East Midlands Regional Spatial Strategy 2005/06

East Midlands Regional Spatial Strategy Annual Monitoring Report 2005/06
Data Analysis
4.34 This policy area is largely concerned with the
regional priorities for regeneration. Many of the
regeneration initiatives have been informed by the
Index of Multiple Deprivation 2004. It is not yet
possible to assess the reduction in the number of
districts in the East Midlands in the worst I0% most
deprived as more recent comparative data are not
available.There are problems in comparisons over
time since the component elements of indices of
deprivation tend to change. It is also likely to be the
case that improvement in the deprived areas could
occur, but because of improvements elsewhere, the
areas remain in the worst decile.
4.35 Data are provided on the proportion of
development occurring in Objective 2 ESF/ERDF
funded areas using this as an alternative measure of
a deprived area. It would appear that the amount of
development in such areas, given their land coverage
in the East Midlands, is on a par with the amount of
development in non Objective 2 areas.
Policy Commentary
4.36 The previous AMR highlighted the difficulty in
monitoring the success or otherwise of this policy
due to the lack of a specification of the extent of the
areas concerned and the consequent problem of
assigning recorded developments to them.This is
one example of a number of definitional issues that
the Regional Assembly recognises needs to be
addressed.The use of Objective 2 areas is seen as an
interim measure until this issue is fully resolved.
4.37 Regeneration of the former coalfield area of
north Derbyshire and north Nottinghamshire has
long been viewed as a regional priority in the wake
of the colliery closures.Work on Derbyshire’s
£62million Markham Vale Employment Growth Zone
project, centred on the former Markham Colliery,
continues to gather momentum.The development’s
flagship Environment Centre was officially opened in
December 2006 and access to the whole
development via the new M1 Junction 29a is
expected to be completed by December 2007.There
has already been considerable interest from firms
wishing to locate on the 85 hectare business park
which will eventually provide 5,000 jobs.
4.38 The majority of committed employment land in
Derby is outside the Objective 2 area, apart from
some significant sites such as Pride Park and parts of
the Bombardier works which are identified for
redevelopment.This is understandable in part as
Objective 2 areas are generally based on the
amalgamation of wards with high levels of
deprivation. As such, these are largely residential
areas and, while there is significant employment
activity within them (e.g. the City centre, Rolls-Royce
and Bombardier), there is perhaps less scope for
identifying large new areas for employment
development that can help meet the City’s
requirements.Where opportunities do exist, e.g. Pride
Park, they have been taken.
4.39 Within Nottinghamshire Districts, the
proportion of Objective 2 development/under
construction is around that for the East Midlands as a
whole.The proportion of commitments however (the
vast majority of which are mixed use sites) is
significantly above the Regional rate with many such
sites most notably to be found in the Sutton area in
Ashfield District.
4.40 Northamptonshire currently does not have any
of England’s 88 most deprived wards, nor is it in an
Objective 2 area.The county has undertaken
significant research into levels of deprivation and this
has resulted in a countywide neighbourhood
renewal strategy.This includes a focus to increase
enterprise within deprived areas. Current policy
direction on core spatial strategies within the county
is clear in the need to ensure development is of
benefit to both new and existing communities, with
regeneration a key consideration in future
development plans.
48