Lead Local Authority Local Authorities Within Consortium Amount

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Lead Local Authority Local Authorities Within Consortium Amount

Lead Local Authority Local Authorities Amount within consortium Cornwall Council Council of the Isle of Scilly £1,287,390 Bolsover District Council North East Derbyshire £117,800 District Council Portsmouth City Council Hampshire County £337,843 Council; Southampton City Council East Riding of Yorkshire Nil £1,048,544 Oldham Council Nil £110,000 Teignbridge District Devon County Council; £1,131,546 Council East Devon District Council; Exeter City Council; Mid Devon District Council; North Devon District Council; South Hams District & West Devon Borough Council; Torbay Council; Torridge District Council Doncaster Council Sheffield City Council £751,880 South Gloucestershire Stroud District Council; £3,295,000 Council Cotswold District Council; Forest of Dean District Council; Gloucester City Council Sefton Council St Helens Council; Wirral £417,806 Council; Knowsley Council; Halton Council Northumberland County Durham County Council; £6,568,141 Council Darlington Borough Council; Redcar & Cleveland Borough Council; South Tyneside; Sunderland City Council; Hartlepool Borough Council; Newcastle City Council Allerdale Borough Council Carlisle City Council; Eden £1,140,000 District Council; South Lakeland District Council Lincolnshire County Boston Borough Council; £570,000 Council East Lindsey District Council; North Kesteven District Council; South Holland District Council; South Kesteven District Council; West Lindsey District Council North East Derbyshire Bolsover District Council £637,625 District Council Suffolk County Council Babergh District Council; £1,625,000 Forest Heath District Council; Ipswich Borough Council; Mid Suffolk District Council; St Edmundsbury Borough; Suffolk Coastal District Council; Waveney District Council Cheshire East Council Nil £180,340 West Lancashire Borough Nil £365,400 Council Blackburn with Darwen Blackpool Council; Burnley £2,241,893 Council Council; Chorley Council; Fylde Borough Council; Hyndburn Borough Council; Lancaster City Council; Pendle Borough Council; Preston City Council; Ribble Valley Borough Council; Rossendale Borough Council; South Ribble Borough Council; West Lancashire Borough Council; Wyre Borough Council Brent Council London Borough of £362,625 Hounslow; London Borough of Ealing Walsall Metropolitan Nil £869,713 Borough Council West Yorks Combined Barnsley Met Borough £1,763,775 Authority Council; Bradford Met and District Council; Calderdale Borough Council; Craven District Council; Harrogate District Council; Selby District Council; Kirklees Council; Leeds City Council; Wakefield District Council; City of York Council .

Copy Link

Recommended publications

Moor Park, Blackpool
Moor Park, Blackpool SuDS used Swales Basins Benefits Control of runoff to greenfield runoff rate. Wetland features manage runoff to ensure clean water enters the natural drainage system. Significantly lower cost of installation over a conventional piped or underground drainage. Massive biodiversity potential. Engagement with school staff and students. Anticipated involvement of local people and potentially Moor Park Friends Group. 1. Location Junction of Bispham Road and Bristol Avenue, north of Blackpool town centre, Lancashire, next to the former TVR car factory. 2. Description The Moor Park development is a large healthcare building, incorporating leisure and library uses as well as new play areas and a multi-use games area. It is set in the north-west corner of an existing park, Moor Park, in the residential neighbourhood of Bispham. The building is served by a large (200 space) car parking area. It lies at roughly 10m AOD and is broadly flat, falling to the south. The development site is around 3.4ha, including the surrounding earthworks and ‘soft’ play areas. Surface water drainage is to a combined sewer running underneath the site (pre-existing drainage). Soils are mixed, but incorporate a high proportion of sands. 1 Case study www.susdrain.org Figure 1 Moor Park masterplan (David Singleton) 2 Case study www.susdrain.org Figure 2 Building layout (David Singleton) 3 Case study www.susdrain.org 3. Main SuDS used From the very early stages of the project, the proposed location of such a large development in a designated green space demanded a high level of sensitivity and a landscape led approach.
[Show full text]
Duty to Co-Operate Statement of Common Ground
CEC – Site Allocations and Development Policies – Duty to Co-operate Statement of Common Ground CHESHIRE EAST COUNCIL SITE ALLOCATIONS AND DEVELOPMENT POLICIES DUTY TO CO-OPERATE STATEMENT OF COMMON GROUND Appendix 2: List of Signatories (as at April 2021) 1.1 Alongside the Revised Draft SADPD, its Sustainability Appraisal and Habitats Regulations Assessment, a DTC SOCG was published in October 2020 (as document ED 51) for consideration by, in particular, relevant DTC organisations who were then invited to sign it, prior to it being submitted to the Secretary of State for consideration by the appointed Inspector at examination. Section 5 of the DTC statement common ground noted that signatures would be requested, and that section completed during consultation on the revised publication draft SADPD. 1.2 Individual letters were sent on the 2nd November 2020 to DTC organisations to request that they confirm their agreement to the content of the DTC Draft Statement of Common Ground [ED 51], namely that: - - there are no strategic cross boundary issues that flow from the policies and proposals set out in the SADPD. - There is ongoing engagement with other local authorities related to existing memoranda of understanding put in place to support the Local Plan Strategy. 1.3 The following signatures have been received (original versions available on request): - • Cheshire West and Chester Council; • Warrington Borough Council; • Trafford Council; • Greater Manchester Combined Authority; • Manchester City Council; • Peak District National Park Authority; • High Peak Borough Council; • Derbyshire County Council; • Staffordshire Moorlands Council; • Newcastle Under Lyme Borough Council; • Staffordshire County Council; • Stoke on Trent City Council; • Shropshire Council; • Environment Agency; • Historic England; • Natural England; • Homes England; • NHS Clinical Commissioning; • Highways England; • Cheshire and Warrington Local Enterprise Partnership.
[Show full text]
Suffolk County Council Hearing Statement
Examination of the Ipswich Local Plan Review November - December 2020 Suffolk County Council Hearing Statement Matter 6 – Site Allocations Authors Cameron Clow – Senior Planning and Growth Officer James Cutting – Head of Planning Graeme Mateer – Head of Transport Suzanne Buck – Transport Policy and Development Manager Luke Barber – Principle Development Management Engineer Chris Fish - Senior Development Management Engineer Pete Mumford – Schools Planning manager Denis Cooper – Flood and Water Engineer Abby Antrobus – Senior Archaeology Officer Issue : Whether the proposed site allocations in the SAP are justified taking into account the reasonable alternatives, positively prepared in meeting the Borough’s development needs, effective in terms of deliverability over the Plan period and consistent with national policy in enabling sustainable development? Strategic Allocations Ipswich Garden Suburb 79. What evidence is there to show that the infrastructure requirements listed in Table 8B for the IGS are justified, deliverable and consistent with national policy? Transport contributions have been considered in detail alongside the Transport Assessments that were submitted with the two outline planning applications that have since been approved. These assessments include estimates of modal shift that are then linked to travel planning measures, contributions to bus services, public rights of way and off-site sustainable transport measures. These are consistent with the NPPF which (para. 103) seeks “opportunities to maximise sustainable transport solutions” whilst recognising that these will vary between urban and rural areas and (at para. 108) will be “appropriate opportunities […] given the type of development”. As noted above, the Department for Education has provided guidance to supplement the strong policy position at paragraph 94 of the NPPF that “It is important that a sufficient choice of school places is available to meet the Examination of the Ipswich Local Plan Review November - December 2020 needs of existing and new communities”.
[Show full text]
Cheshire and Warrington
Children and Young People Health and Wellbeing Profile: Cheshire and Warrington Public Health Institute, Faculty of Education, Health and Community, Liverpool John Moores University, Henry Cotton Campus, 15-21 Webster Street, Liverpool, L3 2ET | 0151 231 4452 | [email protected] | www.cph.org.uk | ISBN: 978-1-910725-80-1 (web) Contents Acknowledgements 1 Introduction 2 Child to young person life course infographic 3 1 Children and young people in Cheshire and Warrington 4 2 Pre-birth and early years 5 3 Primary school 6 4 Secondary school to young adults 7 Interpretation guide 9 Data sources 9 Acknowledgements The Public Health Institute, Liverpool John Moores University was commissioned to undertake this work by the Cheshire and Merseyside Directors of Public Health through the Cheshire and Merseyside Public Health Intelligence Network and Champs Public Health Collaborative (Cheshire and Merseyside). It was developed in collaboration with Melisa Campbell, Research Fellow in Public Health, University of Liverpool. For more information & data sources please contact: Janet Ubido, Champs Researcher, Public Health Institute, Liverpool John Moores University. Email: [email protected] 1 Foreword The health and wellbeing of children and young people in our region is a key public health priority. This report presents profiles for children and young people in Cheshire and Warrington to help identify the actions that can support and improve outcomes for this population. The profiles cover a wide range of indicators which all impact upon health and social wellbeing. The first 1000 days from conception and the early years are key stages which impact on children’s health, readiness to grow, learn and succeed.
[Show full text]
A.L.L. S.A.F.E. ALLSAFE ALLSAFE Was Implemented to Combat the Upsurge in Anti Social Behaviour in the Wai Ms Ley Close Area of Accrington
Lancashire Constabulary The Tilley Award 2003 Category: Partnership A.L.L. S.A.F.E. ALLSAFE ALLSAFE was implemented to combat the upsurge in anti social behaviour in the Wai ms ley Close area of Accrington. Hyndburn Council Community Wardens and CBW have first identified this, which was further evidenced by the rise in the number of Police incidents being reported. A letter drop to 70 residents revealed the main concerns were that the area was run down, insufficient household security, the streets were badly lit, which contributed to a greater "fear of crime' factor. Anti-Social behaviour was rife, they identified that most offenders were congregating around 2 problematic addresses. To combat the problems, ALL-SAFE commenced in September 2002. The Police, Social Services, Wardens, Housing and Maundy Grange Charity joined forces to deal with the 2 addresses and their associate problems, to either re-integrate the occupants or, as eventually occurred, to re-locate them. Juvenile nuisance immediately reduced dramatically. Once the occupants left, so did the problem youths. Fear of crime was tackled by encouraging the charity 'Age Concern' to embrace the project. Funding was obtained resulting in all elderly residents in the area having free security devises installed in their houses (alarms, door locks, chains, window locks.) 'Community E-mail*, was introduced, in order to improve reassurance. Funding for email telephones, installed in homes in the Close, was obtained, and encourages "involvement*. The system was so successful that it was extended throughout Hyndburn. A media campaign promoted our work in the area, and challenged other agencies to get involved.
[Show full text]
191010-2019-Annual-Report-Final
Chairman's Statement 2018-2019 The difficult trading conditions continued during the year and the effect of losing the South Tyneside contract is plain to see in the audited accounts. Fortunately, NECA was aware that this situation could develop so was able to successfully manage the resulting reduction in income, therefore to return a small surplus is a very satisfactory result. The withdrawal of support by South Tyneside Council meant Ambassador House could not continue nor the blue light café on Beach Road. Fortunately NECA was able to reach an agreement with Karbon Homes to transfer the lease of Ambassador House to The Key Project at no cost to the Charity. I’d like to thank Karbon Homes for their valued assistance in facilitating this arrangement. On a positive note NECA was delighted to be chosen to run the pilot scheme for Hungry Britain. This involved the NECA Community Garden providing lunch and activities for children in South Tyneside during the school holidays. The pilot scheme was extremely successful and the event was rolled-out across other areas of the country. Thank you to South Shields MP, Emma Lowell-Buck for her involvement and valued assistance with this project. The NECA Community Garden was also extremely proud to be invited to take part in the Queens Commonwealth Canopy project. This involved planting trees to commemorate Her Majesty The Queen’s 65 years on the throne. Two saplings were planted in the garden by the Lord Lieutenant of Tyne & Wear, Mrs. Susan Winfield ably assisted by local schoolchildren. The success of those two events has encouraged the Trustees to widen the organisation’s remit so that it can offer services to the wider community and not just to those affected by drug and alcohol misuse, and gambling.
[Show full text]
Community Engagement Plan Southport Town Deal
Community Engagement Plan Southport Town Deal June 2020 Contents 1. Introduction 1 2. Town Deals 2 3. Engagement Plan and Programme 5 4. Next steps 11 Appendix 1: Towns Fund Prospectus 1 1. Introduction 1.1 This Community Engagement Plan has been produced to support the emerging Southport Town Investment Plan. Its purpose is to outline the key engagement activities that have been undertaken to date with stakeholders, including elected members and representatives of the local community, and to detail the planned engagement and consultation prior to finalisation of the Southport Town Investment Plan. 1.2 This document is structured to provide: • An introduction to Town Deals and Town Investment Plans • Details of the engagement activities carried out to date and the proposed Engagement Plan and Programme • The proposed next steps 1.3 This Community Engagement Plan has been informed by information set out in the ‘Towns Fund Prospectus’ published by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) in November 2019. The Prospectus is included as Appendix 1 to this document. 1.4 The Community Engagement Plan has been produced by Turley on behalf of Sefton Metropolitan Borough Council (SMBC). It will be published by SMBC to ensure transparency over the engagement process to inform preparation of the Southport Town Investment Plan. 1 2. Town Deals 2.1 In November 2019 the Local Government Secretary invited 101 towns, including Southport, to develop proposals for a Town Deal with the Government, each one potentially receiving up to £25 million investment from the national £3.6 billion Towns Fund. 2.2 While Government has entered into a number of ‘City Deals’ to stimulate growth in large urban areas, smaller towns have been overlooked by that process and not always benefitted from economic growth even where located in close proximity to more prosperous areas.
[Show full text]
Speaker Profiles
Speaker Profiles Deborah Cadman OBE Chief Executive, Suffolk County Council Deborah Cadman is Chief Executive of Suffolk County Council. She started her career in 1984 with the London Borough of Newham after gaining her first degree in Politics. Deborah moved to Birmingham City Council in 1987 where she worked with voluntary organisations and on major regeneration projects in the City. During this period she gained a Masters degree in Economics. In 1996 she moved to Redcar and Cleveland Borough Council as Head of Policy and gained a second Masters Degree in Management. In 1998 she took up a two year secondment with the Department of Environment Transport and the Regions as Local Government Advisor to the Ministerial Team, with specific responsibility for the East of England. She was appointed the Audit Commission's Best Value Service Lead Inspector for the London region in 2000 and led on several national corporate governance inspections. In 2003 she took up the post of Chief Executive at St Edmundsbury Borough Council and was interim Chief Executive of Waveney District Council between January and March 2008. She was Chief Executive of the East of England Development Agency between July 2008 and December 2011. Deborah was awarded an OBE in 2006 for her services to Local Government. Speaker Profiles Dr Tim Coulson Regional Schools Commissioner for the East of England and North-East London Dr Tim Coulson started his role on 1 July 2014. Before his appointment, Tim was Director of Education at Essex county council. Earlier in his career
[Show full text]
Of Its Integrated Coastal Zone Management The
Sustainable Development and Planning II, Vol. 1 475 The ‘Sefton Coast Partnership’: an overview of its integrated coastal zone management A. T. Worsley1, G. Lymbery2, C. A. Booth3, P. Wisse2 & V. J. C. Holden1 1Natural, Geographical and Applied Sciences, Edge Hill University, Ormskirk, Lancashire, U.K. 2Coastal Defence Unit, Ainsdale Discovery Centre Complex, Southport, Merseyside, U.K. 3Environmental and Analytical Sciences Division, Research Institute in Advanced Technologies (RIATec), The University of Wolverhampton, Wolverhampton, West Midlands, U.K. Abstract The Sefton Coast Partnership (SCP), based in Sefton, Merseyside, UK, is set within the context of and reported as an example of Integrated Coastal Zone Management. It has developed out of a well-established and successful Management Scheme and, since its inception, attempted with varying success to develop a ‘working partnership’ which has sustainable management at its heart and which is responsible for conservation and the needs of the local community. The history, function and structure of the SCP are described together with the problems that emerged as the partnership developed. Keywords: ICZM, partnership, sustainable management, Sefton. 1 Introduction The coastal zone is hugely significant in terms of sustainable management since this is where human activities affect and are inseparable from marine and terrestrial processes and environments both in developed countries and the Third World. Integrated management therefore requires a holistic, geographic approach and, in order to be successful, action at the local and regional level which is supported by the national government. This paper introduces the Sefton Coast Partnership as an example of Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM) in WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment, Vol 84, © 2005 WIT Press www.witpress.com, ISSN 1743-3541 (on-line) 476 Sustainable Development and Planning II, Vol.
[Show full text]
Blackpool Climate Assembly
Blackpool Climate Assembly Final report Blackpool Climate Assembly | Final report 11 Summary of recommendations The Blackpool Climate Assembly has made recommendations against 8 issues as part of the town's push to reach NetZero Carbon Emissions by 2030. The Assembly believes that Blackpool should be bold and ambitious in its response to the climate emergency, and that the Council should act as an example for other Councils who face similar problems. The Council should also look to form partnerships with other Councils to reach shared climate goals. Blackpool Climate Assembly | Final report 22 On Generating and Buying Clean Energy, the Assembly Primary recommends establishing an Energy Task Force and writing issues a Local Energy Plan. On Transport, the Assembly recommends making public transport and walking the primary ways to get around the town centre, innovative approaches to fares, a low emissions zone, expansion of low carbon infrastructure and more electric vehicles. On Homes, the Assembly recommends Blackpool should commit to exceeding current energy efficiency standards, introduce an Energy MOT for existing buildings, and introduce a "Climate Contact Point" scheme to promote energy efficiency support. On Reducing Waste Across the System, the Assembly recommends increasing opportunities to recycle in Blackpool, including food waste. Blackpool Climate Assembly | Introduction 3 On Education and Awareness the Assembly recommends Supporting support for schools to plan and implement carbon reduction issues plans and more adult education on the climate. On Community Action the Assembly recommends local action groups around climate change issues, supported by local hubs and a network of community champions. On Networking and Influencing National Government the Assembly recommends supporting and promoting green business, a Climate Business Forum, and more vocal public support for achieving Net Zero from political leaders in Blackpool.
[Show full text]
Blackburn with Darwen, Blackpool and Lancashire Local Flood Risk Management Strategy (Local Strategy)
Blackburn with Darwen, Blackpool and Lancashire Appendix 5(c) Local Flood Risk Management Strategy (Local Strategy) For more information about the Lancashire and Blackpool Flood Risk Management Strategy please contact:- Flood Risk Management Teams Lancashire County Council Cuerden Offices Highways Department Cuerden Way Preston PR5 6BS Blackpool Council Bickerstaffe Hose Blackpool FY1 1AD [email protected] Blackburn with Darwen, Blackpool and Lancashire Appendix 5(c) Local Flood Risk Management Strategy (Local Strategy) CONTENTS Executive Summary to be completed at the end Introduction Flood and Water Management Act Objectives & Measures Past & Future A Joint Local Strategy Other Sources of Flooding Our Vision for Local Flood Risk Management 1. Theme One - Roles and Responsibilities for Managing Flood Risk 2. Theme Two – Understanding Risk – Local Flood Risk within Lancashire 3. Theme Three – Sustainable Flood Risk Management Spatial Planning and Sustainable Drainage 4. Theme Four – Communication and Involvement 5. Theme Five – Funding 6. Theme 6 – Achieving a Nation of Climate Champions Summary Moving Forward – Implementing and Reviewing our Strategy Appendix 1 Glossary Business Plan Blackburn with Darwen, Blackpool and Lancashire Appendix 5(c) Local Flood Risk Management Strategy (Local Strategy) Lancashire Strategic Partnership Exec Summary to be completed and signed by Members of all 3 authorities Blackburn with Darwen, Blackpool and Lancashire Appendix 5(c) Local Flood Risk Management Strategy (Local Strategy) Figure 1 - Typical Flooding from local sources By courtesy of Cumbria County Council Blackburn with Darwen, Blackpool and Lancashire Appendix 5(c) Local Flood Risk Management Strategy (Local Strategy) Introduction Flood & Water Management Act The Flood and Water Management Act 2010 (FWMA) has put many of the recommendations made by the Pitt Review into legislation and as a result County Councils and Unitary Authorities have been designated as Lead Local Flood Authorities (LLFAs).
[Show full text]
Annex F –List of Consultees
ANNEX F –LIST OF CONSULTEES Local highway authorities Leicester City Council Barnsley Metropolitan Borough Council Leicestershire County Council Bath & NE Somerset Council Lincolnshire County Council Bedfordshire County Council Liverpool City Council Birmingham City Council Local Government Association Blackburn & Darwen London Borough of Barking & Dagenham Blackpool Borough Council London Borough of Barnet Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council London Borough of Bexley Borough of Poole London Borough of Brent Bournemouth Borough Council London Borough of Bromley Bracknell Forest Borough Council London Borough of Camden Bradford Metropolitan Borough Council London Borough of Croydon Brighton and Hove City Council London Borough of Ealing Bristol City Council London Borough of Enfield Buckinghamshire County Council London Borough of Greenwich Bury Metropolitan Borough Council London Borough of Hackney Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council London Borough of Hammersmith and Cambridgeshire County Council Fulham Cheshire County Council London Borough of Haringey City of York Council London Borough of Harrow Cornwall County Council London Borough of Havering Corporation of London London Borough of Hillingdon County of Herefordshire District Council London Borough of Hounslow Coventry City Council London Borough of Islington Cumbria County Council London Borough of Lambeth Cumbria Highways London Borough of Lewisham Darlington Borough Council London Borough of Merton Derby City Council London Borough of Newham Derbyshire County Council London
[Show full text]