable Places to Live which Meet our Needs 18 Policy 2 Settlement Hierarchy 19 Policy 3 Development Strategy 21 Policy 4 Housing Provision 22 Policy 5 Effective and Efficient Use of Land 23 Policy 6 Affordable Housing 25 Policy 7 Gypsies, Travellers and Travelling Showpeople 27 Policy 8 Green Belt 28 Policy 9 Open Countryside 29 Policy 10 Rural Workers Dwellings 30 Creating and Sustaining a Green Environment 32 Policy 11 Green Infrastructure 33 Policy 12 Open Space Provision 34 Policy 13 Primarily Open Space 36 Policy 14 Protection of Incidental Open Space 38 Policy 15 Climate Change 39 Policy 16 Natural Environment 41 Policy 17 Flood Risk Management 43 Policy 18 Sustainable Water Management 46 Policy 19 Sustainable Travel and Accessibility 48 Policy 20 Transport Requirements for New Development 51 Policy 21 Alexandra Hospital Public Transport Interchange 53 Policy 22 Road Hierarchy 54 Creating a Borough where Businesses can Thrive 56 Policy 23 Employment Land Provision 57 Policy 24 Development within Primarily Employment Areas 59 Policy 25 Development outside of Primarily Employment Areas 61 Policy 26 Office Development 62 Policy 27 Rural Economic Development 64 Policy 28 Supporting Education, Training
    [Show full text]
  • Final Recommendations on the Future Electoral Arrangements for Worcestershire County Council
    Final recommendations on the future electoral arrangements for Worcestershire County Council Report to The Electoral Commission September 2004 Translations and other formats For information on obtaining this publication in another language or in a large-print or Braille version please contact The Boundary Committee for England: Tel: 020 7271 0500 Email: [email protected] Crown Copyright 2004 Applications for reproduction should be made to: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office Copyright Unit. The mapping in this report is reproduced from OS mapping by The Electoral Commission with the permission of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, © Crown Copyright. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings. This report is printed on recycled paper. Licence Number: GD 03114G. Report no: 378 2 Contents Page What is The Boundary Committee for England? 5 Summary 7 1 Introduction 19 2 Current electoral arrangements 23 3 Draft recommendations 31 4 Responses to consultation 33 5 Analysis and final recommendations 35 6 What happens next? 61 Appendix A Final recommendations for Worcestershire County Council: Detailed 63 mapping 3 4 What is The Boundary Committee for England? The Boundary Committee for England is a committee of The Electoral Commission, an independent body set up by Parliament under the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000. The functions of the Local Government Commission for England were transferred to The Electoral Commission and its Boundary Committee on 1 April 2002 by the Local Government Commission for England (Transfer of Functions) Order 2001 (SI No. 3962). The Order also transferred to The Electoral Commission the functions of the Secretary of State in relation to taking decisions on recommendations for changes to local authority electoral arrangements and implementing them.
    [Show full text]
  • Housing Growth Development Study
    Hagley Romsley Bromsgrove District Council Clent Hollywood and Redditch Borough Council Belbroughton Rubery Planning Wythall Cofton Hackett Hopwood Marlbrook Bournheath Catshill Barnt Green Dodford Lickey End Alvechurch Blackwell Rowney Green Bromsgrove Finstall Beoley Tardebigge Stoke Heath Church Hill Batchley Winyates Stoke Prior Redditch Matchborough Washford Callow Hill Crabbs Cross Astwood Bank Feckenham © Crown Copyright. All rights reserved. Bromsgrove District Council 100023519 (2013) Housing Growth Development Study Executive Bromsgrove Summary District Council www.bromsgrove.gov.uk Housing Growth Development Study Executive Summary This document provides a brief summary of the 1. To provide sufficient homes to meet the full Housing Growth Development Study which, housing needs of both Bromsgrove District and together with the Sustainability Appraisal forms a Redditch Borough. substantial part of the evidence base to support this 2. To provide support and encouragement for the consultation. For full details of the evidence please achievement of a strong and diverse economic refer to the Councils website: base for both Bromsgrove District and Redditch www.bromsgroveandredditchplanning.co.uk Borough. 3. To support and to enhance the vitality and viability In March 2012 the Government published the and, where appropriate, the regeneration of Town National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) which Centres, District Centres, and other centres in both is a guidebook for how the Government wishes to Bromsgrove District and Redditch Borough. see planning decisions taken in the future. The NPPF 4. To enhance the visitor economy and the provision stresses the need to’ significantly boost housing of leisure and cultural facilities in both Bromsgrove supply’ and the need to ‘meet the full and objectively District and Redditch Borough.
    [Show full text]
  • Microsoft Outlook
    Emma Newfield From: Will Sinclair Sent: 16 February 2016 14:40 To: Consult Planning Cc: Subject: Consultation on Bromsgrove District Council and Redditch Borough Council BORLP4 'Narrative' Document Jan 2016 Categories: Blue Category Dear Sirs I wish to write to state that I do not agree with findings of the above document regarding development of WEBHEATH ADR & FOXLYDIATE. I also do not agree with the policy, do not agree with the flawed analysis of the 4 areas and do not agree withe th undemocratic processes employed by RBC, to force through the Planning application. Bordesley is a far more sustainable location to build 3,500 to 5,000 houses for the following reasons: o Its proximity to the town centre, o Access to the region’s motorway and rail networks o Access to Birmingham. o Access to existing local infrastructure requirements – roads, schools, sewage etc Other areas for Redditch’s allocation would also be more suitable for development such as Maypole and therefore these other areas should be considered before and decisions are taken. I wish to object to building on both the WEBHEATH ADR & FOXLYDIATE for the following reasons: Flooding Living in close proximity to a stream on the site of a water mill I have been flooded three times in the last 6 years. I do not believe the pools planned for water retention are adequate to prevent an increased risk of flooding that a new development would present, particularly on the steep slopes at the top of the watercourse. Areas of Feckenham will be similarly affected. Traffic The existing road infrastructure is unable to handle the current levels of traffic, let alone the additional vehicles a new development would attract.
    [Show full text]
  • Bromsgrove District and Redditch Borough Strategic Flood Risk Assessment Level 1 Report
    Bromsgrove District and Redditch Borough Strategic Flood Risk Assessment Level 1 Report Bromsgrove District Council and Redditch Borough Council January 2009 Final Report 9T1791 HASKONING UK LTD. COASTAL & RIVERS Regus / Central Boulevard Blythe Valley Business Park Birmingham B90 8AG United Kingdom +44 (0)1564 711875 Telephone 01564711258 Fax [email protected] E-mail www.royalhaskoning.com Internet Document title Bromsgrove District and Redditch Borough Strategic Flood Risk Assessment Level 1 Report Document short title Level 1 SFRA Status Final Report Date January 2009 Project name Bromsgrove and Redditch SFRA Project number 9T1791 Client Bromsgrove District Council and Redditch Borough Council Reference 9T1791/R00003/303671/Birm Drafted by R Ranger Checked by M Stringer Date/initials check …………………. …………………. Approved by M Stringer Date/initials approval …………………. …………………. CONTENTS Page 1 BACKGROUND 1 1.1 General Overview 1 1.2 Scope 1 1.3 Study Area 2 1.4 Data Used 4 1.5 Limitations and Assumptions 5 2 CATCHMENT DESCRIPTION AND CAUSES OF FLOODING 7 2.1 Catchment Description 7 2.1.1 General 7 2.1.2 River Salwarpe Catchment 7 2.1.3 Gallows Brook Catchment 10 2.1.4 River Arrow Catchment 10 2.1.5 Bow Brook Catchment 12 2.1.6 Other Watercourses 12 2.1.7 Canals 13 2.1.8 River Arrow Catchment 14 2.1.9 Bow Brook Catchment 17 2.2 Causes of Flooding 19 2.3 Geology 20 3 DATA COLLECTION AND REVIEW 23 3.1 Historic Flooding 23 3.1.1 General 23 3.1.2 Flooding from Watercourses 23 3.1.3 Sewer Flooding 25 3.1.4 Highway Drainage and Overland
    [Show full text]
  • Borough of Redditch Local Plan No.4 Sustainability Appraisal Refresh
    NOV EMBER 2014 Borough of Redditch Local Plan No.4 Sustainability Appraisal Refresh Borough of Redditch Local Plan No.4 - Sustainability Appraisal Refresh Contents Page Page Non-Technical Summary………………………………………………………………………….. 5 1. Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………… 8 2. Local Plan No.4 Appropriate Assessment Screening Matrix………………………………. 10 3. Background to the Local Plan…………………………………………………………………. 14 4. Sustainability Appraisal Stages and Tasks………………………………………………….. 16 5. Sustainability Appraisal Objectives…………………………………………………………… 17 Objectives of the Proposed Submission Local Plan………………………………………… 18 Testing objectives………………………………………………………………………………. 19 Table 1 - Matrix testing the compatibility of the SA Objectives and the Local Plan objectives and assessing the cumulative effects of the Local Plan Objectives………………………………………………………………………………………. 20 Cumulative Effects……………………………………………………………………………… 22 Cumulative impacts from the matrix testing the compatibility of the SA Objectives and the Local Plan Objectives……………………………………………………………………... 22 Compatibility of Local Plan Objectives……………………………………………………….. 25 Table 2 - Matrix Testing the Compatibility of Local Plan Objectives………………………. 25 Inconsistencies/Conflicts between Local Plan Objectives………………………………….. 26 6. Strategic Issues for Assessment……………………………………………………………… 27 Comparison of significant effects of the options…………………………………………….. 27 Prediction of effects…………………………………………………………………………….. 27 7. Proposed Mitigation Measures………………………………………………………………... 28 Table 3 - Proposed mitigation
    [Show full text]
  • Land at Foxlydiate Lane, Webheath, Redditch
    HEYFORD DEVELOPMENTS LTD LAND AT FOXLYDIATE LANE, WEBHEATH, REDDITCH Landscape & Visual Appraisal MAY 2013 5127.LVA.006.VF COPYRIGHT The copyright of this document remains with Aspect Landscape Planning Ltd. The contents of this document therefore must not be copied or reproduced in whole or in part for any purpose without the written consent of Aspect Landscape Planning Ltd. Aspect Landscape Planning Ltd Hardwick Business Park Noral Way Banbury Oxfordshire OX16 2AF t 01295 276066 f 01295 265072 e [email protected] w www.aspect-landscape.com CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION 1 2 POLICY BACKGROUND 3 3 APPRAISAL OF POTENTIAL GROWTH OPTION SITES 9 4 THE SUBJECT SITE 16 5 SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONS 20 ASPECT PLANS PLAN ASP1 LANDSCAPE POLICY CONTEXT PLAN ASP2 TOPOGRAPHICAL CONTEXT PLAN ASP3 AREA A LANDSCAPE ANALYSIS PLAN ASP4 SUBJECT SITE ANALYSIS PLAN ASP5 PHOTO LOCATION (Foxlydiate/Webheath) PLAN ASP6 PHOTO LOCATION (West of the A441) APPENDICES APPENDIX 1 GROWTH OPTIONS FOR REDDITCH 2010 APPENDIX 2 PHOTOGRAPHIC RECORD APPENDIX 3 ASPECT METHODOLOGY FOR CAPACITY STUDY Land at Foxlydiate Lane, Redditch MAY 2013 Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment 5127.LVA.006.DV 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1. Aspect Landscape Planning have been instructed by Heyford Developments to provide a landscape and visual appraisal in respect of land to the northwest of Redditch in terms of its suitability for development. The client has control of land at Foxlydiate Lane, Webheath, Redditch, hereby referred to as the Subject Site, which measures in the region of 40ha. The subject site is part of a wider parcel of land that was considered in a Special Consultation on Redditch Expansion (February 2010), identifying three potential Growth Options for Redditch (refer Appendix 1).
    [Show full text]
  • News of Redditch Through Local Newspapers
    NEWS OF REDDITCH THROUGH LOCAL NEWSPAPERS Taken from the Index of Newspaper Documents (2005 – 2016) 1 This Document…….. We have been researching the history of Redditch as reported in newspapers as events happened. We have collected together over 15,000 clips of such events and these have been organised into about 200 categories. Each of these documents reports the newspaper clips for that category in chronological sequence. At the start of each document is an index to the contents of that document. This document represents the index for the ”Through Local Newspaper” document which gives an overall view by Local Newspapers of the years 2005 to 2016. These documents have been created to enable those interested in researching, or just reading about Redditch history, and opportunity to see what topics have been included in the detailed documents, which, for copyright reasons, cannot be put on-line. The detail documents are accessible off-line at shows, exhibitions and other events organised by the Redditch Local History Society. 2 Newspaper Titles - 2 News of Redditch (Document 2005) Contents The Redditch Society –( January) 4 The Redditch Society –( February) 4 The Redditch Society – (February) 4 Redditch Society – (March) 5 Minister to help at church – (February) 6 Redi business plan is agreed – (March) 7 Site earmarked for holocaust memorial – (March) 7 The Redditch Society – (March) 8 New Stage School to open in Redditch – (April) 8 Shows provide a good send-off for theatre – (April) 9 Church to mark 60th VE day with remembrance service
    [Show full text]
  • Borough of Redditch Local Plan No.4
    January 2017 Borough of Redditch Local Plan No.4 Borough of Redditch Local Plan No.4 CONTENTS Contents Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 1 Local Challenges ............................................................................................................................ 2 Duty to Cooperate ........................................................................................................................... 3 What has influenced this Local Plan?.............................................................................................. 4 More information ............................................................................................................................. 6 Local Portrait ................................................................................................................................... 7 Vision ............................................................................................................................................ 14 Objectives ..................................................................................................................................... 18 Policy 1 Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development……………………….………………..19 Key Diagram ................................................................................................................................. 20 Sustainable Places to Live which Meet our Needs ..................................................................
    [Show full text]