East Midlands Regional Spatial Strategy 2005/06

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Data Issues 5.2 Where possible indicators are shown that compare the East Midlands with other regions of the UK and intra-regionally. However, in many cases data is not available at the intra regional level. In addition, and where available, changes in data over time have been presented although consistent time series data is not always available. 5.3 A number of data issues were raised in the 2004/05 Annual Monitoring Report (AMR) which have been addressed in assembling the data for the 2005/06 Report. For example the questionnaire used to collect information on Sustainable Drainage Schemes (SuDS) requested information on sites rather than dwellings. More authorities had completed a Landscape Character Assessment and a number indicated they were in the process of undertaking such an Assessment. Such work in progress is not always picked up in the indicator definitions. 5.4 Much of the information gathered comes from secondary sources and from information provided by organisations such as the Environment Agency. There are still some indicators where information is difficult to obtain e.g. data on the area of new woodland created. 5.5 Issues remain regarding the definition of some indicators and whether they are either logical in the way that they are formulated or measure the impact of the policy concerned. 5.6 Some indicators are defined in terms of the cases or case studies rather than in quantitative terms. While the use of specific examples provides valuable qualitative information it is not clear how such qualitative indicators can be used for general comparisons or for time series analysis. Policy 27: Protecting and Enhancing the Region’s Natural and Cultural Assets The cultural assets of the region include listed buildings, conservation areas, historic parks and gardens, registered battlefields and scheduled ancient monuments Targets: • No net loss of natural or cultural assets • The Government’s Public Service Agreement (PSA) target is to have 95% of the Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) areas in favourable or recovering condition by 2010 Indicators: • Cases of damage to natural and cultural assets and compensatory measures • Improvements in the condition of land classified as SSSI Results: Significant Effects Indicator Figures 5.1 a and b- SSSI condition Sept 2006 England East Midlands Source: Natural England East Midlands Regional Spatial Strategy Annual Monitoring Report 2005/06 77
Table 5.1 - County SSSI condition Sept 2006 % Area Meeting PSA Target 05 % Area Meeting PSA Target 06 % Area Favourable % Area Unfavourable Recovering % Area Unfavourable No Change % Area Unfavourable Declining % Area Destroyed / Part Destroyed Derbyshire 35.67% 51.89% 18.26% 33.63% 29.63% 18.48% 0.00% Leicestershire 66.86% 67.25% 22.32% 44.93% 24.34% 8.18% 0.23% Lincolnshire 60.65% 74.30% 59.64% 14.66% 0.48% 25.23% 0.00% Northamptonshire 70.42% 84.79% 60.33% 24.46% 12.93% 2.13% 0.14% Nottinghamshire 67.23% 69.93% 11.58% 58.35% 24.78% 5.29% 0.00% Source: Natural England East Midlands Regional Spatial Strategy Annual Monitoring Report 2005/06 5.7 The condition of the SSSI land in England is assessed by Natural England. There are six reportable condition categories: favourable; unfavourable recovering; unfavourable no change; unfavourable declining; part destroyed and destroyed. If a SSSI is currently assessed as being in unfavourable no change, unfavourable declining, part destroyed or destroyed condition it is described as being in adverse condition and is ‘not meeting the PSA target’. If a SSSI is currently assessed as being in favourable or unfavourable recovering condition it is described as ‘meeting the PSA target’. Favourable condition means that the SSSI is being adequately conserved and is meeting its conservation objectives. However, there is scope for the enhancement of these sites. Data Analysis 5.8 As of September 2006, 68% of the SSSI areas in the East Midlands were classed as favourable or unfavourable recovering, i.e. meeting the PSA requirement. In England, as of September 2006, 73% of the SSSI areas were classed as favourable or unfavourable recovering. The East Midlands still lags behind the nation as a whole. However during the monitoring period 2005/06 the East Midlands has made significant progress with the proportion of land classed as favourable or unfavourable recovering, rising from 52%, as of September 2005, to 68% at September 2006. The increase for England over the same period was 68% to 73%.The condition of blanket bog in the Dark Peak is the greatest contributor to unfavourable condition. Moorland restoration work undertaken by Moors for the Future and its partners - the National Trust and private landowners - have moved this figure upwards considerably but the programme is in jeopardy due to the uncertainty over future ESA grants support. 5.9 Information at county level reflects the significant progress made in the region towards achieving the PSA target. All counties have shown an increase in the SSSI areas classed as favourable or unfavourable recovering (Table 5.1) with three counties - Derbyshire, Lincolnshire and Northamptonshire - registering substantial increases. Policy Commentary Cultural Assets 5.10 The loss of landscape or townscape character have proved difficult aspects to monitor using objective methodologies, although there is evidence that local authorities are preparing Conservation Area Appraisals, which will define the special character of these areas, in response to the Best Value Performance Indicator (BVPI 219). 5.11 At present, monitoring is focusing on assets ‘at risk’ rather than a systematic collection of loss or damage to historic assets.This approach allows English Heritage, local authorities and their partners to target resources on saving these assets from loss or further damage.The 2004/5 Annual Monitoring Report did report on the loss of parkland between 1918 and 1995.This data is now available by local authority area from the Heritage 78
Page 1 and 2:
East Midlands Regional Spatial Stra
Page 3 and 4:
contents Executive Summary 9 Sectio
Page 5 and 6:
Policy 36 - A Regional Approach to
Page 7 and 8:
Policy 11 - Spatial Priorities for
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
SECTION 1 introduction East Midland
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
SECTION 2 key points and actions IN
Page 17 and 18:
Key Points Take up of Landscape Cha
Page 19 and 20:
SECTION 8 Sub-Areas Key Points Key
Page 21 and 22:
Further research and joint working
Page 23 and 24:
2.8 One action from the 2004/05 AMR
Page 25 and 26: Policy No. Policy Title 19 Regional
Page 27 and 28: Table 3.2- Percentage of New Dwelli
Page 29 and 30: Table 3.4 - Housing Provision Accor
Page 31 and 32: Housing Provision and Supply Table
Page 33 and 34: Table 3.9 - Affordable Housing Comp
Page 35 and 36: East Midlands Regional Spatial Stra
Page 37 and 38: SECTION 4 economy East Midlands Reg
Page 39 and 40: Policy No. Policy Title Key Indicat
Page 41 and 42: Policy 2: Locational Priorities for
Page 45 and 46: Table 4.5 - Comparing Employment Ra
Page 49 and 50: Figure 4.6 - Floorspace of Factorie
Page 51 and 52: Table 4.10 - Completed 2005/06 Empl
Page 53 and 54: Table 4.14 - Employment Land Losses
Page 59 and 60: Name Districts Area (Hectares) Reta
Page 61 and 62: Table 4.20 Retail Gains Total Commi
Page 63 and 64: Results: Table 4.22 - New business
Page 65 and 66: Table 4.24 - Continued Jobs in 2003
Page 69 and 70: Table 4.28 - Spend by Visitors (Sta
Page 71 and 72: SECTION 5 environment East Midlands
Page 73 and 74: INTRODUCTION 5.1 This section provi
Page 75: Policy No. Policy Title Key Indicat
Page 79 and 80: Results: Significant Effects Indica
Page 81 and 82: 5.24 Although this proxy indicator
Page 87 and 88: Data Analysis 5.51 The data on plan
Page 89 and 90: Figure 5.8 - East Midlands General
Page 95 and 96: Figure 5.12 - Number of Sites by En
Page 97 and 98: SECTION 6 minerals, aggregates & wa
Page 99 and 100: Data Issues 6.2 This section contai
Page 101 and 102: Table 6.4 Comparison of East Midlan
Page 105 and 106: Table 6.8 - Existing MSW Capacity 2
Page 107 and 108: Figure 6.1 Source: Defra Municipal
Page 109 and 110: Table 6.16 - Best Value Performance
Page 111 and 112: Table 6.20 - East Midlands’ sub-r
Page 113 and 114: SECTION 7 transport Key Points Chan
Page 117 and 118: Policy No. Policy Title Key Indicat
Page 121 and 122: Cycle Routes - Significant Effect I
Page 125 and 126: Figure 7.4 - Bus and light rail jou
Page 127 and 128:
Table 7.11 - Regional expenditure o
Page 129 and 130:
Data Analysis 7.43 The tonnage of r
Page 131 and 132:
Data Analysis 7.45 After a period o
Page 133 and 134:
Policy No. Policy Title Key Indicat
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Results: 8.12 There are a number of
Page 143 and 144:
Table 8.6 - Change in number of job
Page 145 and 146:
Table 8.9 - Index of Multiple Depri
Page 147 and 148:
Table 8.11 - Employment Rates (perc
Page 149 and 150:
Table 8.13 - Employment Rates Derby
Page 151 and 152:
Policy 11: Spatial Priorities for D
Page 153 and 154:
Table 8.17- Continued Broxtowe Gedl
Page 155 and 156:
Figure 8.5 - Index of Deprivation i
Page 157 and 158:
APPENDIX 1 data sources and referen
Page 159 and 160:
Section 7 - Transport: • Local Au
show all

East Midlands Regional Spatial Strategy 2005/06

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?