Home - Lancaster City Council - Annual Monitoring Report 2010 2010... · Collateandconsider...

Annual Monitoring Report 2010

41 Executive Summary

62 Introduction

62.1 Background - The New Planning System

72.2 The Role of Monitoring

82.3 Existing and Potential Information Base

162.4 Content of the Annual Monitoring Report

173 Spatial Portrait of the District

173.1 Spatial Portrait

254 Progress on Implementing the Lancaster District Local Development Scheme

254.1 Introduction

254.2 LDS Documents List

264.3 Progress Summary

264.4 Statement of Community Involvement

264.5 Core Strategy (DPD1)

284.6 Development Management Policies (DPD2)

294.7 Land Allocations and Proposals Map (DPD3)

314.8 Morecambe Area Action Plan

324.9 Sustainability Appraisal

334.10 Supplementary Planning Documents

334.11 Proposed Revisions to Local Development Scheme

355 Implementation: Outcome and Effects

355.1 Introduction

355.2 Business Development

385.3 Housing

425.4 Accessibility and Transport

455.5 Local Services

475.6 Flood Protection and Water Quality

485.7 Bio-Diversity

505.8 Renewable Energy

546 Special Issues

577 Key Findings for 2009/2010

Lancaster City Council - Local Development Framework


8 Developing the Monitoring Framework 59

Appendices

601 Data Tables for Key Contextual Indicators

772 Core Output Indicators

853 Local Output Indicators

994 Significant Effects Indicators

1045 Lancaster District Local Plan Policies

1196 Glossary

Lancaster City Council - Local Development Framework

1 Executive Summary1.0.1 This document is the Lancaster District Local Development Framework (LDF) Annual Monitoring Reportfor the financial year 2009/10. This is the sixth AMR that Lancaster City Council has prepared and published.The AMR establishes the monitoring framework for the district reporting on the implementation of existingplanning policies as well as the evidence base which will be used to support the preparation of future planningpolicies.

1.0.2 Lancaster City Council has made considerable progress on the production of its LDF and is the firstauthority in the north west to have a Development Plan Document (DPD) found sound under the new planningsystem. The Core Strategy which establishes the strategic vision and policies for the district was found soundby an independent Planning Inspector in June 2008 and was subsequently adopted by the City Council on the23rd July 2008. This is the first DPD to be prepared by the City Council.

1.0.3 Following adoption of the Core Strategy the City Council are now looking to progress preparation ofthe next phase of the LDF. This will include the following elements:

A Land Allocations document – identifies land to be developed for housing, employment or retail, landwhich should be protected and safeguarded from future development and land needed for futureinfrastructure needs such as new roads;A Development Management document – establishes the detailed policies that the Council will take intoaccount when it decides whether to grant planning permission for new development.An Area Action Plan for Morecambe - identifies the development, conservation and change needed tosecure lasting regeneration gains for Morecambe.

2.1.3 Together with the Core Strategy these documents will set the planning policy framework for the Districtfor the next 15 years providing increased certainty and guidance for developers and members of the public onboth the locational requirements of new development and the detailed design and sustainability principles theymust achieve.

2.1.4 The AMR will be essential to the production of these DPDs providing an important source of informationfor determining the policy direction within them as well as the framework for monitoring their implementationand delivery.

1.0.4 Monitoring policy implementation is achieved by reporting against a broad range of indicators. ThisAMR identifies and reports against four types of indicators:

Contextual Indicators: These provide a snapshot of local circumstances and conditions at a point in timeand, by being regularly monitored, provide a means of determining how the implementation of the LDF,and the many other plans and programmes, are influencing the district's characteristics. A wide range ofcontextual indicators are reported in this AMR.Core Output Indicators: Local Authorities have in the past been required to monitor a set of Core OutputIndicators. These were set by the previous Government and were designed to enable the performanceof authorities to be consistently compared across the Country. Whilst there is some doubt as to thecontinuation of Core Output indicators the City Council has, for consistency, continued to monitor themin this report.Local Output Indicators: These address outputs of policies not covered by Core Output indicators. TheCouncil in support of the Core Strategy have developed a number of local output indicators. These havebeen tailored to reflect Core Strategy policies and will be key to measuring policy implementation. Additionallocal output indicators will be developed as further DPDs are produced.Significant Effect Indicators: These are products of the sustainability appraisal process. They allowcomparisons to bemade between the anticipated or predicted effects of a policy on society, the environmentand the economy and the actual effects that are measured during implementation.

Lancaster City Council - Local Development Framework4


1.0.5 Taken together the indicators provide a comprehensive evidence base on which to inform policydevelopment and monitor policy implementation. The City Council will continue to develop the monitoringframework in association with the preparation of DPDs and the sustainability appraisal process.

5Lancaster City Council - Local Development Framework

2 IntroductionPurpose of this publication

2.1 This document is the Lancaster District Local Development Framework (LDF) Annual Monitoring Report(AMR) for the financial year 2009/2010. This is the sixth LDF AMR that Lancaster City Council has preparedand published.

2.2 The AMR establishes the monitoring framework for the district reporting on the implementation of existingplanning policies as well as the evidence base which will be used to support the preparation of future planningpolicies. Importantly the AMR also reports on progress in preparing future LDF documents.

2.3 The main aims of the AMR are therefore to:

Describe the purpose of monitoring and its role in the preparation of the Lancaster District LDF;Describe the information bases that are maintained by Lancaster City Council in its role as the planningauthority for the district;Monitor the spatial portrait of the District;Describe progress to date on the preparation of future LDF documents;Report on the results for Core and Local output indicators (where information is currently available);Monitor a set of significant effect indicators used in the sustainability assessment of future LDF documents(where information is available);Report key findings for the year 2009/2010 and the implications of these for future LDF documents;Report progress on document preparation in the current financial year 2010/11;Anticipate future progress on preparing LDF documents; andDiscuss how future monitoring needs will be addressed.

2.1 Background - The New Planning System2.1.1 Lancaster City Council is the Local Planning Authority for Lancaster district. One of the City Council’smain responsibilities is the preparation of the Local Development Framework (LDF). The LDF is a new systemof planning introduced under the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. Under this system existingplanning policy in the Local Plan will eventually be replaced by a series of local Development Plan Documents(DPDs) which together form the LDF for the district. Together the DPD’s set the spatial vision for the districtand determine the policy framework to deliver it.

2.1.2 Following adoption of the Core Strategy in July 2008 the City Council are now looking to progresspreparation of the next phase of the LDF. This will include the following elements:

A Land Allocations document – identifies land to be developed for housing, employment or retail, landwhich should be protected and safeguarded from future development and land needed for futureinfrastructure needs such as new roads;A Development Management document – establishes the detailed policies that the Council will take intoaccount when it decides whether to grant planning permission for new development.An Area Action Plan for Morecambe - identifies the development, conservation and change needed tosecure lasting regeneration gains for Morecambe.

2.1.3 Together with the Core Strategy these documents will set the planning policy framework for the Districtfor the next 15 years providing increased certainty and guidance for developers and members of the public onboth the locational requirements of new development and the detailed design and sustainability principles theymust achieve.



2.1.4 The AMR will be essential to the production of these DPDs providing an important source of informationfor determining the policy direction within them as well as the framework for monitoring their implementationand delivery.

2.2 The Role of Monitoring2.2.1 The process of monitoring, evaluation and review is essential to the delivery of the LDF framework. Itprovides the main mechanism for reviewing the implementation of DPD’s and evaluating the effects, or outputsof policies. The identification of outputs and trends also ensures that a comprehensive evidence base isdeveloped which can be used to inform the production of future DPD’s. Importantly where the monitoring processreveals that policies are not contributing to the achievement of the LDF aims and objectives the AMR providesthe Council with the opportunity to consider the merits of continuing with, or alternatively, revising these policies.

2.2.2 The AMR reports on two types of indicators - contextual indicators and output indicators:

Contextual indicators – these monitor the spatial portrait of the District providing information on a rangeof issues including the demographics of the District, socio-cultural characteristics, economic andenvironmental characteristics as well as issues surrounding transport matters and social inclusion. Togetherthey provide a backdrop against which the effects of policies can be considered. The annual assessmentof contextual indicators enables the Authority to understand how the characteristics of the district arechanging over time.Output indicators – these monitor the direct impacts of implementing planning policies. Output indicatorsare further sub-divided into:

Core output indicators– Local Authorities have in the past been required to monitor a set of CoreOutput Indicators. These were set by the previous Government and were designed to enable theperformance of authorities to be consistently compared across the Country. Whilst there is somedoubt as to the continuation of Core Output indicators the City Council has, for consistency, continuedto monitor them in this report.Local output indicators – these address outputs of policies not covered by Core Output indicatorsand are designed to ensure that local impacts and benefits are monitored. The Council in supportof the Core Strategy have developed a number of local output indicators. These have been tailoredto reflect Core Strategy policies and will be key to measuring policy implementation. Additional localoutput indicators will be developed as further DPDs are produced.Significant effect indicators – these are products of the sustainability appraisal process. They allowcomparisons to be made between the anticipated or predicted effects of a policy on society, theenvironment and the economy and the actual effects that are reported during implementation. LocalAuthorities are advised to develop a sufficient number of significant effect indicators so that, togetherwith the core and local output indicators, a robust assessment of policy implementation is provided.

2.2.4 Taken together the indicators provide a comprehensive evidence base on which to inform policydevelopment and monitor policy implementation.


2.3 Existing and Potential Information Base2.3.1 In addition to the AMR the City Council have produced and commissioned a number of important evidencebase documents. The documents provide a valuable source of monitoring data, particularly those compiled ona consistent and regular basis over a number of financial years. The most significant of these documents arereported below.

Table 1 – Existing Information Base

AnticipatedFutureActivity

PublishedPurposeDocument NameCategory

Community Development, Housing and Health Evidence

The SHMAwill undergoa full reviewevery fiveyears

August 2008

Prepared by DavidCouttie Associates onbehalf of the CityCouncil

Provides a comprehensiveassessment of the Lancasterdistrict housing market area.It provides an assessment ofdemand and need within thehousingmarket area providing

Strategic HousingMarketAssessment(SHMA)

HousingNeed

detailed information on tenure,type, affordability and thelocation of need.

Updateundertakenin 2007. Full

2004


Report on the housing needssurvey of the districtspopulation. Describes housingneeds by size and type.

Housing NeedsStudy

reviewanticipated in2011.

Full reviewanticipated in2011.

2007


Updates information containedin the 2004 Housing NeedsStudy

Housing NeedsUpdate Report

Review notimminent.

September 2006

Prepared by ECOTECConsultants on behalfof Government Officefor the North West

Reports on the identificationand use of local housingmarket areas.

Study into theIdentification andUse of LocalHousing MarketAreas for thedevelopment ofthe RegionalSpatial Strategy inthe North West



Review notimminent.

2008

Prepared by NevinLeather Associates onbehalf of 4NW.

The study looked atboundaries defined in theabove study. New informationwas also fed into the processprimarily using travel to workdata and patterns of migration.

Definition ofHousing MarketAreas in the NW

Review notimminent.

2007

Prepared byUniversities of Salfordand Birmingham.Commissioned by 4NW

Assessment of the need forgypsy and travelleraccommodation and serviceprovision in the north westover the next decade.

North WestRegional Gypsyand TravellerAccommodationand RelatedServicesAssessment

Review notimminent.

2007

Prepared byUniversities of Salfordand Birmingham.Commissioned by 4NW

Assessment of the need forgypsy and travelleraccommodation and serviceprovision in Lancashire overthe next decade.

LancashireSub-RegionalGypsy andTravellerAccommodationand RelatedServicesAssessment

Review notimminent.

2010

Prepared by AdamsIntegra on behalf of theCity Council.

Tests the circumstances inwhich the district's housingmarket can deliver affordablehousing.

AffordableHousing ViabilityStudy

Producedannually witha base dateof the 1st April

J 2010

Prepared by LancasterCity Council

Reports on housingcompletions within the Districtfor the period 1st April 2003 tothe 31st March 2010 and thelong term delivery of housing

Housing LandMonitoring Report

Housing LandSupply

land supply across the Districtfor the 1st April 2010 to 31stMarch 2024.

Kept underreview aspart of the

March 2009

Prepared by Atkins Ltdin conjunction withLambert SmithHampton on behalf ofthe City Council.

Identifies and assesses thedeliverability of potentialhousing sites across thedistrict. Sites are assessedbased on their suitability,achievability and availabilityfor housing.

Strategic HousingLand AvailabilityAssessment(SHLAA) housing land

monitoringprocess.

Supersededby theSHLAA.

February 2008


Updates information containedin the 2004 Urban PotentialStudy. Examines the potentialland resource for housingdevelopment within the district.

Review of theUrban PotentialStudy for Housingin LancasterDistrict


Review notimminent

2009

Prepared by Atkins Ltdin conjunction withLambert SmithHampton on behalf ofthe City Council.

Identifies key brownfield sitesacross the district andexamines the obstaclescurrently preventing theirdevelopment as well as themechanisms to overcomethem.

Local BrownfieldLand Study

BrownfieldLand Delivery

Review notimminent

January 2007

Prepared by NorthLancashire NHS Trust

Reports on public health datafor the district.

Public HealthProfile

Health

20112001Provides key demographicstatistics from the census.

Census HandbookPopulation

Economy and Transport Evidence

Review notimminent

January 2004


Examines town centre healthindicators

Shopping andTown CentresMonitoring Report

RetailMonitoring

Updated in2009

2006

Prepared by WhiteYoung Green on behalfof the City Council

Report of survey of retailcapacity and town centrecatchment areas

Retail Study

Updated in2009

September 2006


Considerations of initial reportfindings in light of thenemerging policy guidance(RSS), re-estimates ofpopulation and expenditurefigures

Addendum toRetail Study forperiod 2016-2021

Review notimminent

June, 2009


Update of the convenienceand comparisonmodels in theLancaster Retail Study

Retail UpdateStudy

Review notimminent

August 2006


Provides information anddescriptive account ofemployment information andstructure of the local economy.

Local EconomyMonitoring Report

EmploymentLandMonitoring



Review notimminent

October 2005

Prepared by Regenerison behalf of the CityCouncil

Baseline analysis of the localeconomy, identifying andassessing key economicdrivers of the economy

Lancaster andMorecambeEconomic BaseLine Study

Review notimminent

September 2006

Prepared byconsultants Regenerisand King Sturge onbehalf of the CityCouncil

Employment premises and siteassessment

Employment LandStudy andPremisesAssessmentReport

Review notimminent

October 2008

Prepared by Atkins Ltdin conjunction withLambert SmithHampton on behalf ofthe City Council

Review of continued suitabilityof employment sites acrossthe district. The informationwill be used to inform theallocations of sites in the LandUse Allocations DPD.

PartialEmployment LandReview

Regularlyreviewed

2008

Prepared by Council’sTourism Service andupdated in 2008

Assessment of tourismdemand and provision acrossLancaster District.

Lancaster DistrictTourism Strategy

Tourism

To be takenforward viathe

October 2005

Prepared by DTZ PiedaConsulting

Aims to support MorecambeAction Plan Partnership andother partners to achieve thevision for Morecambe

MorecambeResort Action Plan

MorecambeArea ActionPlan.

Regularlyreviewed

2007

Executive summary ofkey figures prepared byLancaster City Council

Provides information on visitornumbers, expenditure and theeconomic impact of tourism inthe District

STEAM Reports

Regularlyreviewed

2008

Prepared by England’sNorthwest ResearchService

Provides visitor opinions andprofiles for key attractions andcentres within the District.Reports are available forLancaster and Morecambe

DestinationBenchmarkingReports


Review notimminent

2008

Prepared by FaberMaunsell in 2008 onbehalf of Lancashire

Reports on a wide range ofinformation about transport inthe urban area of Lancasterand Morecambe andproposals for improvement

The LancasterTransport Strategy

Transport

County Council andLancaster andMorecambe VisionBoard

Ongoingupdates

2010

Prepared by LancashireCounty Council

Supporting information to theplanning application for theHeysham to M6 link

Completion of theHeysham M6 Link

Ongoingupdates

2010


Information on cycling andwalking routes across theDistrict.

Lancaster Cyclingand Walking Map

Review notimminent

June 2005

Prepared by LancashireCounty Council

Assesses the extent to whichrights of way meet the presentand likely future needs of thepublic.

Lancashire Rightsof WayImprovement Planfor Lancashire

Review notimminent

Prepared by theHighways Agency

10 year strategy setting outthe Highways Agency actionsand expenditure for theidentified route.

The M6 Junction20-44 Warringtonto the ScottishBorder RouteManagementStrategy

Review notimminent

2010

Prepared by NetworkRail

Identifies opportunities forimproving local connections,improving rail links betweensome of the bigger towns and

Route UtilisationStrategies forLancashire andCumbria

making the railway a moreattractive option forcommuters.

Review notimminent.

2008

Network Rail

Scoping Document on routeutilisation across Lancashireand Cumbria.

Route UtilisationStrategies forLancashire andCumbria



Review notimminent.

June 2006

Prepared by QuantumStrategy andTechnology Ltd on

Identifies the potential fordevelopment of renewableenergy and recyclingindustries in Lancaster andMorecambe and assesses the

Development ofNew RenewableEnergy andRecyclingIndustries forLancaster andMorecambe

Energy

behalf of the Lancasterand Morecambe Visionboard.

potential contribution ofrenewable energy toLancaster district’s energyconsumption.

Review notimminent.

February 2005

Prepared by Lovejoy onbehalf of LancashireCounty Council

Assessment of landscapesensitivity to wind energyacross Lancashire. Existinglandscape character areasform the basis for the study.

LandscapeSensitivity to WindEnergyDevelopment inLancashire

Landscapes are assessed fortheir ability to absorb changeand the scale of change thatcan be accommodated.

Environmental Protection, Enhancement and Recreation Evidence

N/aMarch 2004Identification of air qualitymanagement area inLancaster City Centre

Lancaster AirQualityManagement Area

Air and LandQuality

Prepared by the CityCouncil’s Health andStrategic HousingServices

N/a2007Identification of air qualitymanagement area in Carnforth

Carnforth AirQualityManagement Area Prepared by the City

Council’s Health andStrategic HousingServices

Work isongoing

No formal studycurrently exists. Workis ongoing

District wide assessment ofcontaminated land –addressing issues andimplications

ContaminatedLand Survey

Update beinginvestigated

September 2007

Prepared by Jacobs onbehalf of the CityCouncil

Assessment and over-view offlood risk across the district.

Strategic FloodRisk Assessment

Flooding


Publicationanticipated in2010

Publication anticipatedin 2010

Prepared byEnvironment Agency

Identifies how flood risk will bemanaged for the next 50-100years.

River LuneCatchmentManagement Plan

Review notimminent

Published 1999

Prepared byMorecambe BayShorelineManagementPlan Partnership

Provides initial guidance forshoreline management andthe development ofsustainable polices for coastaldefences.

ShorelineManagement Plan

Review notimminent

December 2000

Prepared byEnvironmentalResources

Classifies the landscape intodistinct landscape typesidentifying key characteristicsand sensitivities as well as theprinciples to guidedevelopment.

LandscapeCharacterAssessment

Landscapeand UrbanCharacterAssessments

management (ERM) onbehalf of LancashireCounty Council

Review notimminent

March 2007

Published by NorthWest DevelopmentAgency and EnglishHeritage

Identifies a small number ofhistoric towns and cities asstrategic priorities for tourisminfrastructure and productdevelopment

Historic Townsand Cities inEngland’s NorthWest

Review notimminent

December 2007

Prepared by PMPConsultants on behalfof the City Council

Report of survey of recreationand open space within thedistrict and identification offuture need.

Open Space Study(PPG17 Study)

Leisure andRecreation

Review notimminent

October 2010

Refresh undertaken byLancaster City Council

Refresh of 2007 Open SpaceStudy

Open Space Study(PPG17 Study)Refresh

Review notimminent

July 2007

Prepared by WhiteYoung GreenConsultants on behalfof the City Council

Report of survey ofcommercial leisure facilities inthe District.

Lancaster District(Commercial)Leisure Study

Infrastructure



Will bereviewed aspart of the

2009

Lancaster City Council

Estimates the total amount ofmoney being spent onInfrastructure in the Districtover the next 10 years.

InfrastructureSchedule

Infrastructure

LandAllocationsprocess.

Table 2.1


2.4 Content of the Annual Monitoring Report2.4.1 The Report is divided into the following sections:

Spatial portrait of the district as defined by the contextual indicators;Implementation of the district Local Development SchemeAnalysis of output indicators based on the following themes:

Business Development

Housing

Accessibility and Transport

Local Services

Flood Protection and Water Quality

Biodiversity; and

Renewable Energy

Issues, challenges and opportunities facing the district.

2.4.2 A comprehensive list of all the indicators monitored together with the data collected is contained in theappendices to this report. The relationship with saved policies of the Local Plan is also reported. Saved policieswill continue to be monitored until they are replaced by equivalent policies in DPDs.



3 Spatial Portrait of the District3.1 Spatial Portrait3.1.1Lancaster is the most northerly district in Lancashire covering an area of 565 square kilometres. It containsthe coastal towns of Morecambe and Heysham, the historic city of Lancaster, the railway town of Carnforth andan extensive rural area; over 90% of the District is classified as rural. The District is bound to the south by theLancashire Authorities of Wyre and Ribble Valley, to the east by the North Yorkshire Authority of Craven Valley,and to the north by the Cumbrian Authority of South Lakeland.

Lancaster District

3.1.1 Revisions to population data across the Country has resulted in adjustments to the mid year populationestimates. For Lancaster District this has resulted in a downward adjustment with a population of 139,800recorded for 2009, a 0.2% increase from the adjusted 2008 figure of 139,500. Net migration was responsiblefor all of this increase. Revisions to the data means that the District no longer has the largest population inLancashire with the two unitary authorities of Blackpool and Blackburn with Darwen recording larger populations.


Population by District, 2009

3.1.2 The presence of two Universities within the District continues to skew the age profile of the District witha higher proportion of the population recorded in the 20-24 age cohort. This is not reflective of the district aswhole with the concentration of students in a select number of wards in the Lancaster South and LancasterNorth sub-areas having a significant impact on the overall age profile of the district. This is most evident in thecomparison of age profiles for the main sub-areas of the district Lancaster South, Lancaster North, Morecambeand Heysham, Carnforth and rural areas(i).

i Data at a ward level is presently only available for the 2007 mid year estimate – the age profile by sub-area is basedon 2007 data.



2009 Age Profile for Lancaster District

Age profile by sub-area


3.1.3 The population of the district is expected to continue to grow with a projected increase of 13.8% expectedby 2033, taking the population to 158,700 and making it the largest district in Lancashire. The district is expectedto have the largest projected population growth across all Lancashire authorities.

3.1.4 Despite the current economic downturn unemployment figures for the district have fallen over the last12 month period with 2.9% of the working age population now classed as unemployed, this compares to 3.1%for the previous monitoring period. Unemployment levels remain below the North West average which for thesame period was recorded at 4.4% of the working age population. For the purpose of this indicator unemploymentlevels are measured by the number of people claiming job seekers allowance.

3.1.5 Unemployment levels continue to vary across the district with the main concentration of unemploymentlocated in the Morecambe and Heysham sub-area. The highest concentration of unemployment is experiencedin the Harbour ward with above levels of average unemployment recorded, 6% of the working age populationis classified as unemployed in this ward. The lowest level of unemployment was recorded in Silverdale wherejust 0.4% of the working age population were classified as unemployed.

Unemployment by ward

3.1.6 Affordability remains an issue with an increase in average house prices recording during the 2009/10monitoring period. This follows falls in prices for the previous monitoring period. The 2009/10 monitoring periodrevealed a rise of 10% in average house prices in the district from £143,131 in the first quarter of 2008/09 to£157,998 in the same quarter in 2009/10. The local combination of relatively low wages and relatively highhouse prices means that in 2010 the ratio of relative housing affordability in Lancaster District, that is, the ratioof the median gross annual pay to the average cost of a terraced house was 6.3:1. This is slightly higher thenthe 5.7:1 ratio recorded in the previous monitoring period. Reductions in medium gross annual pay coupledwith continuing difficulties in obtaining a mortgage are likely to add to this problem with affordability remainingan issue for many residents in the district.



3.1.7 The District continues to be renowned for both the quality and diversity of its natural environment withmany of its assets protected by local, national and international designations. These include the Arnside/SilverdaleAONB and the Forest of Bowland AONB, as well as the largest area of wetland in Britain at MorecambeBay.A rich variety of habitats are present across these areas, many of which are recognised in the UK and LancashireBiodiversity Action Plans and are afforded protected status.

Environmental Designations

3.1.8 The rich diversity of the natural environment is complemented by a high quality built heritage whichincludes 1,345 listed buildings, 38 Conservation Areas and 38 Scheduled Monuments. The addition of CannonHill Conservation Area increased the number of Conservation Areas in the district from the 37 recorded lastyear. The City Council is currently in the process of reviewing its 38 conservation areas. 8 have now beenappraised with appraisals available for Morecambe, Bolton-le-Sands, Brookhouse, Halton, Hornby, Slyne,Warton and Wray. The Conservation Studio has been appointed to carry out a review of the LancasterConservation area. A review of local heritage assets is also being undertaken and will be used to identify thoseassets of significance for the district.


Lancaster Town Hall

3.1.9 Residents continue to benefit from a high quality transport network with quality bus services operatingbetween the main urban areas and frequent rail services along the west coast mainline. Together these provideexcellent connectivity and accessibility both within the District and externally with the wider North West. Inaddition to reliable and frequent public transport the district also has an excellent cycling network with over75km of cycle path.

3.1.10 Rail usage has continued to increase with 1,716,000 passenger journeys recorded at the District’smain train station in Lancaster between 2008 and 2009, a 4% increase from the previous year. The importanceof Lancaster Station at both a District and sub-regional level is highlighted by the fact that Lancashire CountyCouncil has identified Lancaster Station as the third most important rail station in the County. The presence of5 other rail stations across the District further improves rail accessibility for residents and commuters.



District railway stations

Key Issues and Opportunities:

3.1.11 The spatial portrait has revealed a number of issues which will need to be considered as part of futureDevelopment Plan preparation in the district. These include:

Population growth. The district is expected to grow by 13.8% by 2033. Meeting the needs of this growingpopulation will be one of the key issues for the next phase of the LDF.


Age profile. Over 9% of the population is aged between 20 and 24 reflecting the large concentration ofstudents within the district. Whilst this presents a number of benefits for the district in terms of economicactivity and employment opportunities, it also creates problems in terms of housing and service provision.This is especially relevant for a number of wards in the Lancaster sub-area where students are noted tobe concentrated.The implications of the economic slowdown. Whilst unemployment levels within the district have fallenover the last 12 month period the district remains vulnerable to wider economic conditions. This is likelyto be especially true over the coming 12 month period as the impacts of the Comprehensive SpendingReview begin to be felt. The high concentration of public sector employment within the district makes itespecially vulnerable to any reductions in this sector. Opportunities to diversify the employment marketand provide new attractive employment and business opportunities should be investigated through theLDF.Housing affordability – this remains an issue. Whilst house prices had decreased in the 2008/09 perioddata for 2009/10 reveals an increase in price with the average house price increasing by 10% from£143,131 to £157,998. Delivery of affordable housing also remains low with only 29 affordable dwellingscompleted between the 1st April 2009 and 31st March 2010. Future LDF documents will need to addressthis issue.A high quality and diverse natural and built environment with many of its assets protected by local, nationaland international designations. This needs to be protected and enhanced through the LDF system.Good levels of accessibility with residents benefiting from good public transport links providing excellentconnectivity and accessibility both within the district and externally with the wider north west. Opportunitiesto strengthen and build on these links and minimise the environmental impacts of traffic should beinvestigated.



4 Progress on Implementing the Lancaster District LocalDevelopment Scheme4.1 Introduction4.1.1 The project plan for the implementation of Lancaster’s LDF is called the Local Development Scheme(LDS). This document provides a timetable for the preparation of future Development Plan Documents detailingkey milestones, the resources for preparation and the risks associated with preparation.

4.1.2 Following approval from the Secretary of State the City Council adopted a revised LDS in April 2010.The revised LDS updates the previous timetable for document preparation contained in the 2007 LDS takingaccount of new guidelines and regulations for the preparation of Development Plan Documents.

4.1.3 The revised LDS covers the period April 2010 to March 2015.

4.1.4 This part of the AMR monitors LDF preparation against the timetable set out in the revised LDS. TheLDSmay need to be revised further in light of the reforms to the planning system proposed by the new CoalitionGovernment.

4.2 LDS Documents List4.2.1 The AMR considers progress on the following DPD documents:

Development Management PoliciesLand Allocations and Proposals MapMorecambe Area Action Plan

4.2.2 In addition to the above DPDs the Council also intends to produce Supplementary Planning Documents(SPDs) on:

Planning ObligationsMeeting Housing NeedsDesign, and, Sustainable Development and Climate Change

4.2.3 The LDS also describes the Council's intention to prepare additional SPDs as and when resourcespermit. Whilst the LDS does not provide a commitment to the preparation of further SPDs, the list of potentialfuture guidance includes:

Area based strategies for significant development sitesCarnforth Spatial StrategySouth Heysham Spatial StrategySkerton Spatial StrategyDocuments furthering the implementation of Conservation Area Appraisals and Conservation AreaManagement PlansDevelopment briefs for areas identified in the Land Allocations DPD


4.3 Progress Summary

Next stage 2010/11CorrectiveAction

Required

Defined MilestonesDocumentName

-NoAdopted 12th June 2006Statement ofCommunityInvolvement

-NoAdopted 23rd January 2008The CoreStrategy

Collation and consideration ofresponses and evidence base -development of options.

NoCommenced Regulation 25Issues and Options consultationJune 2010

DevelopmentManagementPolicies


NoCommenced Regulation 25Issues and Options consultationJune 2010

Land Allocationsand ProposalsMap


NoCommenced Regulation 25Issues and Options consultationApril 2010

Morecambe AreaAction Plan

Not an LDS Document, but included here for completenessSustainabilityAppraisalScoping Report

Timetable for SPDs no longer requiredin LDS. SPDs will be progressed asand when resources and prioritiespermit.

NoNo further progress has beenmade.

SupplementaryPlanningDocuments

Table 4.1 Summary of Progress on adopted LDF Listed Documents

4.4 Statement of Community Involvement4.4.1 The Statement of Community Involvement was adopted on the 12th June 2006. No further work hasbeen done on this during this monitoring period.

4.5 Core Strategy (DPD1)4.5.1 The Core Strategy was adopted on the 23rd June 2008. Following adoption of the Core Strategy theCity Council are now progressing preparation of the Land Allocations DPD, the Development ManagementDPD and an Area Action Plan for Morecambe.

4.5.2 Key Milestones for the Core Strategy are highlighted in bold below



LDS Monitoring Table 3.2 DPD 1 – Core Strategy

CommentProgress2007 LDStimetable

Preparation Stage

Preferred Options consultation wasdeferred until Jan 2006 at the request ofthe NWRA to align with RSS timetable

Jan 2006June 2005Public Participation onPreferred Options(Regulation 26)

As aboveMarch 2006Aug 2005Consideration ofRepresentations

Following representations by GovernmentOffice a second round of public

April 06-May 06Addendum consultation

consultation was undertaken on anaddendum document.

The Core Strategy was submitted to theSecretary of State on the 4th May 2007.

May 2007April 2007Submission to Secretaryof State

The 6 week public consultation period tookplace between the 4th May 2007 to the 15th

June 2007

May to June2007

May to July2007

Public Consultation onSubmission DPD1

(Regulation 29)

Representation considered as to thetimetable

Aug to Sept2007

Sept 2007Pre-ExaminationConsiderationof Representations

Meeting took place on the 6th December2007

Dec 2007Dec 2007Pre-Examination Meeting

Examination commenced on submissionof the DPD in June 2007. The hearingsessions commenced on Tuesday 4thMarch 2008 and were completed on Friday14th March 2010.

Mar 2008Mar 2008Commencement ofIndependent Examination

Inspectors Report was received on the10th June 2008

June 2008Sept 2008Receipt of Binding Report

The Core Strategy was adopted on the23rd July 2008

July 2008Nov 2007Adoption

A facsimile edition of the Core Strategywas published in August 2008.

Aug 2008Nov 2008Publication

Table 4.2


4.6 Development Management Policies (DPD2)4.6.1 Following the adoption of the revised LDS a new timetable for the preparation of the DevelopmentManagement DPD has been prepared. As a starting point for this work the City Council prepared a CombinedScoping Document for the Land Allocations and Development Management DPD’s. This set out the Council'sinitial view on what the documents should contain, the geographical area they should cover, and the time periodthey should cover.

4.6.2 This was made available for a 6 week period from Friday 25th June to Friday 6th August 2010. Duringthis period a variety of consultation methods were used including drop in sessions, general mail outs, facebook,twitter, press releases and meetings with key local stakeholder groups and the Local Strategic Partnership.Comments received during this process are now being used to inform the issues and options stage of theprocess.

4.6.3 The preparation of the Development Management DPD has been delayed from that reported in theLDS in order to take account of the delays experienced in the publication of the Scoping Document followingthe General Election in June 2010 and also to take account of Local Elections planned in 2011.

4.6.4 It is anticipated that this next stage will take approximately 12 months to complete with a draft documentnot anticipated until late 2011 with adoption anticipated in January 2013.

ProgressKey Milestones (LDS)Stage

Preparatory Stages and Regulation 25

The General Election delayedpublication of initial ScopingDocument.

June - July 2010

April/May 2010Scope the Purpose of the DPD

April/May 2010April/May 2010Produce Project Plan

April/May 2010April/May 2010Produce Sustainability AppraisalScoping Report

The General Election delayedpublication of initial ScopingDocument

June - July 2010

May 2010Consult statutory bodies on thescope of the SustainabilityAppraisal

Delays in publication of the ScopingDocument delayed thecommencement of this work

Commence: June 2010

10 – 12 months to complete

Prepare Draft Document

July 2010

Regulation 27




Timetable delayed due to LocalElections.

June 2011Publish DPD

October 2011

Regulation 28

November 2011Commence July 2011

Statutory 6 week consultation

Seek Representations

January 2012August 2011Collate and considerrepresentations received

Regulation 30

March 2012October 2011Submit the DPD to the Secretaryof State

May 2012December 2011Pre-hearing meeting

June 2012January 2012Start of Examination Hearing

September 2012April 2012Receipt of Inspector's FactChecking Report

October 2012May 2012Receipt of the Inspector's Report

January 2013August 2012Adoption

Table 4.3 Preparation of Development Management DPD

4.7 Land Allocations and Proposals Map (DPD3)4.7.1 Following the adoption of the revised LDS a new timetable for the preparation of the Land AllocationsDPD has been prepared. As a starting point for this work the City Council prepared a Combined ScopingDocument for the Land Allocations and Development Management DPD’s. This set out the Council's initial viewon what the documents should contain, the geographical area they should cover, and the time period theyshould cover.

4.7.2 This was made available for a 6 week period from Friday 25th June to Friday 6th August 2010. Duringthis period a variety of consultation methods were used including drop in sessions, general mail outs, facebook,twitter, press releases and meetings with key local stakeholder groups and the Local Strategic Partnership.Comments received during this process are now being used to inform the issues and options stage of theprocess.

4.7.3 The preparation of the Land Allocations DPD has been delayed from that reported in the LDS in orderto take account of the delays experienced in the publication of the Scoping Document following the GeneralElection in June 2010 and also to take account of Local Elections planned in 2011.


4.7.4 It is anticipated that this next stage will take approximately 12 months to complete with a draft documentnot anticipated until late 2011 with adoption anticipated in January 2013.



The General Election delayedpublication of initial ScopingDocument.June - July 2010

April/May 2010Scope the Purpose of the DPD

April/May 2010April/May 2010Produce Project Plan

April/May 2010April/May 2010Produce Sustainability AppraisalScoping Report

The General Election delayedpublication of initial ScopingDocumentJune - July 2010


Delays in publication of the ScopingDocument delayed thecommencement of this work

Commence: June 2010

10 – 12 months to complete

Prepare Draft Document

July 2010

Regulation 27



October 2011

Regulation 28

November 2011Commence July 2011Statutory 6 week consultation

Seek Representations

January 2012August 2011Collate and considerrepresentations received

Regulation 30

March 2012October 2011Submit the DPD to the Secretaryof State

May 2012December 2011Pre-hearing meeting

June 2012January 2012Start of Examination Hearing




September 2012April 2012Receipt of Inspector's FactChecking Report

October 2012May 2012Receipt of the Inspector's Report

January 2013August 2012Adoption

Table 4.4 Preparation of Land Allocations DPD

4.8 Morecambe Area Action Plan4.8.1 The previous AMR noted the City Council’s commitment to the production of an area action plan forcentral Morecambe. Accordingly, the revised LDS provided a timetable for the preparation of the MorecambeArea Action Plan (MAAP) DPD.

4.8.2 Preparatory work on the MAAP commenced in late 2009 / early 2010 with a non-statutory consultationexercise to gain an understanding of how people felt about the town. The ‘Capture Consultation’ asked peoplefor their likes, dislikes and the areas or issues that they saw as priorities for improvement.

4.8.3 The information gained during this engagement helped to inform the Council’s view on the scope ofthe MAAP and specifically what matters the plan should consider, the geographical area that it should coverand the time period.

4.8.4 A draft MAAP Scoping Document and companion Scoping Report: Sustainability Appraisal, StrategicEnvironmental Assessment and Habitat Regulations Assessment were made available for a five week periodfrom Monday 22 March until Monday 26 April 2010. Where appropriate, relevant comments received werenoted and incorporated into the final versions. Following approval by the Council, these were published on 26July 2010.

4.8.5 On Monday 28th June 2010, issues engagement commenced via a number of approaches, including:a topic paper, school workshops, drop in sessions, community and stakeholder workshops and one-to-onestakeholder meetings. Further opportunities for involvement were made available through the use of facebookand twitter and were publicised through use of emails, press releases, postcards, posters and the MAAPwebpage at www.lancaster.gov.uk/morecambeaap.

4.8.6 Issues engagement is now drawing to a close and the comments received are being analysed to helpinform the Options stage of plan preparation which is anticipated to commence in the new year.

4.8.7 The preparation of the Morecambe Area Action Plan DPD is therefore slightly delayed from that reportedin the LDS which was perhaps overly optimistic. It is currently anticipated that a Draft Plan should be availablein late Autumn 2011 with adoption anticipated in late Autumn 2012/ early Winter 2013.

Preparation of Morecambe Area Action Plan DPD



Commenced January 2010.Approved and published July 2010.

March 2010Scope the Purpose of the DPD

January 2010March 2010Produce Project Plan


http://www.lancaster.gov.uk/morecambeaap

Commenced January 2010.Approved and published July 2010.

March 2010Produce Sustainability AppraisalScoping Report

CommencedMarch 2010. Approvedand published July 2010.


Commenced June 2010Commence: May 2010Prepare Draft Document

12-18 months to complete12 months to complete

Regulation 27



December 2011

Regulation 28

December 2011Commence June 2011Seek Representations

Statutory 6 week consultation

January 2012July 2011Collate and considerrepresentations received

Regulation 30

April 2012September 2011Submit the DPD to the Secretaryof State

June 2012November 2011Pre-hearing meeting

July 2012December 2011Start of Examination Hearing

October 2012March 2012Receipt of Inspector's FactChecking Report

November 2012April 2012Receipt of the Inspector's Report

February 2013July 2012Adoption

Table 4.5

4.9 Sustainability Appraisal4.9.1 Although not an LDS document the Sustainability Appraisal Scoping Report is an essential componentof the Local Planning process.

4.9.2 The Council's first Sustainability Appraisal Scoping Report was approved in June 2005 and set out theCouncil's Sustainability Appraisal framework. At the time it was envisaged that this would provide the basis forappraising all other Development Plan Documents and Supplementary Planning Documents. However, with



new Government Guidance, experience in using the framework and more up to date information, the Councilfurther revised the Sustainability Appraisal framework and it's Sustainability Objectives. The Council's Cabinetapproved a revised framework in March 2007. The Council used this framework in preparing the LancasterDistrict Core Strategy, adopted in July 2008.

4.9.3 Following adoption of the Core Strategy the City Council are keen to progress the production of furtherDPD’s. In view of this it was determined that a review of the existing approach to Sustainability Appraisal wasrequired.

4.9.4 In February 2010 the Council commissioned Hyder Consultants to review the Sustainability Appraisalframework. Following this review Hyder prepared a draft Sustainability Appraisal Scoping Report. This is dividedinto 3 parts - an overarching scoping report applicable to the whole Local Development Framework and thenseparate mini-scoping reports which establish a more tailored approach for the appraisal of the relevant DPD.

4.9.5 The revised Sustainability Appraisal Scoping Report was adopted by the Council in December 2010.

4.10 Supplementary Planning Documents4.10.1 The Planning Act 2008 directs that local planning authorities no longer need to list SupplementaryPlanning Documents in their LDS; thus SPDs can be prepared without the agreement of the Secretary of State,however as a local planning authority’s commitment to preparing SPDs represents a commitment on the useof resources and, for the purposes of completeness and clarity the SPDs which Lancaster City Council currentlyintends to prepare are provided here for information purposes:

Planning ObligationsMeeting Housing NeedsDesign and Sustainable Development and Climate Change

4.10.2 The Council has previously described intentions to prepare further SPDs as and when resourcespermit. Whilst the LDS does not provide a commitment to the preparation of further SPDs, the list of potentialfuture guidance is described below:

Following the Secretary of State’s refusal of a significant retail and housing proposal from developerCentros in Lancaster’s canal corridor the City Council will need to consider how the future of this areamight be progressed. Potentially if market circumstances improve such that developer confidence isrestored there may be a need to give a priority to prepare area-based Strategies, which will includesignificant development sites, in the from of SPDs

4.10.3 Consideration will also need to be given to other potential SPDs including;

Carnforth Spatial StrategySouth Heysham Spatial StrategySkerton Spatial StrategyDocuments furthering the implementation of Conservation Area Appraisals and Conservation AreaManagement Plans

4.10.4 Following the progression of the Land Allocations Development Plan consideration may need to begiven the preparation of area site development briefs in the form of Supplementary Planning Documents.

4.11 Proposed Revisions to Local Development Scheme4.11.1 No revisions are proposed to the LDS as a result of information contained in this AMR. The City Councilwill continue to monitor the implementation of the LDS through future AMR's. Corrective action will be takenwhere necessary.


4.11.2 A live timetable of document preparation is maintained on the following link Progress on LDF



http://http://www.lancaster.gov.uk/planning-environment/forward-planning/local-development-framework/progress-ldf-documents-quick-check-table/

5 Implementation: Outcome and Effects5.1 Introduction5.1.1 The nature and purpose of output indicators is described in section 2 of this report. Analysis of thedirection of movement of the indicators will inform consideration of how effective policies are performing andwhether there have been any unintended effects.

5.1.2 Analysis is provided for each of the Core Output Indicators with additional information included on Localand Significant Effect indicators. These additional output indicators have been developed to support the Council’sLDF and the Sustainability Appraisal of DPDs. Together the output indicators provide a comprehensive pictureof the district against which to monitor the implementation of policies and inform the development of futureDPDs. The analysis should be read in conjunction with the key contextual indicators described in the spatialportrait of the district.

5.1.3 Data tables for the output indicators are provided in appendices 2 to 4. A brief description and analysisis provided below.

5.2 Business Development5.2.1 Core Output Indicators: Business Development

Core Output IndicatorsTotal amount of additional employment floorspace – by typeBD1Total Amount of employment floorspace (gross) coming forward on previously developedland (PDL)

BD2

Employment land available – by typeBD3

Table 5.1

5.2.2 This set of indicators provides an account of how much floorspace has been developed for B1, B2 andB8 employment use across the district and how much is located on previously developed land. Information isalso provided on the extent of employment land available within the district for future development. This revealedthat as of the 1st April 2010 there was an outstanding employment land supply of 120.55 ha across the district.

5.2.3 Over the last 12 months an additional 4,580 sq metres of floorspace was completed for employmentuses within the district. This includes B1, B2 and B8 uses. The completion of the data centre at the ISS buildingat Lancaster University is responsible for a large amount of this increase. 69% of new completions were onpreviously developed land, this compares to 99% for previous monitoring period. The completion of developmentat Bainsbeck Farm in Kirkby Lonsdale is responsible for the increase in greenfield employment land completionsduring the 2009/2010 monitoring period.

Local and Significant Effect Indicators

5.2.4 As part of the strategy of urban concentration in the Core Strategy, 95% of new employment developmentis to be directed to urban areas. Of this 45% is to be located to Lancaster, 45% to Morecambe and Heyshamand 5% to Carnforth. The current distribution of floorspace is shown below. Latest monitoring reveals that 40%of completions were in the rural sub-area. Completions for general industry at Bainsbeck Farm in Kirkby Lonsdaleand storage and distribution units at Pennine Bee Farm in Galgate are responsible for the majority of completionsin the rural area. Less then 1% of new employment completions were delivered in the Morecambe and Heyshamsub-area with just 16sqm completed. This is especially worrying given the high percentage of unemploymentrecorded in a number of wards within this sub-area.


Employment Completions by Sub-Area 2009/10

5.2.5 The economy of the District continues to be largely driven by the service and knowledge based sectorswith the majority of people employed in these industries. The main employers in the District include LancasterCity Council, British Energy, Heysham Port, Lancaster University and Cannon Hygiene Ltd.

5.2.6 The location of two universities and Heysham power station within the district mean that employmentin higher education and the energy sector is four times the national average. The identification of Heysham asa possible site for future nuclear expansion would further increase job opportunities within this sector.

5.2.7 While there are a number of key employers in the District there remains an over reliance on a smallnumber which places the District at risk of any major job losses within those companies. This is especially truefor the public sector with a higher percentage of people located within this sector then the north west andnational average. This is particularly worrying in the current economic climate. 37% of people were recordedas employed in the public sector in Lancaster District 2007. This compares to a national average of 27% anda North West average of 28%.

Implications for the LDF

5.2.8 As reported in the spatial portrait one of the main issues affecting future LDF documents will be theimpact of the economic downturn on the economy as a whole and on key sectors such as the knowledge andservice based sectors, both of which are noted to be key components of the districts employment base.



5.2.9 Future LDF documents will need to ensure that opportunities continue to exist for new employmentprovision within the district whilst also working to protect existing employment sources. Opportunities to diversifythe district’s economy should also be investigated through the LDF process.

5.2.10 Current monitoring reveals an uneven distribution of employment opportunities with the majority ofcompletions taking place within the Lancaster and rural sub-areas. Just 16sqm of land were completed foremployment purposes in the Morecambe and Heysham sub area, 0.35% of the total completions. This is incontrast to the 2008/09 monitoring year where 80% of new provision had been recorded in the Morecambeand Heysham sub-area. Future LDF documents will need to ensure a more even distribution of employmentland. The distribution of new employment opportunities should continue to be monitored.


5.3 HousingCore Output Indicator 2: Housing

Core Output IndicatorsPlan period and housing targetsH1Net additional dwelling – in previous yearsH2(a)Net additional dwellings – for the reporting yearH2 (b)Net additional dwellings – in future yearsH2 (c)Managed delivery targetH2 (d)New and converted dwellings – on previously developed landH3Net additional pitches (Gypsy and Traveller)H4Gross affordable housing completionsH5Housing Quality – Building for Life AssessmentsH6

Table 5.2

5.3.1 The Core Strategy requires the Council to plan for 7,200 dwellings over the period 2003/04 to 2020/21,equal to an annual mean requirement of 400 dwellings. The housing trajectory setting out how the City Councilwill meet this housing requirement is shown below.

5.3.2 This takes account of actual housing completions as well as projected completions for the next 15years. The trajectory has been extended beyond the plan period to cover the required 15 year period describedin national planning policy. Anticipated completions are based on the deliverability assessment of sites containedin the Council’s Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) together with new information fromdevelopers regarding projected delivery rates. Unless evidence exists to amend the conclusions the deliverabilityassessment contained in the SHLAA have been delayed by one year to reflect the slowdown in the housingmarket. Only sites which are concluded to be deliverable are included in the long term housing supply.



5.3.3

The implementation of Supplementary Planning Guidance 16 (SPG16) ‘The Phasing of New ResidentialDevelopment’ together with the lower dwelling requirement of the Structure Plan and more recently the impactsof the credit crunch have resulted in lower dwelling completions within the district. Completions had increasedpost 2006/07 with 345 dwellings completed in 2007/08 and a further 325 dwellings completed in 2008/09. Thistrend however looks to have reversed in the reported monitoring year 2009/10 with only 121 dwelling completionsrecorded. This is reflective of the situation across the Country which has seen construction levels fall nationallyto the lowest level since 1981. (ii)

Completion rates are projected to remain low for the immediate future with construction noted to have stalledon a number of sites and builders continuing to experience difficulty in obtaining finance. Current evidenceindicates that construction levels will not start to increase until 2011/12 with similarly low levels of completionsanticipated for the current financial year 2010/11.

57% of completions were recorded on previously developed land (pdl). Whilst this figure represents a decreasefrom previous monitoring periods it needs to be considered in the context of of a reduction in the overallcompletion rate across the District. The continued build out of the greenfield site in Mossgate in Heysham isresponsible for the majority of completions in the district, with this forming one of the largest sources ofcompletions over the last 12 month period and as such skewing the completions on pdl figure.

Completions at Mossgate, Heysham

Affordable housing completions are also monitored. In total 29 affordable dwellings were completed betweenthe 1st April and 31st March 2010, 24% of the total dwellings completed during this monitoring period.

ii http://www.building.co.uk/story.asp?storycode=3158303



The total number of gypsy and traveller pitches across the district has also been monitored. This revealed atotal provision of 129 pitches as of the 31st March 2010. In total 23 pitches were lost during this monitoringperiod, 19 permanent pitches and 4 transit pitches. This followed approval for residential use on what waspreviously a gypsy and traveller site. No new pitches were completed over the last 12 month period.


In line with the Core Strategy’s policy of urban concentration the geographical distribution of dwelling completionsis also monitored. Policy SC2 ‘Urban Concentration’ of the Core Strategy directs most development to the mainurban areas of the District, with 90% of new housing expected to be delivered in the Districts main urbanareas. Within this 40% of new housing is intended to be developed in Lancaster, 40% in Morecambe andHeysham, and 10% in Carnforth. The remaining 10% of new housing is directed to rural areas.

As in previous monitoring periods the distribution of new completions over the last 12 months continues to beheavily focused in the urban areas of Lancaster and Morecambe and Heysham, with 41% of completionsconcentrated in Lancaster and 50% in Morecambe and Heysham. There have been no reported completionsin the Carnforth sub-area. This trend looks set to continue in the immediate future with no large sites noted tobe under construction in Carnforth as of the 31st March 2010.

Housing Completions 1st April 2009 to 31st March 2010 by sub-area


It is clear that in the longer term an additional supply of housing sites is required to meet the future housingneeds of the district, with the housing trajectory currently reporting a housing deficit of 1,331 dwellings. FutureLDF documents will need to identify how this deficit will be addressed. Importantly the trajectory only includessites that accord with the Council’s policy of urban concentration. The ability to meet the long term housingneeds of the district within its urban boundaries will need to be investigated with difficult decisions facing the


Council on the need for more intense forms of development within its urban areas and/or on the need for urbanextensions. It is clear that this represents one of the main challenges for the Council in the preparation of futureplanning policy.

Whilst improvements to the delivery of affordable housing have been noted affordable completions remainsignificantly below the 495 affordable housing need identified in the Strategic Housing Market Area (SHMA)for the district. With affordability remaining a significant problem additional work on this area is clearly needed.In view of this the City Council commissioned consultants, Adams Integra, in October 2009 to prepare anAffordability Housing Viability Study. In response to the recommendations in the study the Council has prepareda practise update. This seeks to increase opportunities for affordable housing delivery in the district havingregard to the overall viability of schemes. This will be incorporated into a Supplementary Planning Documentin the new year.

Meeting the future housing needs of all residents in the district is an important area of future planning policy.In view of this the Council is currently in the process of commissioning a new Housing Needs Study for thedistrict. This will provide information on the needs of specific household groups including households withsupport needs, the housing needs of older people, black and minority ethnic households, gypsy and travellerprovision and student households. This is a key piece of work for future policies in the LDF.

Additional work is also required on gypsy and traveller provision across the district. This is especially importantgiven the uncertainty that exists for regional planning following the election of the new coalition Government.Planned work on this area as part of the partial review of the Regional Strategy has now been abandoned andit is now for Local Authorities via their LDF to determine how to build on the evidence base in this area. This iscurrently being investigated as part of the LDF.

The Council has been unable to report progress against core output indicator H6 which monitors the quality ofnew housing development. This is being addressed by the Council with a member of the team working onbecoming the Building For Life Assessor within the authority. It is hoped that this will be in place for next year’sreport.

5.4 Accessibility and Transport5.4.1 As reported in last year’s AMR the Core Output Update no longer contains indicators to monitoraccessibility. Monitoring of this now falls to local authorities to monitor as part of their local output and significanteffect indicators. In view of the importance of this indicator to the delivery of sustainable development theCouncil will continue to monitor it with the assistance of Lancashire County Council.

5.4.2 Latest monitoring data reveals that the accessibility of new residential development to key services hascontinued to improve with 98% of new development located within 30 minute public transport drive time of the6 identified key services (iii). This is an improvement of 2% from the previous monitoring period 2008/2009where accessibility was recorded at 96%. The district continues to perform well against the rest of the Countywhere 82% of new development completed over the last 12 month period were located within 30 minute publictransport drive time of the 6 key services.


5.4.3 The compact nature of the district combined with the policy of urban concentration within the CoreStrategy ensures that residents continue to benefit from high levels of accessibility with services and accessto public transport in close proximity to where people live. The close proximity of services coupled with a highquality public transport network has helped to encourage more sustainable transport movements within the

iii Key services are identified as a GP, hospital, primary school, secondary school, areas of employment and majorretail centre.



district. Travel to work statistics indicate that use of the private car within district is below the regional average.In 2001 journey to work statistics revealed that 55.2% of journey to work trips within the district were made byprivate car compared to 58.4% across the North West and 55.2% across the rest of England and Wales.

5.4.4 In continuing to promote sustainable transport provision the Core Strategy seeks to ensure that allmajor development proposals are accompanied by a Business Travel Plan. Travel Plans identify a package ofmeasures and initiatives that aim to reduce the number of car journeys made by a business. Increased provisionof travel plans will help assist more joined up thinking between businesses and help in the shift towards moresustainable transport modes. In total 2 travel plans were submitted in the district over the last 12 months.

5.4.5 In addition to reliable and frequent public transport the district also has an excellent cycling networkwith over 75km of cycle path. This includes lanes on the highway network as well as off road shared use paths.The identification of Lancaster and Morecambe as one of the original six cycling demonstration towns in 2005helped secure additional funding for both the cycling network and cycling training for residents.

District cycle path

5.4.6 Whilst air quality in the district is generally good, several locations suffer from high exhaust pollutionas a result of high levels of congestion. Formal air quality management areas have been declared at twolocations in the district following the failure of one of the mandatory UK air quality objectives for nitrogen oxide- Lancaster city centre and Carnforth town centre.

Key implications

5.4.7 Implementation of the policy of urban concentration has ensured that new developments continue tobe targeted to those areas well served by public transport. This should mean that residents continue to benefitfrom high levels of accessibility. Future policy will however need to ensure that rural needs also continue to bemet with opportunities identified for promoting and encouraging sustainable transport initiatives in rural areas.This is especially relevant for specific sectors of the population who are more dependent on public transportand local service provision such as the elderly and younger population.

5.4.8 Parking standards need to be developed at the local level. Parking standards are presently establishedat the regional level in the Regional Strategy. The Coalition Government has reaffirmed its commitment toabolish regional planning with new legislation planned via the Localism Bill in 2011. There are presently nolocal parking standards within the district. Abolition of the Regional Strategy would therefore create a policyvacuum in relation to parking standards. This will need to be addressed in the Development Management DPD.


5.4.9 Progress on the Heysham M6 link road will need to be kept under review as part of the preparation offorthcoming DPDs. The timetable for construction has recently been revised with commencement not anticipateduntil 2012. A timetable to hear objections to the Compulsory Purchase Orders for land is being prepared, furtherinformation is anticipated in the new year.



5.5 Local ServicesCore Output Indicator 4: Local Services

Core Output Indicator

Total amount of floorspace for 'town centre uses'BD4

Table 5.3

5.5.1 A total of 1,109 sq metres gross town centre use floorspace were completed between 2009-2010, 21%of this was completed in the district's town centres. This includes retail and office development. The completionof an out of centre retail development as part of a petrol station in Morecambe is responsible for A1 floorspacecompletions outside of the main retail centres.

5.5.2 Whilst no longer a core output indicator the Council will continue to monitor the amount of eligible openspace managed to green flag award standard. Only Torrisholme Cemetery continues to have green flag status.This represents 12.8% of the total park area within the district.


5.5.3 Additional indicators have been developed tomonitor overall floorspace across the district. The distributionof new gross convenience and comparison retail floorspace across the sub-areas of Lancaster, Morecambeand Carnforth is shown in below. No new floorspace was completed in Carnforth.

Gross Convenience and Comparison Floorspace (sq m)Sub-area

917Lancaster

565Morecambe

0Carnforth

Table 5.4

5.5.4 All new retail floorspace completed over the last 12 months was for convenience goods.

5.5.5 Retail representation across the three main centres is also monitored. This shows an increase in retailerrepresentation across all the main centres, rising from 210 to 215 in Lancaster and 99 to 118 in Morecambe.This follows previous falls in the 2008/09 monitoring period. Despite improvements in the diversity of retailrepresentation the number of vacant units in both centres has increased. Morecambe has experienced thelargest increase with vacancy levels increasing by 4.8% from 13.5% in 2008/09 to 18.3% in 2009/10. In Lancastervacancy levels increased by 0.1% from 13.6% to 13.7%. This is reflective of market conditions across theCountry with increased vacancy levels reported across most town centres.

5.5.6 The overall mix of uses across the two main centres has remained relatively stable over the last 12months with A1 (shops) retail remaining the predominant usage in both Lancaster and Morecambe town centres.A3 (restaurants and cafes) and A5 (hot food takeaways) uses have both increased within Lancaster City Centre.The closure of Walkabout in Lancaster has led to a reduction in A4 use (drinking establishments) within thecity centre.


5.5.7 A review of service provision across the districts villages was undertaken in September 2009, ‘Reportof Village Surveys’. The survey reports on service provision in the eight named villages of the Core Strategy(iv), as well as service provision across a number of non-named villages in the district. The survey revealed anoverall high level of service provision across the district. It was noted that Slyne-with-Hest no longer has adoctors surgery with the nearest provision now located in Bolton le Sands. Limited service provision was alsoreported in Wray with both the doctors surgery and general store offering a lower level of service provisionwhen compared to other villages. Further work on service provision across the rural areas is currently underwayas part of work on rural engagement for the LDF. The results of this work will be reported in more detail in nextyears AMR.

Key implications

5.5.8 The economic downturn is continuing to impact on the economy of the District’s Town Centres withincreased vacancy levels reported over the last 12 months in both Lancaster and Morecambe town centre. A1retail use across both centres is also noted to have decreased. The downturn will also have an impact on thedeliverability of town centre schemes and the vulnerability of town centres to competition from out-of-centreoutlets, retail destinations outside the District, widening ranges of goods in supermarkets and internet shopping.There is a need to keep under review retail capacity and retail need, the health of our centres and the deliverabilityof town centre and edge of centre schemes. Opportunities to protect and promote town centre developmentsshould be pursued in the LDF.

5.5.9 With more than 90% (602 sq m) of Lancaster District being rural and around 34,000 people living invillages and rural areas it is vital that Lancaster City Council maintains a good understanding of the issuesaffecting these areas to enable rural communities to remain healthy and sustainable. The implications of the2009 village survey and the rural engagement exercise currently being undertaken will be central to this forminga key component of the evidence base for future rural policy in the LDF.

5.5.10 Proposals for a major mixed use retail led development at the Canal Corridor North site in Lancasterwere refused by the Secretary of State in December 2009. The decision has significant implications for theLDF. This will need to be considered as part of the preparation of future DPDs.

5.5.11 The implications of the recently revised PPG 17 'Open Space, Sport and Recreation Facilities' studywill need to be reviewed. This provides up to date information on existing facilities across the district identifyingareas of deficiencies and where future policy response may be needed to improve provision. Full details of thisreview will be reported in next year's AMR.

iv Bolton-le-Sands, Caton and Brookhouse, Halton, Hornby, Wray, Slyne-with-Hest, Silverdale and Galgate



5.6 Flood Protection and Water QualityCore Output Indicator:

Core Output Indicators

Number of planning permissions granted contrary to Environment Agency adviceon flooding and water quality grounds

E1

Table 5.5 Environmental Quality Core Output Indicators

5.6.1 Over the last 12 months no applications were approved contrary to Environment Agency advice onflooding and water quality.


5.6.2 The district lies within the river Lune catchment area. The key watercourses in the district include theriver Lune itself and its major tributaries, the river Keer, river Hindburn, river Roeburn, and the river Conder.

5.6.3 9,037ha of the district is located within flood zone 3. Flood zone 3 is defined as areas at risk from a 1in 100 or greater probability of river flooding or between a 1 in 200 or greater annual probability of flooding fromthe sea.


5.6.4 Flooding remains one of the main issues affecting future planning policy and planning decisions in thedistrict. Ensuring that new homes, businesses and public areas are not exposed to unacceptable flood risks isone of the key objectives of the Core Strategy. The implementation of this objective falls to the Land AllocationsDPD and Development Management DPD. These documents must ensure that development is directed tosustainable locations with the lowest risk of flooding. Where this is not possible appropriate mitigation measuresmust be provided to alleviate the risk.

5.6.5 The Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA) for the district is currently being reviewed. The reviewwill take account of the Environment Agency revisions to flood risk zones in 2009 and allow more detailedassessments to be undertaken as part of the preparation of the Land Use Allocations DPD. The review will alsoneed to take account of new information including publication of the River Lune Catchment Management Plan,Shoreline Management Plan Review and the River Basin Management Plan.


5.7 Bio-DiversityCore Output Indicator


Change in areas of biodiversity importanceE2

Table 5.6 Environmental Quality Core Indicator

5.7.1 Areas of biodiversity importance are defined as the following designations: Sites of Special ScientificInterest (SSSI), Special Protection Area (SPA), Regionally Important Geological/Geomorphological Sites (RIGS),Ramsar sites, Biological Heritage Sites (BHS) and Areas of Outstanding National Beauty (AONB). The totalarea of these designations is reported in table 2.10 in appendix 2.

5.7.2 An additional 13 hectares of BHS have been allocated in the district. No losses were reported.

Local and Significant Effects Indicators

5.7.3 In addition to the key contextual indicators additional output indicators have been developed to monitorthe environmental quality of the district. One of these indicators measures the amount of land in entry/higherlevel stewardship schemes within the district. Under this scheme payments are made to farmers and other landowners to enhance and conserve the landscape, wildlife and/or history of their site. A total of 18,851.83 hectaresof land was identified as being in environmental stewardship as of March 2010.

Total Area (ha)Number of AgreementsESS Scheme Strand

15,140.22212Entry Level Stewardship

3,402.3137Entry Level plus Higher Level Stewardship

202.654Organic Entry Level Stewardship

106.652Organic Entry Level plus Higher Level Stewardship

18,851.83Total

Table 5.7



5.7.4 As in previous years the condition of the district’s two AONBs is also reported. Both AONBs benefitfrom up to date management plans. The Arnside Silverdale AONB published a revised management plan in2009 covering the period 2009 – 2014. In addition to this the Arnside Silverdale AONB are also looking atrevising the landscape character assessments of the area with a new Landscape/Seascape CharacterAssessment of the AONB currently being undertaken. The Forest of Bowland AONB has also revised itsmanagement plan with a new plan covering the period 2009-2014 adopted in April 2009.

5.7.5 The amount of agricultural land across the district is monitored. This reports a baseline position of53,963 ha of farmed land across the district. The majority of land is classified under grades 3 to 5.

Grade 5Grade 4Grade 3Grade 2Grade 1

16,51215,49521,3316250haLancaster

29.227.437.71.10.0%

Table 5.8

Source: Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA): Agricultural Land Classification


5.7.6 As reported in previous monitoring reports the district benefits from a rich and diverse natural environmentwith large areas designated for their environmental quality. It is this environmental quality which distinguishesthe district from the more urban authorities of Lancashire and provides residents with a high quality of life. Thecontinued protection and enhancement of this environment represents one of the main challenges for the LDFwith many areas under threat from development.

5.7.7 A key issue emerging from the AMR is the quality and amount of environmental evidence available.This is an area which will need to be addressed in preparation for future DPDs. The recent update of theCouncil's Open Space study will provide an important source of information for this work. Additional work isalso planned on green infrastructure provision and investment across the district including a green spacestrategy. The City Council will also look to utilise expertise at Lancashire County Council in regards to ecologyand landscape advice. Such work would be of assistance not only for informing the LDF but also in informingthe determination of individual planning applications.

5.8 Renewable EnergyCore Output Indicator

Core Output Indicator

Renewable energy generationE3

Table 5.9 Environmental Quality Core Indicators

5.8.1 As reported in last years AMR there are 3 large scale renewable energy schemes within the district.These are:

Caton Moor Wind Farm – 16MW provided from 8 turbinesThe Salt Ayre Landfill site – 4.3MWLancaster Sewage Treatment – 0.65MW



5.8.2 Together these provide a total generating capacity of 20.95MW.

5.8.3 There have been no new major schemes completed over the last 12 months.


5.8.4 Total CO2 emissions in Lancaster amounted to over 1 million tonnes in 2008 equivalent to 7.3 tonnesper head. This is below the Lancashire average of 8.4 and regional average 8.3. Road transport is responsiblefor the largest amount of emissions with 344,000 tonnes of emissions released from this source in 2008.

Carbon Dioxide emissions by source, 2008

5.8.5 Reducing our impact on and adapting to the consequences of climate change is a key priority of theCity Council. Maximising the proportion of energy from renewable sources provides one of the main mechanismsto achieve this.

5.8.6 Over the last 12 months the district has experienced growing interest from wind energy developers witha number of wind farm applications submitted within and adjacent to the district. Between the 1st April 2009and 31st March 2010 5 applications for wind energy were submitted and awaiting determination. Most of thesewere for small scale turbines e.g. 11kw wind turbine at Yealand Conyers. One of these applications, an applicationfor two turbines at Lancaster University, was subsequently refused, although it is noted that a smaller schemefor one turbine has now been submitted. During this same period one application was approved at Galgate forthe retrospective erection of a wind turbine adjacent to the A6.

5.8.7 An application for a 50MW 20 wind turbine scheme was refused by the City Council at Claughton Moorduring the reported monitoring period. This is now the subject of an appeal which is scheduled to be heard inMarch 2011. An application for a reduced number of turbines (13 turbines) for the same site has recently beensubmitted to the City Council, this is currently awaiting determination in the new year.

5.8.8 In addition to the above the City Council also received two screening requests for potential schemesand a further 2 applications were approved for meteorological masks within the district.


5.8.9 Whilst wind energy made up the majority of renewable energy applications 7 applications for solarpanels were approved and a further 4 schemes had been submitted and were awaiting determination duringthe 2009/10 monitoring period. An application for the installation of a biomass central heating boiler at WhittingtonHall was also approved and an application for the extension of the time period for the erection of a biomassrenewable energy plant at Middleton Business Park was also submitted, this has subsequently been approved.

Renewable Energy Schemes 2009-2010

5.8.10 The Council is aware that in addition to the schemes identified above a large number of smallerschemes exist across the district providing energy at the micro-level. These schemes are equally importantwith all schemes helping secure a clean renewable energy resource for the district. As some of these schemesdo not require planning permission it is not possible to obtain an accurate picture of the amount of renewableenergy generated across the district. The Council is looking to improve its evidence base in this area.




5.8.11 The absence of a detailed policy on climate change was highlighted as one of the main areas ofweakness in the Core Strategy. Despite this the Inspector concluded that the policy provided sufficient flexibilityto ensure compliance with regional targets as well as providing a sound basis for more detailed work onrenewable energy for inclusion in subsequent DPDs.

5.8.12 As an area of the Country with both a large renewable energy resource and high quality environmentit is clear that a more detailed policy framework must be developed as a matter of urgency. Growing interestfrom a number of wind energy developers for further schemes within the District highlights the growing needfor additional work in this area. This work would assist not only Officers of the Council in determining applicationsbut it would also provide certainty for developers in pursuing schemes as well as helping overcome concernsfrom members of the public through increased involvement at the start of the process.

5.8.13 The need for more detailed guidance in this area was also highlighted in the recent DPD scopingconsultation. Adapting and mitigating against the impacts of climate change was seen as one of the key areasrequiring urgent attention in subsequent DPDs with a clear framework on renewable energy needed. Importantlythis needs to cover all types of renewable energy.

5.8.14 In developing these policies the Council will need to improve its evidence base on renewable energygeneration. Additional work is required on monitoring schemes already implemented together with monitoringnew schemes within the planning system as well as those schemes not requiring planning permission andallowed under permitted development rights. The implementation of the on-site renewable energy requirementconditioned as part of planning approvals for larger residential and commercial developments will also need tobe monitored.

5.8.15 Additional work is also required onmonitoring the energy efficiency of schemes particularly the recordingof schemes which meet building for life standards. This is a key area of work given that building for lifeassessments is now one of the core output indicators which local authorities are now required to monitor.


6 Special IssuesMajor events

Planning Policy

6.0.1 The 2009/2010monitoring period saw further advancement and consolidation of the Council's evidencebase in preparation for the next phase of the LDF. This included the commissioning of the Affordable HousingViability Study, preparation of a Local Brownfield Study and Strategy for the district, retail update as part of theCentros mixed use development in Lancaster and preparation of an Infrastructure Schedule for the district.

6.0.2 Having undertaken this work the Council is now looking to progress preparation of the next phase ofthe LDF, most notably the preparation of the Land Allocations DPD, the Development Management DPD andan Area Action Plan for Morecambe. A revised Local Development Scheme (LDS) detailing this work has beenprepared and adopted. This is reported under section 3 of this report and includes information on progress todate as well as the anticipated timetable for future document preparation. The Sustainability Appraisal ScopingReport has also been revised as part of this work.

6.0.3 At the national level a draft Planning Policy Statement on Planning for a Natural and Healthy Environmentwas published in March 2010. This sets out planning policies for the conservation and enhancement of thenatural environment and the habitats and species it supports, green infrastructure, open space and land andrelated facilities for sport, recreation and play. A consultation on a new Planning Policy Statement: Planningfor a Low Carbon Future in a Changing Climate was also published with the intention of supplementing PlanningPolicy Statement 1: Delivering Sustainable Development . The statement is intended to combine and updateexisting planning policy on climate change and renewable energy into one consolidated document. A newsupplement to PPS25 was also published, Planning Policy Statement 25 Supplement: Development and CoastalChange.

6.0.4 Importantly a new planning statement on sustainable economic development, Planning Policy Statement4, was published in December 2009. This establishes the Government's policy framework for planning forsustainable economic development in urban and rural areas. The new PPS replaces Planning Policy Guidance4: Industrial, Commercial Development and Small Firms (PPG4) and Planning Policy Guidance 5: SimplifiedPlanning Zones (PPG5); Planning Policy Statement 6: Planning for Town Centres (PPS6); and the economicdevelopment sections of Planning Policy Statement 7: Sustainable Development in Rural Areas (PPS7).

6.0.5 A new Planning Policy Statement on Planning for the Historic Environment (PPS5) was also publishedduring the reported monitoring period. This is especially relevant for this district given its heritage resource andassets. The new PPS recognises the central role planning plays in conserving heritage assets and utilising thehistoric environment to create sustainable places. In view of this the City Council has commenced the preparationof a local heritage asset list identifying those assets of significance for the district.

6.0.6 As reported in last years AMR the existing nuclear power stations at Heysham are reaching the end oftheir lives. Heysham 1 Power Station commenced generation in 1983 and is due to be decommissioned in2014 (see BE/EDF website) whilst Heysham 2 commenced in 1988 and is due to be decommissioned in 2023.The Government's draft National Policy Statement on Nuclear Power Generation, issued for consultation inNovember 2009, identified a 115 ha site adjacent to the existing Heysham Power Station for new nuclear powergeneration. This site includes land within the existing power station boundary, HeyshamGolf Course and OceanEdge Caravan Park. In October 2010 the Government announced that Heysham was one of eight sites acrossthe Country it considered suitable for future nuclear power stations. The draft National Policy Statement isavailable for consultation until Monday 24 January 2011.

6.0.7 Whilst occurring outside of the reported monitoring period the election of the new Coalition Governmentin May 2010 represents a major event in regards to planning policy. Proposed changes to the planning systemvia the Localism Bill are likely to have significant implications for the preparation of future planning policy and



the determination of planning applications. Included within this is the likely abolition of the Regional SpatialStrategy. This follows earlier attempts by the Coalition Government to abolish regional planning and remove itfrom the Development Plan. A high court challenge in October 2010 however ruled that the Government'searlier revocation of regional plans was illegal and reinstated the Regional Spatial Strategy back into theDevelopment Plan for an area. The Localism Bill and its implications for planning policy preparation at the locallevel will be reported in more detail in next year's AMR.

6.0.8 The anticipated abolition of regional planning has led to amendments in the status of the new RegionalStrategy for the North West which was being prepared to supersede the current Regional Spatial Strategy. Thiswas to serve as both the Regional Spatial Strategy and Regional Economic Strategy for the North West. Whilstthis document is still in preparation it is now being taken forward as 'Future North West' a framework for localauthorities, businesses, the voluntary, community and faith sector, and government bodies to work together todeal with issues which cross local boundaries and are critical to securing a sustainable and prosperous futurefor the North West. Proposed work on gypsy and traveller provision and revised parking standards for the NorthWest are no longer being developed at this level. It is for Local Authorities via the preparation of their LDF totake forward these areas of work.

Spatial Portrait

6.0.9 The economic downturn and the affects of the credit crunch are continuing to impact on the delivery ofnew housing within the district, with just 121 dwelling completions recorded for the 2009/10 monitoring period.279 dwellings below the Core Strategy 400 per annum housing requirement. Completion rates are projectedto remain low for the immediate future with construction noted to have stalled on a number of sites and builderscontinuing to experience difficulty in obtaining finance. Current evidence indicates that construction levels willnot start to increase until 2011/12 with similarly low levels of completions anticipated for the current financialyear 2010/11.

6.0.10 Despite the current economic downturn unemployment figures for the district have fallen over the last12 month period with 2.9% of the working age population now classed as unemployed, this compares to 3.1%for the previous monitoring period. This is in part due to the high concentration of public sector employmentwithin the district with approximately 37% of people employed in the public sector (2007). Whilst the highconcentration of public sector employment has until now protected the district from the impacts of the economicslowdown it also makes it especially vulnerable to cuts in this sector. This is especially worrying given theplanned cuts within this sector as a result of the Comprehensive Spending Review.

6.0.11 Effective spatial planning will be key to ensuring that the impacts of the economic downturn are reducedfor existing and future residents. The provision of attractive and high quality employment sites will be essentialto attracting and retaining employment opportunities as well as diversifying the economic base of the district.The increased delivery of affordable housing will also be important in ensuring people’s housing needs aremet. The ability to deliver these will opportunities will however be increasingly challenged if the current economicclimate continues.

Planning Applications

6.0.12 A public inquiry into the Canal Corridor North site was held in July 2009. As reported in last yearsAMR the Council had sought to grant planning permission for the mixed use redevelopment of the central canalsite in Lancaster. The application was called in by the Secretary of State and a public inquiry was held in July2009. Following conclusion of the inquiry and consideration of the evidence the application was refused by theSecretary of State in December 2009. The implications of this decision for the future of this site now need tobe considered through the LDF process.


6.0.13 A further significant application for the district over the 2009/10 monitoring period was the applicationfor a 50MW 20 wind turbine scheme at Claughton Moor. This application was refused by the City Council andis now the subject of an appeal which is scheduled to be heard in March 2011. An application for a reducednumber of turbines (13) for the same site has recently been submitted to the City Council, this is currentlyawaiting determination in the new year.



7 Key Findings for 2009/20107.0.1 Key findings from Sections 3, 4 and 5 are described below:

Key contextual indicators

Revisions to population data across the Country has resulted in adjustments to the mid year populationestimates. For Lancaster District this has resulted in a downward adjustment with a population of 139,800recorded for 2009, a 0.2% increase from the adjusted 2008 figure of 139,500;The district is projected to have the largest population growth in Lancashire over the next 23 years rising13% to 158,700 by 2033;Unemployment levels have fallen over the 2009/10 monitoring period with 2.9% of the working agepopulation now classified as unemployed compared to 3.1% for the 2008/09 monitoring period;Average median gross annual pay has decreased over the last 12 month period falling by £1,064 since2008/2009;House prices have increased by 10% between 2008/09 and 2009/10 with the average cost of a propertyrecorded at £157,998 in the first quarter of 2010. This follows a fall in house prices between 2008 and2009;Flooding remains an issue within the district with a large proportion of the district’s communities locatedadjacent to, or near, the River Lune and/or its tributaries. 3.7% of the district's housing stock is locatedwithin flood zone 3;Residents benefit from a good level of accessibility with 63.3% of the population located within 1km ofbasic services such as GP, primary school, food shop, post offices and bus stop;The district continues to benefit from a high quality and diverse natural and built environment with manyof its assets protected by local, national and international designations.

Progress on preparing Local Development Documents

Following approval from the Secretary of State the City Council adopted a revised Local DevelopmentScheme (LDS) in April 2010. The revised LDS updates the previous timetable for document preparationcontained in the 2007 LDS taking account of new guidelines and regulations for the preparation of futureDevelopment Plan Documents.Preparation has now commenced on the next phase of the LDF with work started on an Area Action Planfor Morecambe, the Land Allocations DPD and the Development Management DPD.External consultants, Hyder, have prepared a revised Sustainability Appraisal Scoping Report on behalfof the City Council. This was adopted by the Council in December 2010.The 2009/2010 monitoring period saw further advancement and consolidation of the Council's evidencebase. This included the commissioning of the Affordable Housing Viability Study, preparation of a LocalBrownfield Study and Strategy for the district, retail update as part of the Centros mixed use developmentin Lancaster and preparation of an Infrastructure Schedule for the district.

Output indicators:

Despite some data gaps the output indicators provide a comprehensive evidence base on which to monitorthe implementation of policies and their effects. The AMR provides an important source of baselineinformation on which to take forward future DPDs;The housing trajectory confirms that based on actual and projected completions an additional 1,331dwellings are required to meet the housing requirement of the Core Strategy. Opportunities to addressthis shortfall are currently being invested via the Land Allocations DPD;Affordability remains an issue within the district with just 29 affordable dwellings completed between2009/10. This is significantly below the 495 affordable housing need identified in the Strategic HousingMarket Area (SHMA) for the district;


23 gypsy and traveller pitches were lost during the reported monitoring period. The total pitch provisionin the district now stands at129 pitches;Output indicators confirmed that despite worsening economic conditions the Council has continued toapprove new employment and retail floorspace. An additional 4,580 sqm of employment floorspace and1,109sqm of retail floorspace have been completed between the 1st April 2009 and 31st March 2010;Lancaster University remains one of the main economic assets within the district employing around 2,500people;Monitoring data reveals an uneven distribution of new employment opportunities with less than 1% of newfloorspace completed in the Morecambe and Heysham sub-area. This is in sharp contrast to the ruralareas where 40% of completions took place. The completion of general industry floorspace at BainsbeckFarm in Kirkby Lonsdale and storage and distribution units at Pennine Bee Farm in Galgate are responsiblefor the majority of completions in the rural area;The mix of uses across the two main retail centres has remained relatively stable over the last 12 monthswith A1 (shops) retail remaining the predominant usage in both Lancaster and Morecambe town centres.Within this mix A1 use in both Morecambe and Lancaster City Centre were noted to have decreased andvacancy levels were noted to have increased with the greatest increase experienced in Morecambe wherea 4.8% increase was recorded;Implementation of the policy of urban concentration has ensured that new developments continue to betargeted to those areas well served by public transport. 98% of new residential development was locatedwithin 30 minute public transport drive time of the 6 identified key services;The district also continues to benefit from a high quality public transport network complemented by excellentcycling and pedestrian links. Lancaster train station is identified as the third most important railway stationin the county in terms of passenger usage;An additional 13 hectares of Biological Heritage Sites have been allocated in the district. No losses werereported during the 2009/10 monitoring period;Applications for new renewable energy schemes has increased over the last 12 months with a numberof applications for wind energy and solar energy schemes submitted over the 2009/10 monitoring period.There are currently 3 large scale renewable energy schemes within the district. Together these providea total generating capacity of 20.95MW.



8 Developing the Monitoring Framework8.0.1 The AMR reports on a number of contextual and output indicators which together provide acomprehensive evidence base on which to inform policy development and monitor policy implementation. TheCouncil has continued to make progress on improving the monitoring framework and evidence base on whichto inform policy decisions.

8.0.2 Despite this additional work is still required in a number of areas. These include:

Core Output Indicator H6. This requires Local Authorities to monitor the quality of new housingdevelopments. Only qualified building for life assessors can monitor progress against this indicator. Amember of the Policy and Regeneration Team is currently being trained in this area and it is hoped thatthis will be in place to monitor this indicator in next years report.PPS12 requires Local Authorities to report how infrastructure providers have performed against programmesfor infrastructure set out in the Core Strategy. The Council are continuing to develop its evidence base inrelation to this area with this work essential in determining the deliverability of schemes suggested throughthe Land Allocations process. This will be reported in more detail in next years AMR.Improving the environmental evidence base used to support future LDF documents. The quality andavailability of environmental evidence is identified as an important issue. This will need to be investigatedas part of the preparation of future DPDs. The City Council will look to utilise expertise at LancashireCounty Council in regards to ecology and landscape advice.

8.0.3 The City Council will continue to develop and improve its evidence base across all topic areas as itlooks to progress the next phase of the LDF. Current consultation and engagement work via issues and optionsconsultation for the Land Allocations DPD, Development Management DPD and Morecambe AAP will assistin this process.


Appendix 1 Data Tables for Key Contextual IndicatorsTable A1.1:

KCI Topic Set One: Demographic Structure

IndicatorDateDemographic Structure1.1

133,9142001Most Recent Census1.1.1

123,856*1991Previous Census

Source: Census: Update Period:10 Years*Please note as this figure did not include the student population direct comparison between the1991 Census and 2001 Census is not possible.

Difference onprevious year

IndicatorDateMid-Year Population Estimate1.2

300139,800Mid 2009Registrar General's Estimate: MostRecent Mid Year

-400139,500Mid 20081.21

-300139,900Mid 2007

300140,200Mid 2006

2,100139,900Mid-2005

1,700137,800Mid-2004

1,700136,100Mid-2003

400134,400Mid-2002

Mid-2001established asBaseline (LPI)

134,000Mid-2001

LPI+4%Mid-2001 toMid-2008:

Population Change from Base Date ofStrategic Element of Development Plan(mid 2001) to most recent RG’s Mid-YearEstimate

1.2.2

Source: Registrar General: Update Period: Annual.

The methodology for calculating population was amended in 2009. The result of this was an amendmentfrom that recorded in previous monitoring periods.



ComparativeIndicator (CI)

IndicatorDateHousehold Types1.3

2.34 (England)2.12001Average Household Size1.3.1

90.9 (England)97.82001Percentage: WhiteEthnicGroups

1.3.2

9.1 (England)2.22001Percentage: Other thanWhite

7.1 (North WestRegion)

6.22001Percentage: LargeEmployers and highermanagerial/professionaloccupations

SampleSocialGroups for allpeople aged16-74

1.3.3


15.82001Percentage: Lowermanagerial andprofessional occupations


1.22001Percentage: Long-termunemployed


13.42001Percentage: Full-timeStudents

Source: KS14bNS-SeC (National Statistics Socio-economic classification) Collateddata for Males and Females: Census 2001, Key Statistics for local Authorities

Lancaster District isranked 256 out of375 local authorities(England &Wales*)

2.3 people perhectare

2001Population Density1.3.4

*The most densely populated local authority area is Kensington and Chelsea at 131 people per hectare. Theleast densely populated is Eden with 0.2 people per hectare

Source: Census: Update Period: 10 Years


Table 1.1

1.1 Table A1.2 KCI Topic Set Two: Socio-Cultural Issues

North WestRegion

IndicatorDateRecordedCrimeRate (BCSCompactor)per 1,000 population

2.1

46.443.12009/10Lancaster District Recorded Crime Rate2.1.1

5444.02008/09Lancaster District Recorded Crime Rate

5847.02007/08Lancaster District Recorded Crime Rate

69.554.82006/07Lancaster District Recorded Crime Rate




Source: Lancashire Profile (Original Source: Home Office) Update Period: Annual

Table 1.2



North Westregion

IndicatorUnit TypeDateUnemploymentand

UnemploymentRates

2.2

4.4%1,964NumberMarch 2010MaleUnemployment

2.2.1

4.3%Percentage

6.6%2,185NumberMarch 2009

4.6%Percentage


2.1%Percentage


3.4%Percentage


3.2%Percentage

2.3%684NumberMarch 2010FemaleUnemployment

2.2.2

1.5%Percentage

2.2%638NumberMarch 2009

1.5%Percentage


1.8%Percentage


1.1%Percentage


1.1%Percentage

4.4%2,648NumberMarch 2010TotalUnemployment

2.2.3

2.9%Percentage


3.1%Percentage



1.9%Percentage


2.3%Percentage


1%Percentage

3%-6%PercentageMarch2009-March2010

Change on previous12 months

2.2.4

Source: Lancashire Profile Update Period: Monthly

Claimant data no longer represents the official unemployment figures. Model based unemploymentestimate for Lancaster district is 6.4%

Table 1.3

Comparative Indicator (CI): Rankingwithin UK Authorities

Indicator:(LPI)

DateDeprivation2.3

Lancaster District is the 117th worst froma total of 354 local authorities (i.e. mostdeprived LA =1, the least deprived LA =354)

1172007Indices of MultipleDeprivation: Local AuthoritySummary, Rank of AverageScore

2.3.1

1072004

Lancaster District is the 114th worst froma total of 354 local authorities

1142007Indices of MultipleDeprivation: Local AuthoritySummary, Rank of IncomeScale

2.3.2

1022004

Lancaster District is the 103rd worst froma total of 354 local authorities

1032007Indices of MultipleDeprivation: Local AuthoritySummary, Rank ofEmployment Scale

2.3.3

932004

Source: Neighbourhood Statistics: Update Period: Annual

The guidance note published by Department for Communities and Local Government points out that theindex scores for 2007 cannot be compared with those from 2004. An area's score is affected by the scoresof every other area so it is impossible to tell whether a change in score is a real change in the level ofdeprivation in an area or is due to the scores of other areas going up or down. Care should therefore beapplied when looking at this set of data.

Table 1.4



1.2 Table A1.3: KCI Topic Set Three: Economy

NorthWestRegion

ComparativeIndicator £: (CI)North WestRegion

Price Movement in 8 yearperiod (LPI)

Indicator£ (LPI)

SalesFigures forDwellings inLancasterDistrict

3.1: HousePrices

PriceMovementin 8 yearperiod (CI)

2001 setsbase date

71,1072001 sets base date62,675Jan-Mar2001averageprice of 678sales

3.1.1OverallAverage

129%163,066+152%157,998Jan- Mar2010averageprice of 352sales


3.1.2Detached



3.1.3Semi-detached



3.1.4Terraced


163%109,748150%115,367Jan- Mar2010averageprice of 86sales


3.1.5Flat/Maisonette


Source: Land Registry: Update Period: Quarterlyhttp://www.landreg.gov.uk/propertyprice/interactive/ppr_ualbs.asp

Comparative Indicator(CI)

LancasterDistrictIndicator

DateProductivity3.2

£32,200 (North WestRegion)£34,800 (England)

£32,5002002Gross Value Added per employee*3.2.1

*Source: Lancaster Vision Economic Baseline Study – estimated from ONS Data for North-West GVA. As itis taken from a one-off study this figure may not be updateable. Further consideration to be given to Indicator.

70.3% (CI: Average forGreat Britain)

71.1%April2009-March2010

Employment Rate for People ofWorking Age*

3.2.2

74% (CI: Average forGreat Britain)





73.3%April 2006to March2007


75.4%April 2005to March2006



http://www.landreg.gov.uk/propertyprice/interactive/ppr_compare.asp


65.5%April 2004toMarch 2005


78.9%March 1999to February2000

Employment Rate for People ofWorking AgeHistoric Comparative Rate

Source: Nomis: Update Period: Updates every three months

https://www.nomisweb.co.uk/Default.asp# (i.e. those aged 16 to 64 for men or 16 to 59 for women)

Table 1.5


https://www.nomisweb.co.uk/reports/lmp/la/2038432057/subreports/ea_time_series/report.aspx

1.3 Table A1.4: KCI Topic Set Four: Environment

Comparativeindicator:Differenceon previous year

IndicatorDateProperties at risk offlooding

4.1

04,101July 2009Properties withinFlood Zone 3

4.1

-71% increase from2005

4,101July 2008

14,928July 2007

14,788July 2006

2005 now establishedas Baseline

14,183July 2005

Flood Zone 3: This is the area of land on the Flood Map shown as at risk in a 1% (1 in 100 chance ofoccurring in any year) chance flood from rivers or 0.5% (1 in 200 chance of occurring in any year) chanceflood from the sea but does not take account of flood defences

Source:Environment Agency : Update Period: Annual

www.environment-agency.gov.uk/commondata/ 103601/la_properties_flood_113902_xls

The data is subject to a continuing programme of improvement and refinement.Comparative

indicator: Differenceon previous year

IndicatorDateAreas Designatedfor Nature

Conservation

4.2

027June 2009Number of SSSIswithin or partly withinLancaster District

4.2.1

27June 2008

27July 2007

27November 06

29October 05

Source: English Nature: Update Period: Annual: English Nature update its website as new informationbecomes available. The website will be revisited for monitoring updates.

http://www.english-nature.org.uk/special/sssi/report.cfm?category=C,CF

0163June 2009Number of UNITSthat comprise theSSSIs within or partlywithin LancasterDistrict

4.2.2

163June 2008

163July 2007

163November 06

211October 05



Definitional Note: SSSI units are divisions of SSSIs used to record management and condition details. Unitsare the smallest areas for which English Natures gives a condition assessment. The size of units variesgreatly depending on the types of management and the conservation interest. The number of units is usedhere as an indication of the district’s ecological diversity.

Further work is required to identify units wholly or partly within Lancaster District

6% improvement90.61%June 2009% of SSSI Units thatcomprise the SSSIswithin or partly within

4.2.3

1.6% improvement84.6%June 2008Lancaster District that

3% improvement83%July 2007are assessed byEnglish Nature as

2006 now establishedas LPI Baseline

80%November 2006being in Favourableor UnfavourableRecovering Condition

Note: TheGovernment's PublicService Agreement(PSA) target to have95% of the SSSI areain favourable orrecovering conditionby 2010

Source: English Nature: Update Period: Annual: English Nature updates its website as new informationbecomes available. The website will be revisited for monitoring updates.http://www.english-nature.org.uk/ special/sssi/searchresults.cfm

Comparativeindicator

IndicatorDateUp-to-date AONBManagement Plans

4.3

N/aRevisedManagement Planadopted in 2009.Covers the period2009-2014

2009Arnside-SilverdaleAONB ManagementPlan

4.3.1

Source: http://www.arnsidesilverdaleaonb.org.uk/asaonb/aonb_publications.html

Update Period: Annual progress on the Management Plan will be monitored on the AONB Website

N/aRevisedManagement Planadopted in 2009.Covers the period2009-2014

2009Forest of BowlandAONB ManagementPlan

4.3.2

Source: http://www.forestofbowland.com/publ_plans.asp


http://www.english-nature.org.uk/special/sssi/searchresults.cfm

Update Period: Annual progress on the Management Plan will be monitored on the AONB Website

Table 1.6



1.4 Table A1.5: Key KCI Topic Set Five: Housing and Built Environment

ComparativeIndicator


IndicatorDateHousing Stock and Stock Conditions5.1

+10461,01131.03.10Dwelling Stock (Units)5.1.1

+32960,90731.03.09Source: Housing Flows ReconciliationReturn 2010Update Period: Annual 60,57831.03.08

2005 establishedas LPI Baseline

59,49931.03.05

-5261,87231.03.10Total households on the housing register5.1.2

+4922,39831.03.09Strategic Housing TeamUpdate Period: Annual

-1071,90631.03.08

+3672,01331.03.07

2005 nowestablished as LPIBaseline

1,64631.03.05



IndicatorDateHousing Affordability5.2

2004 nowestablished as LPIBaseline.

1,6962004Number of concealed households: Impliedfrom Survey

Source: Housing Needs Survey 2004(DCA)Update Period Circa 3-5 years

5.2.1

No new data isavailable

-164662009Overall Annual Shortfall of AffordableHousing (Units)

5.2.2

+44502008Source: Housing Needs Update 2007(DCA)Update Period Circa 3-5 years)

4462007

-5.5%£18,2752010Median Gross Annual Pay (MGAP)(resident based) Lancaster District

5.2.3

-5.4%£19,3392009

+0.7%£20,4502008


+5.6%£20,3102007

-1.4%£19,2382006

£19,5192005

+0.9%£20,0002010Comparative Indicator (CI):

-0.2%£19,8112009Median Gross Annual Pay (MGAP)(resident based)North West Region

+4%£19,8662008

+3.3%£19,0722007

+2%£18,4662006

£18,1692005

91%2010Comparative Indicator (CI):Lancaster District MGAP as Percentageof North West Region MGAP -5%98%2009

-3%103%2008

-2%106%2007

-3%104%2006

107%2005

Source: http://www.lancashire.gov.uk/environment/ lancashireprofile/areas/laincome.aspUpdate Period: AnnualNB. Figures for 2005 have been revised to take account of errors identified in the 2005 estimates of theAnnual Survey of hours and earnings

0.6:1 increase6.3:12010Lancaster District: Ratio of RelativeHousing Affordability (LPI)

5.2.4

0.4:1 decrease5.7:12009Median Gross Annual Pay (MGAP) 2010:Terraced House Average Price Jan-Mar2010

0.2:1 increase6.1:12008

0.2:1 increase5.9:12007

2005 nowestablished asBaseline

5.7:12006

5.2:12005

1.9:1 increase5.4:12010Comparative Indicator (CI): North WestRegion: Ratio of Relative HousingAffordability 1.5:1 increase3.5:12009

-0.2:15.0:12007Median Gross Annual Pay (MGAP) 2010:Terraced House Average Price Jan-Mar2010



2005 nowestablished asBaseline

5.2:12006

4.6:12005



IndicatorDateStock Condition Indicators5.3

39.0%CI: EnglishAverage

48.0%2004Percentage of dwellings stock built priorto 1945

5.3.1

21.0%RCI EnglishAverage

30.0%2004Percentage of dwelling stock built prior to1919

5.3.2

4.2%RCI EnglishAverage

4.5%2004Percentage of dwelling stock classifiedas unfit

5.3.3


£4,5072004Average Cost per Dwelling to Deal withUnfitness

5.3.4


92.5%2004Measure of Area Confidence

Percentage replying “Yes” to the Question“Do you want to continue living in thisarea?”

5.3.5

Source: Lancaster District House Condition Survey (MHA Consultants) 2004: Update Period Circa 3-5 years

ComparativeIndicator:


IndicatorDateHistoric Environment5.4

+21,345March 2010Source:Department ofCulture Media andSport/EnglishHeritage

Overall Number ofListed Buildings inLancaster District

5.4.1

04March 2010Source: LancasterCity Council BuiltConservationTeam

Listed Buildings atRisk - NationalRegister

5.4.2

-14March 2009

-15March 2008

06March 2007

+1618.12.2006

524.10.2005




Scheduledmonuments at risk- national register


Registered Parksand Gardens at risk- national register

No listMarch 2010Source: LancasterCity Council BuiltConservationTeam

Listed Buildings atRisk -LocalRegister

5.4.3

Cannon Hill added38March 2010Source: LancasterCity Council BuiltConservationTeam

Overall Number ofConservation Areasin Lancaster District

5.4.4

8 up to date/1 inproduction

March 2010Source: LancasterCity Council BuiltConservationTeam

Number ofConservation Areaswith Appraisal

5.4.5


March 2009


March 2008

8 5 in draftMarch 2007

8 5 in draft18.12.2006

113 of these are

preliminary

24.10.2005

no change2 - Morecambeconservation

areas and

March 2010Source: LancasterCity Council BuiltConservationTeam

Number ofConservation Areaswith enhancementschemes/policydocuments

5.4.6

Lancaster castle(both have

Includes: conservationmanagement

plans)Management plans,design guidance,THI plans

Table 1.7

1.5 Table A1.6: KCI Topic Set Six: Transport and Spatial Connectivity


ComparativeIndicator NorthWest Region

IndicatorDateCar Ownership6.1

30.2%28.1%2001Percentage of Households with NoCar or Van

6.1.1

Source: Census Update Period: 10 years

Comparative Indicator:Lancashire County

IndicatorDateAccess toServices

6.2

69%82%2005% of populationwithin DfT LowThreshold (highnumbers best)

6.2.1

47%59%2005% of populationwithin Dft MidThreshold (highnumbers best)

6.2.2

11%14%2005% of populationwithin Dft HighThreshold (highnumbers best)

6.2.3

Source: Lancashire Transport Plan (LTP) 2006/07-10/11 Audit Accessibility (2005)

Update period: Currently unclear but further reliable comparative information is anticipated. The LTP is notupdated annually.

This makes use of a slightly amended form of the Department for Transport (DfT) Accession software. Thisprovides an account of the percentage of the population who are able to access six key services (SecondarySchools, FE Establishments, major employment opportunities, hospitals, GPs and retail centres) at specifictimes of the day. This indicator is still in development and it may therefore be subject to revision in futureyears.

Table 1.8

End of Appendix 1



Appendix 2 Core Output IndicatorsTable A2.1

2.1 Core Output indicators have been revised to reflect guidance in the new 'Core Output Indicators - Update2/2008'.

2.2 Business Development and Town Centres

Sq mTypeIndicatorCOINo.

4,580TotalTotal amountof additional

BD1

544B1 (a)employmentfloorspace -by type 2,493B1 (b)

0B1 (c)

1,106B2

437B8

%Gross (sq m)TypeIndicatorCOINo.

69%3,196TotalTotal amountof

BD2

46%250B1 (a)employmentfloorspace

100%2,493B1 (b)onpreviously

0%0B1 (c)developedland - bytype 1.5%16B2

100%437B8

Sites for which planningpermission has been

Sites allocated foremployment use in DPD's(ha)

TypeIndicatorCOINo.

granted for employmentuse (ha)

13.6120.55TotalEmploymentland

BD3

1.7315.01B1 (a)available bytype

No dataNo dataB1 (b)

No dataNo dataB1 (c)

030.025B2



1.315.025B8

10.5760.49Mixed


230.8Total floorspacecompleted within towncentre area

Total amountof floorspacefor 'towncentre uses'

BD4

1,109Total floorspace withinthe local authority area

66A1 completed withintown centre area

565A1 within the localauthority area

0A2 completed withintown centre area

0A2 within the localauthority area

164.8B1 (a) completed withintown centre area

544B1 (a) within the localauthority area

0D2 completed withintown centre area

0D2 within the localauthority area

Table 2.1 Business Development and Town Centres

2.3 For completeness the Council have continued to monitor the core output indicators which were removedin the recent update.

Gross (sqm)TypeIndicatorNo.

4,580TotalFloorspace developed foremployment in

1b

544B1 (a)employment orregeneration priorityareas 2,493B1 (b)



Gross (sqm)TypeIndicatorNo.

0B1 (c)

1,106B2

437B8

Total (ha)IndicatorNo.

No new data for 2010Losses of employmentland inemployment/regenerationpriority areas

1e

No new data for 2010Losses of employmentland in local authorityarea

No new data for 2010Amount of employmentland lost to residentialdevelopment

1f

Table 2.2 Removed Business Core Output Indicators


2.4 Housing

Source of PlanTarget

Total HousingRequired

End of PlanPeriod

Start of PlanPeriod

IndicatorCOI No.

Core Strategy7,200303/202101/04/2003Plan period andhousing targets

H1

Table 2.3 Housing Plan Period



Year

COI

24/

2523 /24

22 /23

21 /22

20 /21

19 /20

18 /19

17 /18

16 /17

15 /65

14 /15

13 /14

12 /13

11 /12

10 /11

09 /10

08 /09

07 /08

06 /07

05 /06

04 /05

03 /04

325

345

177

248

343

551

H2a

116

H2b

-5-5

-587

150

464

587

870

627

773

598

432

459

221

111

H2c

(number)

21.05

14.66

12.4

12.76

2.32

H2c

(ha)

400

400

400

400

400

400

400

400

400

400

400

400

400

400

400

H2c

(target)*

931

463

307

229

201

192

231

276

342

370

407

423

423

426

412

H2d

H2(a)Netadditionalhouses-inprevious

years

H2(b)N

etadditionaldwellings

-forthereporting

year

H2(c)N

etadditionaldwellings

-infutureyears

H2(d)M

anaged

deliverytarget

Table2.4CoreOutputIndicatorsH1andH2


Change%GrossIndicatorCOI

+23%57%69New and converted dwellings - onpreviously developed land

H3

Table 2.5 Previously Developed Land Performance

LossesNew PermissionsNew completionsIndicatorCOI

23 pitches0 pitches0 pitchesNet additional pitches (Gypsyand Traveller)

H4

Table 2.6 Gypsy and Traveller Provision

Affordable HousingTotal

IntermediateHousing

Social HousingIndicatorCOI

29209Gross affordable housingcompletions

H5

Table 2.7 Affordable Housing Delivery

2.5 Core Output Indicator H6 'Housing Quality - Building for Life Assessments' has not been monitored. Thisis being addressed by the Council with a member of the team working on becoming a Building for Life Assessorwithin the Authority. It is hoped that this will be in place for next year's AMR.

2.6 For completeness the Council have continued to monitor the core output indicators which were removedin the recent update.

%IndicatorNo.

11%% of dwellings completed at 30 dwellings per hectare2c

1%% of dwellings completed at 30 and 50 dwellings per hectare

88%% of dwellings completed above 50 dwellings per hectare

Table 2.8 Housing Density

2.7 Environmental Quality

Water QualityFloodingIndicatorCOI No.

00Number of planningpermissions granted

E1

contrary to theEnvironment Agencyadvice on flooding andwater quality grounds

Table 2.9 Environmental Quality



Area (ha)DesignationIndicatorCOI No.

19,119Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)Change inareas of

E2

18,098Special Protection Areas (SPA)biodiversityimportance

10,649Special Areas of Conservation (SAC)

1,491Regionally Important Geological/Geomorphological Sites(RIGS)

10,507RAMSAR

6,155Biological Heritage Site (BHS)

30,638Area of Outstanding National Beauty (AONB)

Table 2.10 Designation Areas

TotalEnergy TypeIndicatorCOI No.

BiomassHydroSolarPhotovoltaics

WindOnshore

RenewableEnergyGeneration Plant

biomassAnimalbiomass

Co-firingofbiomasswithfossilfuels

Municipal(andindustrial)solid wastecombustion

Sewagesludgedigestion

LandfillGas

5.052MW5MW0000000.047MW0.005MWPermittedinstalled capacityin MW

E3

20.95MWunknownunknownunknownunknown0.65MW4.3MWunknownunknown16MWCompletedinstalled capacityin MW

Permitted installed capacity relates to approved developments. The total generating capacity is unknown for all micro-generation schemes - where providedthe installed capacity is recorded.

Completed installed capacity currently excludes micro-generation schemes - the capacity generated by such schemes will be investigated by the Councilover the next financial year.

Table 2.11 Renewable Energy Generation 2009-2010

2.8 Note: Core Output Indicator M1 - Minerals, and Core Output Indicator W1 and W2 - Waste, are compiledby Minerals and Waste Planning Authorities – in this case Lancashire County Council.


2.9 Removed Core Output Indicators

2.10 In addition to the indicators discussed above the Council will continue to monitor the following CoreOutput Indicators (these were removed in the latest guidance):

PercentageAmountServicesIndicator

98%119GPAmount of newresidentialdevelopment 96%119Hospitalwithin 30 minutespublic transporttime of:

98%119Primary School

98%119Secondary School

98%119Areas of employment

98%119Major Retail Centre(s)

Table 2.12 Transport

Data provided by Lancashire County Council.

End of Appendix 2



Appendix 3 Local Output Indicators

ComparativeData

AnnualChange

DataDateIndicatorType

Sub-indicatorsIndicator

EnglandandWales

NW

Policy SC1 Sustainable Development

Not possible tomonitor until the

LocalSC1.1 Housingallocations meetingcriteria in the table production of the

Land UseAllocations DPD


LocalSC1.2 Employmentallocations meetingcriteria in table production of the

Land UseAllocations DPD


LocalSC1.3 Retailallocations meetingcriteria in table production of the

land useAllocations DPD


LocalSC1.4 Housingpermissionsmeeting criteria intable

production of theLand UseAllocations DPD


LocalSC1.5 Employmentpermissionsmeeting criteria intable

production of theLand UseAllocations DPD

Not possible tomonitor until theproduction of theLand UseAllocations DPD

LocalSC1.6 Retailpermissionsmeeting criteria intable

Policy SC2 Urban Concentration


-110502010LocalLancasterSC2.1 Dwellingcompletions bylocation -70612010LocalMorecambe

andHeysham

-1602010LocalCarnforth

-13102010LocalRural

2,689 sqm2010LocalLancasterSC2.2 Employmentsqm (gross) bylocation

16 sqm2010LocalMorecambeandHeysham

54 sqm2010LocalCarnforth

1,821 sqm2010LocalRural

2010LocalLancasterSC2.3 Retail sqm(gross) by location

2010LocalMorecambeandHeysham

2010LocalCarnforth

2010LocalRural

Policy SC3 Rural Communities

No change292010LocalSC3.1 Parish Plansprepared

-129 completions inrural areas

2010LocalSC3.2 Affordablehousing completed

-302010LocalSC3.3 Local needshousing completed

+1,051sqm4 sites (1,527sqmgross floorspace)

2010LocalSC3.4 Ruralemploymentpremises delivered



Slyne withHest no

longer hasa doctorssurgery

7 of the 8 keyvillages have

access to the 5basic services

2010LocalSC3.5 Facilitiesavailable in villages

Policy SC4 Meeting the Districts Housing Requirement

-209121 (gross)Apr-10LocalSC4.1 DwellingCompletions

-10Outstandingcommitment for392 dwellings

2010LocalSC4.2 AffordableHousingPermissions

-16292010LocalSC4.3 AffordableHousingCompletions

Policy SC5 Achieving quality in Design

02010LocalSC5.1 Entries forLancaster DistrictAwards

02010LocalSC5.2Developmentreceiving Civic Trustawards

02010LocalSC5.3Developmentsreceiving BURAawards

02010LocalSC5.4Developmentsreceiving RTPIawards

02010LocalSC5.5 Applicationsreferred by CABE

Policy SC6 Crime and Community Safety

Recorded under contextual indicator KC2.12010LocalandContextual

SC6.1 RecordedCrime per 1000population

-19.6884.02 (rate per1,000 of thepopulation)

2010LocalSC6.2 Incidences ofdisorder *


+150302April09-March10

LocalSC6.3 Reportedviolent crimes inLancaster CityCentre **

-156317April09-March10

LocalSC6.4 Reportedviolent crime inCentral Morecambe**

* Figures for 2007 have been amended to reflect new information received from Lancashire County Council.The data relates to calls to the police about anti-social behaviour.

** The indicator monitors Serious Violent Crime which includes: homicides, acts endangering life, GBHwithout intent and Assault with Less Serious Injury.Data for Lancaster City Centre relates to Dukes ward and data for Central Morecambe relates to Poultonward

Policy SC7 Development and the risk of Flooding

Reported under Core Output Indicator E12010LocalSC7.1 Planningpermission grantedcontrary to advicefrom theEnvironmentAgency on eitherflood risk or waterquality grounds

+6189,037.372010LocalSC7.2 Area of landwithin flood zone 3

002010LocalSC7.3 Seriousflooding incidentsinvolving damage toproperty.

Policy SC8 Recreation and Open Space

-5%75%2010LocalSC8.1 Sportspitches toacceptablestandards*

-0.81 ha9.38 ha2010LocalSC8.2 Children'splayspaces **

-481 ha of land per136 people

2010LocalSC8.3 Public openspace per 1000population ***

No new publicspace

2010LocalSC8.4 New publicspace deliveredannually



1 new Play Area.2010LocalSC8.5 Children'splayspace deliveredannually

* This is based on the outdoor sports facilities category in the Council's revised PPG17 study. The studydoes not provide a figure in hectares for pitches at acceptable standards. The average score for the Districtis reported in the AMR.

** Taken this information from table 7.1 of the Council's PPG17 Study which looks at provision for childrenunder 12.

*** Based on total open space recorded in the Council's PPG17 Study

Policy ER1 Higher and Further Education

-63514,117(Lancaster

2010LocalER1.1 Studentnumbers

University andUniversity of

Cumbria)

No newfloorspacecompleted

2010LocalER1.2 sqm ofteachingaccommodationcompleted

2010LocalER1.3 sqm ofresearch anddevelopmentfloorspacecompleted

2010LocalER1.4 Studentaccommodationcompleted oncampus

2010LocalER1.5 Studentaccommodationcompletedoff-campus

-60013,400 (totalfigure)

2006LocalER1.6 Knowledgebased jobs created

14,000 (totalfigure)

2005

Policy ER2 Regeneration Priority Areas

The CoreStrategy was

adopted in July2008

2009LocalER2.1 SpatialStrategies in place


No2010LocalER2.2 LunesideEast commenced

Application wasrefused by the

Secretary of Statein December

2009

2010LocalER2.3 CentralCanal Corridorcommenced

Midland Hotelopened

2009LocalER2.4 CentralPromenadecommenced

Policy ER3 Employment Land Allocations

0.46 ha2010LocalER3.1 Hadeveloped for B1

0.49 ha2010LocalER3.2 developedfor B2

0.5 ha2010LocalER3.3 Hadeveloped for B8

3,037 sqm2010Localandcontextual

ER3.4 B1floorspacecompleted

1,016 sqm2010Localandcontextual

ER3.5 B2floorspacecompleted

437 sqm2010Localandcontextual

ER3.6 B8floorspacecompleted -60013,400 (total

figure)2006LocalER3.7 Jobs created

in environmentaltechnologies

14,000 (totalfigure)

2005Local

Reported under local output indicator ER1.6ER3.8 Jobs createdin knowledge basedindustries

Policy ER4 Town centres and shopping

-6%73,154 sqm2010LocalLancasterER4.1 Grossconvenience and

-19%29,492 sqm2010Morecambecomparison retailfloorspace in



No data for2009

9,360 sqm2010CarnforthLancaster,Morecambe andCarnforth centres(sq m)

2152010LocalLancasterER4.2 Retailerrepresentation in

2102009Lancaster,Morecambe andCarnforth Centres 1182010LocalMorecambe

982009

302010LocalCarnforth

No data2009

-4.88%43.7%2010LocalA1Lancaster

ER4.3 Mix of usesin Lancaster,Morecambe andCarnforth centres 1.08%10.4%A2

1.18%6.10%A3

-5.16%5.4%A4

2.13%3.4%A54.86%16.61%Other

0.17%13.77%Vacant

-7.2%37%2010A1Morecambe

-3%10.5%A2

-0.3%7%A3

-1.5%4.3%A4

-0.2%3.4%A5

7.22%19.2%Other4.8%18.3%Vacant

No dataavailable for2009

47.2%2010A1Carnforth


10.4%A2

2.8%A3

3.8%A4

3.8%A5

23.5%Other

7.54%Vacant

92 units2010LocalPrimaryVacancy byUnitLancaster

ER4.4 Primary andoverall vacancy by 24,487 sqmPrimary

Vacancy bygrossfloorspace

unit and grossfloorspace inLancaster,Morecambe andCarnforth centres

OverallVacancylevel by unit

OverallVacancylevel bygrossfloorspace

842010LocalPrimaryVacancy byUnitMorecambe

8,806 sqmPrimaryVacancy bygrossfloorspaceOverallVacancylevel by unit




8 units2010LocalPrimaryVacancy byUnitCarnforth

619 sqmPrimaryVacancy bygrossfloorspace

OverallVacancylevel by unit


Not available2007LocalER4.5 Zone A rentsin Lancaster andMorecambe

No newdata

1,097,1502008LocalLancasterTotal

ER4.6 Pedestrianflows in Lancasterand Morecambe

No newdata

36,5722008LancasterAverage

No newdata

301,3402008Morecambe* Total

No newdata

14,3502008Morecambe* Average

* Figures for Morecambe exclude the Westend

No newdata

5.50%July2008

LocalER4.7 Retail yieldsin Lancaster CityCentre

Policy ER5 New Retail Development

-900 sqm2009-10LocalER5.1 Town CentreComparisonFloorspaceCompleted (sqm)


+76662009-10LocalER5.2 Town CentreConvenienceFloorspaceCompleted (sqm)

002009-10LocalER5.3 Edge ofCentre ComparisonFloorspaceCompleted (sqm)

13802009-10LocalER5.4 Edge ofCentreConvenienceFloorspaceCompleted (sqm)

002009-10LocalER5.5 Out ofCentre ComparisonFloorspaceCompleted (sqm)

-9794992009-10LocalER5.6 Out ofCentreConvenienceFloorspaceCompleted (sqm)

Policy ER6 Developing Tourism

Midland Hotelopened June2008

2008LocalER6.1 Progress onmajor projects(Midland Hotel,Winter Gardens;potential ofLancaster TownHall and the Castle;development ofCarnforth's railway,canal and industrialheritage;diversification in thecountryside)

GeneralAtmosphere

GeneralAtmosphere:

2008LocalER6.2 DestinationBenchmarking

changeLancaster - 4.12since 2006:Morecambe -Lancaster4.11. Feeling of-0.23;welcome:



Lancaster - 4.13Morecambe 4.08Score based oncategory ofoverall

Morecambe:0.33.Feeling ofwelcomechangesince 2006:impression ofLancasterLancaster and-0.14;MorecambeMorecambe0.14

(scored out of 5)in the 2008Lancaster andMorecambeDestinationBenchmarking

202,403 (100,381Lancaster,

2008/09LocalER6.3 TourismInformation Centreinquiries 102,022

Morecambe)

Changesince 2006:

Quality ofaccommodation

2008LocalER6.4 Quantity andquality ofaccommodation Lancasterwas rated based

+0.35.on benchmarkingMorecambe:+0.04

Lancaster scored4.55 andMorecambescored 4.44

Data for 2009records 16,563beds in thedistrict

unknownLocalER6.5 Parish Plans– rural tourismopportunitiesidentified

Policy ER7 Renewable Energy

No newinstalledschemesreported

16MW2010LocalER7.1 On-shorewind turbinecapacity installed

No newinstalledschemesreported

4.95MW2010LocalER7.2 Biomasscapacity installed


1 wind energyscheme and 7

solar panelschemesapproved

2010LocalER7.3Micro-renewablesapproved (whereknown)

Policy E1 Environmental Capacity

13haincrease

6,155 ha of theDistrict is coveredby BiologicalHeritage Site(BHS)designation

2010LocalE1.1 Biodiversity

Reported under contextual indicator KC5.42010LocalE1.2 ListedBuildings at Risk

Recorded under core indicator E32010LocalandCore

E1.3 RenewableEnergy capacityinstalled

No new habitatscreated

2010LocalE1.4 Habitatscreated

Recorded under contextual indicator KC4.32010Localandcontextual

E1.5 AONBManagement Plansin place

Policy CE2 Transport Measures



The timetable forconstruction has

recently been

2010LocalCE2.1 Progress onHeysham-M6 Linkproposals

revised withcommencementnot anticipated

until 2012

No new routes2010LocalCE2.2 Quality BusRoutes

Awaiting datafrom LancashireCounty Council

2010LocalCE2.3 Quality BusPatronage

+67,0001,716,0002008/09LocalCE2.4 Local RailPatronage

2 Travel Planssubmitted - SJ

Bargh Ltd, Caton

2009LocalCE2.5 BusinessTravel Plansapproved

Road (Nov 2009)& Bailrigg /Lancaster

Science Park(Sept 2009)

Over 75km2010LocalCE2.6 Cycle routelength

Policy CS1 ‘Improving Customer Service’

No newcentresreported

2 new customerservice centres atLancaster andMorecambeTownHall

2008LocalCS1.1 Face-to-FaceCustomer ServiceCentres established

Recorded under local indicator ER4.3LocalCS1.2 Diversity ofuses in TownCentres

Awaitingnew data

63.58% of thepopulation iswithin 5km of the5 basic services

2007LocalCS1.3 Availability ofbasic services

fromLancashire

CountyCouncil

Lancaster - 42%of shops not

2001LocalCS1.4 Accessibilityof commercialpremises accessible (data


awaited for widerarea)

Policy MR1 ‘Planning Obligations’

5 S106agreements were

2010LocalMR1.1 Number ofschemes with S106contributions entered into

containingrequirements forfinancialcontributions forsustainabletransport andhighway impactmitigation.

£294,533TransportationImprovements

2010LocalMR1.2Contributionssecured forinfrastructure

£02010LocalMD1.3Contributionssecured for openspace

£02010LocalMD1.4Contributionssecured forbiodiversity

Table 3.1

Sources of data available on request.



Appendix 4 Significant Effects IndicatorsComparativeData

%ChangeDataDateIndicatorType

Sub-indicatorsIndicator

Englandand Wales

NW

Moredetailedindicators

arerequired

Significanteffect

Perception of crimeS1.2a

002010SignificantEffect

Sites> 1ha approved forresidential development

S1.3a

without any regulatoryobjection (from theEnvironment Agency)regarding flood risk (% of allsites approved)

-7982009SignificantEffect

Number of peoplekilled/seriously injured in roadtraffic accidents

S1.3b

Awaitingdatafrom

EnvironmentalHealth

SignificantEffect

Sites approved fordevelopment without anyregulatory objection regardingland contamination (% of allsites approved)

S1.3c

-69%2010SignificantEffect

Variation of District housingcompletion rate p.a. from

S2.1a

meeting regional requirementp.a. (%)

1%decrease

3%Mar-10SignificantEffect

Households on Councilhousing waiting list (% of allhouseholds)

S2.1b

38%increase

130April2009-March

2010

SignificantEffect

Homeless households(number reported)

S2.1c

8%decrease

6%2010SignificantEffect

Affordable housingcompletions by a registered

S2.2a

social landlord either sharedequity or housing for rent viaa (% of identified need)

Recorded under contextual indicator 5.3.3SignificantEffect and

Unit dwellings (% of alldwellings)

S2.3a

contextualindicator

No newdata

1 GPpractice

per5,501people


GPs per 1,000 populationS3.1a

No newdata


Village settlements withDoctor's Surgery

S3.1b


No newdata

1 Dentalpractice

per6,810people


Dentists per 1000 populationS3.1c

642allotments(217 per1,000 ofpopulation)


Allotments per 1,000population (this includesprivate and council ownedsites)

S3.2a

No newdata


Village settlements withGeneral Store

S3.2b

2008representsbaseline

31.7km2008SignificantEffect

Length of undeveloped coastS3.4a


20.2km2008SignificantEffect

Length of remote coast (>1kmfrom urban/village settlement)

S3.4b

None inLancasterDistrict


Beaches with blue flagaccreditation (% of alldesignated beaches)

S3.5a

Within720m ofNatural


% of the population within theurban area with access topublic greenspace *

S3.5b

orSemi-NaturalGreen

Space =

83.8%

Within480m ofAmenityGreenSpace

=~94.7%

WilliamsonPark no

12.8%of parks

and


Parks with green flagaccreditation (% of allidentified parks andgreenspaces)

need toput thisas a % longer has

green flagstatus

gardenswithinthe

DistrictNo newdata

3,192March 2007SignificantEffect

Cinema seating capacity per1,000 population

S3.7a

No newdata

967March 2007SignificantEffect

Theatre seating capacity per1,000 population

S3.7b

Recorded under contextual indicator KC2.2.32010SignificantEffect

People unemployed (% ofworkforce)

S5.1a



1.2%reduction

3.8%March 2009SignificantEffect

Average householdearnings(% variation tonational mean)

S5.1b

Amendmentsto data


New dwellings completedlocated within 400m of a bus

S6.1a

collectionstop or 800m of a train stationhas(% of all completions per

annum) meantthat it

has notbeen

possibleto

monitorthis

No newdata

97.53%April 2006SignificantEffect

Population within 400m of abus stop on a quality busroute (% of total population)

S6.1b

Amendmentsto data

collection


New dwellings within 0.5kmof the District cycle pathnetwork (% of all completionspa)

S6.2a

hasmeantthat it

has notbeen

possibleto

monitorthis

Awaitingdata

SignificantEffect

Public buildings meetingminimum standards ofaccessibility for disabledpeople (Number pa)

S6.3a

No newdata


Village settlements within 3kmof post office, general store,

EC2.1a

primary school, doctor'ssurgery, public house

LancasterUniversity

is


University rankings in leaguetables (Lancaster Universityand University of Cumbria)

EC2.2a

ranked16.

Universityof

Cumbriais

ranked85th

(Guardianleaguetable)


Recorded under contextual indicator KC3.2.2SignificantEffect andcontextual

People in employment (% ofworkforce)

EC2.2b

2.7%decrease

30.5%April2009-March

2010

SignificantEffect

High earners (% of workforce)(managers and senior officialsand professional occupations)

EC2.2c

Datapresently

notavailable

SignificantEffect

New developments meetingeco homes/breaam 'verygood' standards

EN1.3a

Recorded under significant effects indicatorS3.5a

SignificantEffect

Beaches with blue flagaccreditation (% of alldesignated beaches)

EN2.1a

Awaitinginformation

fromEnvironmentalHealth

SignificantEffect

Incidences where thresholdsfor air quality are exceeded inrecorded measurements - a)within air quality managementplan are and b) low levelozone

EN2.4a

Awaitinginformation


SignificantEffect

Complaints re. Odour/smellpa

EN2.4b

Awaitinginformation


SignificantEffect

Households within smokelesszones

EN2.4c

1%increase

92October 2009SignificantEffect

SSSIs units in favourablecondition

EN3.1a

Recorded under local indicator MD1.3SignificantEffect

New greenspace habitatcreated as part of newdevelopment pa.

EN3.2a

3,402ha inEntry

2007/08SignificantEffect

Land in entry/higher levelstewardship schemes orequivalent

EN3.2b

Levelplus

HigherLevel

StewardshipAwaiting

dataSignificantEffect

Take of greenfield land fordevelopment (ha)

EN5.1a

Awaitingdata

SignificantEffect

Development on greenfieldland (% of all developmentp.a.)

EN5.1b

Awaitingdata

SignificantEffect

Take of greenfield land fordevelopment (ha)

EN5.2a


21,956ha2009SignificantEffect

Take of Grades 1,2 and 3aagricultural land fordevelopment pa

EN5.2b



Awaitingdata

SignificantEffect

New developments approvedfor greenfield land wheretopsoil is safeguarded (% ofall such new developments)

EN5.2c

Awaitingdata

SignificantEffect

Development where topsoilimport is required (numberp.a.)

EN5.2d

4.4%2010SignificantEffect

Vacant housing (% of allhousing)

EN5.3a

3%2010SignificantEffect

New dwellings completed asconversions (% of alldwellings)

EN5.3b

Awaitingdata

SignificantEffect

New development >1hawhere materials existing atsite are re-used in that newdevelopment (number)

EN5.3c

1%increase

36%2009/10SignificantEffect

Household waste recycled (%of waste by weight)

EN5.3d

MonitoringFrameworkneeds to

bedeveloped

SignificantEffect

New developments meetingeco homes/breaam 'verygood' standards

EN6.1a

1 windenergyscheme


Developments incorporatingmicro-generation (solar, wind,CHP) pa.

EN6.1b

and 7solarpanel

schemesapproved

overmonitoringperiod

MonitoringFrameworkneeds to

bedeveloped

SignificantEffect

Developments where >10%of energy consumptionrequirement is met bymicro-generation

EN6.1c

Table 4.1

4.1 * Open green space is defined as natural and semi-natural space and amenity space. Assessment figuresare taken from the Council's revised PPG17 Study.

The monitoring framework of significant effects indicators will be developed further over the next 12 monthperiod as the City Council implements its new Sustainability Appraisal Framework

Sources of data available on request


Appendix 5 Lancaster District Local Plan Policies5.1 The Lancaster District Local Plan was adopted in April 2004.When the Planning and Compulsory PurchaseAct came into force in September 2004, policies in the Local Plan were 'saved' for three years (i.e. until September2007). At the time, it was anticipated that the Local Plan would have been replaced by new Local DevelopmentDocuments within this three year period. This has not been the case and Lancaster City Council applied tohave certain policies retained until such time as they are replaced under the new system. The Secretary ofState responded to this request and issued a Direction stating which Local Plan policies will be retained andused when determining planning applications. This came into force on the 27th September 2007.

5.2 Additionally several Local Plan policies have now been wholly superseded or partially superseded bypolicies in the Core Strategy. The status of Local Plan policies can be viewed from the following linkhttp://www.lancaster.gov.uk/Documents/Planning/Local%20Plan%202004/Summary_List_of_Saved_Not_Saved_and_Superseded_LDLP_Policies.doc

5.3 The table below relates only to those Local Plan policies which have been saved or partly saved. Therelationship between these policies and indicators within the District's Monitoring Framework is explained withinthis table. Policies not saved are listed at the end of this appendix.

HousingDoes an Indicator in this AMR relate toPolicy?

Does a Target accompanyPolicy? /Policy Type

Lancaster District Local PlanPolicy

Yes: Core Output Indicator(COI) H2 and Local OutputIndicator SC2.1

Yes – Land AllocationEstablishment of HousingLand Supply andAllocation of HousingSites in the Urban Area

H2-6

Yes: COI H2 and LocalOutput Indicator SC2.1

Yes – Land AllocationUrban HousingOpportunity Sites

H3


Yes – Land AllocationUrbanHousing AllocationsH4


Yes – Land AllocationRural Housing AllocationsH5

Yes:COI H2 and LocalOutput Indicator SC2.1

Yes – Land AllocationRural HousingOpportunitySites

H6

Yes: Local indicators SC2.1and SC3.3

No - Permissive; viaconsideration of criteria

Housing in VillagesH 7

Yes: Local indicators SC2.1and SC3.3

No - Restrictive; viaconsideration of criteria

Housing in theCountryside

H8

Need for furtherindicators will beaddressed by the

NoNo – Asset ProtectionRemoval of OccupancyConditions on Housing forRural Industries Workers

H9

developingMonitoringFramework


Yes – DevelopmentRequirement

Affordable HousingH10

Need for furtherIndicators will beaddressed by the

NoNo - Permissive; viaconsideration of criteria

Rural Exceptions SitesH11

developingMonitoringFramework

Yes: COI H6 and Localindicators under Policy SC5

No - DevelopmentRequirement

Housing DesignH12



http://www.lancaster.gov.uk/Documents/Planning/Local%20Plan%202004/Summary_List_of_Saved_Not_Saved_and_Superseded_LDLP_Policies.doc

HousingDoes an Indicator in this AMR relate toPolicy?



Yes: COI H6Yes – DevelopmentRequirement(Partial)

Sustainable LivingH13

Yes - COI H4No – Asset ProtectionExisting Gypsy SitesH15Yes - COI H4No - Permissive; via

consideration of criteriaProposed Gypsy SitesH16

Need for furtherIndicators will be


Sheltered Homes, Homesfor the Elderly

H17

addressed by thedevelopingMonitoringFrameworkAs aboveNoNo - Permissive; via

consideration of criteriaNursing HomesH18

As aboveYes: COI H2 (But only withregard to Housing LandSupply not amenitycriteria )


Residential Developmentwithin Existing HousingAreas

H19


No - Two part policyPermissive by CriteriaApproach and AssetProtection

Upper Floors of ShopsH20



Flat DevelopmentH21

As aboveNoNo - Permissive; viaconsideration of criteria

Houses in MultipleOccupation

H22

Table 5.1

The Local EconomyDoes an Indicator in this AMR relate toPolicy?



Yes: COI BD3Yes – Land AllocationBailrigg Business ParkEC1

Yes, in that the site contributes tothe employment land supply

Yes: COI BD3Yes – Land AllocationNew EmploymentAllocations – UrbanArea

EC2

Yes, in that the area of sitescontributes to the employmentland supply

Yes: COI BD3Yes – Land AllocationNew EmploymentAllocations – CarnforthBusiness Park

EC3



The Local EconomyDoes an Indicator in this AMR relate toPolicy?



Yes: COI BD3No - Permissive; via considerationof criteria

Rural EmploymentAreas

EC4

Local IndicatorsSC2.2 and SC3.4

Yes: COI BD3Yes - Land AllocationExisting UrbanEmployment Areas

EC5


Need for furtherIndicators will beaddressed by thedeveloping MonitoringFramework

NoNo - Permissive; via considerationof criteria

Criteria for newEmploymentDevelopment

EC6

Yes: (partially)COI BD3

No - Land Allocation (mixed use)Halton MillsEmploymentOpportunity

EC7

Policy Regime will besimplified in LDF

NoNo – Restrictive; via considerationof criteria

Port of HeyshamEC10

Policy Regime will besimplified in LDF

NoNo - Permissive; via considerationof criteria

Port of GlassonEC11

Need for furtherIndicators will beaddressed in futurerevisions to theMonitoring Framework

Yes: LocalIndicator ER2.2

No – Restrictive; via considerationof criteria

LunesideEC14

Need for specific ruralemployment Indicatorswill be addressed infuture revisions to theMonitoring Framework

Yes: COI BD1No – Asset ProtectionNon-employmentdevelopment on ruralemployment sites

EC16

Yes: COI BD1and BD4

No - Permissive; via considerationof criteria

Office DevelopmentEC17

Yes: COI BD1Yes - Land Allocation (mixed use)Kingsway SiteEC18(also seeT7) Yes, in that the area of sites

contributes to the employmentland supply

Table 5.2

ShoppingDoes an Indicator in this AMR relate toPolicy?



Yes: COI BD4 andlocal indicators ER4and ER5


Shopping HierarchyS1



ShoppingDoes an Indicator in this AMR relate toPolicy?




NoNo - Asset ProtectionIdentification of RetailFrontages

S4


No – Restrictive; viaconsideration of criteria

Proposals for A2 Uses inPrimary Retail FrontagesLancaster

S5


NoNo – Restrictive; viaconsideration of criteria

Proposals for AmusementCentres in Lancaster

S6



Proposals for A3 Uses inPrimary and Other KeyRetail Frontages inLancaster

S7



Morecambe Town CentreNon-A1 Retail Uses

S9



Proposals for AmusementCentres in Morecambe

S10



Protected FrontagesCarnforth Town Centre

S12



Small Local ShopsS15




Farm ShopsS17

Yes: Local IndicatorsSC3.5


The loss of village shopsand food and drink uses

S18

As aboveNoNo – Restrictive; viaconsideration of criteria

Food and Drink UsesS19

As aboveNoNo - Asset ProtectionThe loss of food and drinkestablishments in theCountryside

S21

Table 5.3


TourismDoes an Indicator in this AMR relate toPolicy?


Lancaster District Local Plan Policy

Need for more specificindicators will beaddressed by thedeveloping MonitoringFramework

Yes: Localindicators ER6

No – Permissive; viaconsideration of criteria

Tourism Opportunity AreaTO2

As aboveYes: Localindicators ER6


Small Scale TourismDevelopment in theCountryside

TO3

As aboveYes: Localindicators ER6


Major TourismDevelopment in theCountryside

TO4

As aboveNoNo – RestrictiveCaravans in AONBsTO5As aboveNoNo – RestrictiveCaravans outside AONBsTO6As aboveNoNo - Permissive; via

consideration of criteriaTouring Caravan SitesTO7


Caravan Sites - Extensionof Season

TO8

Table 5.4

TransportDoes an Indicator in this AMR relate toPolicy?

Does a Target accompanyPolicy? / Policy Type

Lancaster District LocalPlan Policy

Need for further Indicators willbe addressed in futurerevisions to the MonitoringFramework

NoNo - Commitment to Preparea Strategy, Plan or Brief

Transport StrategyT1


Rail StationsT3


NoNo – Commitment toPrepare a Strategy, Plan orBrief

Park and RideT8


Yes: LocalIndicator CE2

No – DevelopmentRequirement

Provision for buses innew housingdevelopment

T9

NoNo – Asset ProtectionCity Centre Highwayimprovements

T10

NoNo – Asset ProtectionCity Centre highwayimprovements

T11

Need for specific Indicatorswill be addressed by thedeveloping MonitoringFramework

NoNo – Asset ProtectionShopper/Visitor ParkingIn Lancaster

T13


Non-residentialDevelopment in theLancaster CentralParking Area

T15



TransportDoes an Indicator in this AMR relate toPolicy?

Does a Target accompanyPolicy? / Policy Type

Lancaster District LocalPlan Policy

Yes – (partially)monitored underreplaced COI 3a -


Car ParkingT16

the Council willcontinue tomonitor this.


Yes: LocalIndicator CE2.5


Green Travel PlansT17

As aboveNoLPA Commitment toundertake project

Morecambe PromenadeT18

As aboveNoNo – Asset ProtectionVisitor/Shopper CarParks in Morecambe

T19

As aboveNoNo – Asset ProtectionCompensatory CarParking

T20


Car Parks at VisitorDestinations in ruralareas

T23

Further indicators will need tobe developed in theMonitoring Framework

Yes: LocalIndicator CE2.6

Commitment to prepare aStrategy, Plan or Brief

Cycle NetworkT24

As aboveYes: LocalIndicator CE2.6


Strategic Cycle NetworkT26


NoNo – Asset ProtectionPublic Rights of WayT27

Table 5.5

Environmental Protection and EnhancementDoes an Indicator in this AMR relate to

Policy?Does a Target accompany

Policy? /Policy TypeLancaster District Local Plan

PolicyNoNo – Land AllocationDefinition of Green BeltE1

Need for specificindicators will beaddressed by thedeveloping MonitoringFramework

No

See KCI 4.3


AONBsE3


Development in theCountryside Area

E4

Further indicators willneed to be developed inthe MonitoringFramework

Yes: (partly) significanteffects indicator 3.4aand 3.4b


Development on theCoastline

E5





PolicyNeed for specificindicators will beaddressed by thedeveloping MonitoringFramework


WatercoursesE7

As aboveNoNo - Asset protectionGroundwaterE8More detailed specificindicators will bedeveloped

Yes – COI E1No – Restrictive; viaconsideration of criteria

Flooding RiskE11

As aboveYes – COI E2(partially)

No - Asset protectionWildlife ImpactsE12


No - Asset protectionWoodland and TreesE13


No - Asset protectionLimestoneE14


No - Asset protectionSSSIsE16


No - Asset protectionBiological andGeological HeritageSites

E17

More detailed specificindicators will bedeveloped

No(except for whereproposal add to thehousing supply)


The conversion ofredundant buildings inthe countryside

E20


Business Proposals thatform part of anagricultural unit

E21

Yes - COI E3 in regardto generating capacity


WindfarmsE22

Need for specificindicators will beaddressed by thedeveloping MonitoringFramework


TelecommunicationsInstallations

E23


Electricity LinesE24

NoNo – Land AllocationMiddleton WoodE26As aboveNoLPA Commitment to

undertake projectWoodland OpportunityAreas

E27

As aboveNoAspirational/encouragement for beneficialproposals

Woodland in newhousing areas

E28

Yes – COI E3(partially) and localindicators under policySC8

No - Asset protectionUrban GreenspaceE29

Yes- Local Indicatorsunder Policy SC8

No - Asset protectionGreen CorridorsE30






PolicyMore detailed specificindicators will bedeveloped

NoNo - Asset protectionKey Urban LandscapeE31

As aboveYes – Contextualindicator 5.2 (partially)

No - Asset protectionListed BuildingsE32-34


No - Asset protectionDevelopment inConservation Areas

E35-39


No - Asset protectionDevelopment inConservation Areas

E40-43

As aboveNoNo - Asset protectionArchaeologyE45-46As aboveNoNo – Restrictive; via

consideration of criteriaAccess CorridorsE47

Table 5.6

Recreation and Community ServicesDoes an Indicator in this AMR

relate to Policy?Does a Target accompany Policy?

/Policy TypeLancaster District Local Plan

PolicyPPG17 study providesbaseline position. Further workis required in this area.

NoNo - Asset protection

Partially reported under localindicator SC8

Recreational Open SpaceR1

As aboveNoNo - Permissive; via consideration ofcriteria

All Weather PitchesR2



Major sports groundsR3



Outdoor Playing SpaceR4


Need for specific indicatorswill be addressed by thedeveloping MonitoringFramework

NoNo - Permissive; via consideration ofcriteria

Proposals for Golf Coursesin the AONBs

R6


Proposals for New GolfDriving Ranges

R7


Equestrian DevelopmentR10

YesYes: Local Indicator MD1.3Open Space in newHousing Development

R11


Recreation and Community ServicesDoes an Indicator in this AMR

relate to Policy?Does a Target accompany Policy?

/Policy TypeLancaster District Local Plan

PolicyYesYes: Under local indicator ER1Lancaster UniversityR12YesYes: Under local indicator ER1St Martin’s CollegeR13

Need for specific indicatorswill be addressed by thedeveloping MonitoringFramework

NoNo – Land AllocationLancaster andMorecambeCollege

R14

As aboveNoNo - Development RequirementMoor Primary SchoolR16As aboveNoNo – Land AllocationCarnforth Community

CentreR18

YesYes: Significant Effects IndicatorDukes TheatreR19

S3.7a

YesYes: Under replaced COI 3b andSignificant Effect indicator S6.1

AccessibilityR21

Table 5.7

Note: Eight types of policy have been identified within the Lancaster District LocalPlan; these are described below.

Eight types of policy have been identified within the Lancaster District Local PlanExample PolicyDescriptionTypeNo

POLICY EC1THE 9.7 HA OF LAND IDENTIFIED ON THE LOCAL PLANPROPOSALS MAP AS THE BAILRIGG BUSINESS PARK ISALLOCATED FOR B1 (BUSINESS AND LIGHT INDUSTRIAL)USE ONLY.

Identifies a specific sitefor a particular land usewithin the plan period

Land Allocation1

POLICY E31THE KEY URBAN LANDSCAPE AREAS SHOWN ON THELOCAL PLAN PROPOSALS MAP WILL BE CONSERVED ANDIMPORTANT NATURAL FEATURES SAFEGUARDED.

Identifies anenvironmental, economicor social asset to beprotected during the planperiod

Asset Protection2

DEVELOPMENT WILL ONLY BE PERMITTED WHICHPRESERVES THE OPEN NATURE OF THE AREA AND THECHARACTER AND APPEARANCE OF ITS SURROUNDINGS.




POLICY H16PROPOSALS FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OR EXTENSIONOF GYPSY SITES WILL ONLY BE PERMITTED WHERE THEAPPLICANT CAN PROVE TO THE SATISFACTION OF THECOUNCIL THAT:THE PROPOSAL MEETS A GENUINE NEED FOR GYPSYACCOMMODATION WHICH CANNOT BE MET ON ANEXISTING OR APPROVED SITE;THE SITE IS SUITABLE FOR THE PROPOSED USE AND CANPROVIDE AN ACCEPTABLE LIVING ENVIRONMENT;THEPROPOSEDUSE ISCOMPATIBLEWITHNEIGHBOURINGUSES;AND THE SITE IS LOCATED IN OR ADJACENT TO ANEXISTING SETTLEMENT AND IS WITHIN REASONABLEDISTANCE OF LOCAL SERVICES AND SCHOOLS;

Circumstances whereproposals will bepermitted or will bepermitted where theyaccord with the criteriadescribed

Permissive; viaconsideration ofcriteria

3

EXCEPTIONALLY, PROPOSALS WHICH INVOLVE THECARRYING OUT OF A TRADE BY THE OCCUPANT(S) IN AREASONABLEMANNERWITHOUTSIGNIFICANTLYHARMINGTHEAMENITYOFNEARBYRESIDENTSWILLBEPERMITTED.

POLICY H20PROPOSALS WHICH WOULD REMOVE SEPARATE UPPERFLOOR ACCESSES IN TOWN CENTRE AND SEAFRONTPROPERTIES WILL NOT BE PERMITTED. PROPOSALS TO

Circumstances whereproposals will not bepermitted or will only bepermitted if they accordwith the criteriadescribed

Restrictive; viaconsideration ofcriteria

4

CONVERT UPPER FLOORS TO RESIDENTIAL USE WILL BEPERMITTED WHERE A SEPARATE PRIVATE ACCESS ANDACCEPTABLE STANDARDS OF PRIVACY, SPACE ANDRESIDENTIAL AMENITY ARE PROVIDED.WITHIN THE AREA SHOWN ON THE LOCAL PLANPROPOSALS MAP AS THE STONEWELL UPPER FLOORSIMPROVEMENT AREA, THE COUNCIL WILL PROMOTE THECOMPREHENSIVE CONVERSION OF UPPER FLOORPROPERTIES TO RESIDENTIAL USE

POLICY R11 HOUSING DEVELOPERS WILL BE REQUIREDTO PROVIDE OPEN SPACE AND PLAYGROUNDS INACCORDANCE WITH THE STANDARDS SET OUT INAPPENDIX 1.WHERE A DEVELOPER IS UNWILLING TO MAKE SUCHPROVISION WITHOUT SOUND REASON, PLANNINGPERMISSION WILL BE REFUSED.OPEN SPACE PROVIDED IN THIS WAY WILL BE REGARDEDAS URBAN GREENSPACE AND PROTECTED FROMDEVELOPMENT IN LINE WITH POLICY E29.TO OBTAIN THE REQUIRED GREENSPACE AND SECURECONTRIBUTIONS TOWARDS ITS MAINTENANCE, THE CITYCOUNCIL WILL NEGOTIATE LEGAL AGREEMENTS WITHHOUSING DEVELOPERS.

Describes what isexpected from adevelopment proposal

DevelopmentRequirement

5



POLICY T18Statement that theCouncil will prepare anadditional documentwhen circumstancespermit

Commitment toprepare aStrategy, Planor Brief

6

BETWEEN LORD STREET AND CENTRAL DRIVE, THE CITYCOUNCIL WILL REMODEL MARINE ROAD TO IMPROVEHIGHWAYSAFETYANDFACILITIES FORPEDESTRIANSANDCYCLISTS.

DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS BETWEEN THE LANDWARDSIDE OF MARINE ROAD AND THE FORESHORE WILL ONLYBE PERMITTED WHERE THEY MAKE A POSITIVECONTRIBUTION TO THE COUNCIL'S REMODELLINGPROPOSALS.

POLICY R9THE CITY COUNCIL WILL CONCENTRATE OPPORTUNITIESFOR INFORMAL RECREATION IN THE FOLLOWINGLOCATIONS;THE LUNERIVERSIDEPARK LANCASTERCANALSIDEPARKMORECAMBE CENTRAL PARKMORECAMBE AND HEYSHAM SEAFRONTTHE LANCASTER COASTAL WAYWITHIN THESE AREAS THE COUNCIL WILL WORK WITHLANDOWNERSAND INTERESTEDBODIESTO IMPROVETHEAPPEARANCE AND SAFETY OF THE ROUTES AND TO

Statement ofencouragement orsupport for theundertaking of a projectby other parties

Aspirational/encouragementfor beneficialproposals

7

PROVIDE BETTER PUBLIC ACCESS. THE COUNCIL WILLALSO SEEK TO IMPROVE ACCESS TO AND WITHIN THEAREAS BY FOOT, BICYCLE AND PUBLIC TRANSPORT.POLICY E27THE FOLLOWING SITES IDENTIFIED ON THE LOCAL PLANPROPOSALS MAP ARE ALLOCATED AS WOODLANDOPPORTUNITY AREAS:

Statement that theCouncil intends toimplement a proposal

LPACommitment toundertakeproject

8

SOUTH HEYSHAM, LUNESIDE AND LANCASTER EASTERNM6 CORRIDOR

WITHIN THESE AREAS, THE COUNCIL WILL SEEK TOESTABLISH NEW WOODLANDS USING PREDOMINANTLYNATIVESPECIESANDALLOWING,WHEREPRACTICAL, FORPUBLIC ACCESS AND THE PROTECTION ANDENHANCEMENT OF NATURE CONSERVATION INTERESTS.

DEVELOPMENT WHICH WOULD PREJUDICE THEESTABLISHMENT OF NEW WOODLANDS IN THESE AREASWILL NOT BE PERMITTED. WITHIN THE WOODLANDOPPORTUNITY SITES, THE EXISTING NATURECONSERVATION VALUE WILL BE ASSESSED AND AREASOF SIGNIFICANT VALUE WILL NOT BE PLANTED.

Table 5.8

The following table lists the current status of Local Plan policies.



REASONS FOR DELETING POLICYLIST OF POLICIES NOT SAVED

Policy duplicates other policies which deal with theappearance of new residential development.

Policy H14 'Residential Caravans andPark Homes'

1

Outdated policy – with the new neighbourhood approachand greater community involvement a policy whichestablishes a presumption in favour of residential use isno longer appropriate.

Policy H23 'The Central Poulton Area ofMorecambe'

2

Policy is incompatible with national policy. The policy doesnot reflect the more flexible approach to employment sitespromoted in national policy.

Policy EC8 'Employment Areas andAllocations'

3

Development to be controlled bymainstream developmentcontrol policies.

Policy EC9 'South Heysham'4

The operation has now closed and proposals for theresidential re-use are now well advanced.

Policy EC12 'Nightingale Hall Farm'5

Proposals for residential re-use are now well advanced.Policy EC13 'Nightingale Hall Farm'6

Amenity and Transport Issues covered by Policy EC6Policy EC15 'Business and IndustrialDevelopment Outside EmploymentAreas'

7

Sites have now been developed.Policy S3 'King Street'8

Duplicates national policy in PPS6Policy S8 'MorecambeTown Centre'9

Duplicates national policy in PPS6Policy S11 'CarnforthTown Centre'10

Duplicates national policy and Policy S1 in the CoreStrategy.

Policy S13 'MorecambeWest End LocalCentre'

11

Duplicates national policy and Policy S1 in the CoreStrategy.

Policy S14 'Local Centres'12

Duplicates national policyPolicy S16 'Villages'13

Duplicates national policyPolicy S20 'Retail Development inMixed-Use Schemes'

14

Whilst the sites remain desirable there is no prospect ofimplementation and these site specific policies can nolonger be justified.

Policy T2 'New Railway Stations'15

Implemented.Policy T6 'Lancaster Bus Station'16

No prospect of ImplementationPolicy T7 'Kingsway site'17

Implemented.Policy T12 'Church StreetPedestrianisation'

18


REASONS FOR DELETING POLICYLIST OF POLICIES NOT SAVED

Duplicates other policies.Policy T14 'The Redevelopment ofNon-Residential Car Parking'

19

Implemented.Policy T21 'Poulton Market'20

Implemented.Policy T25 'Crossing the River Lune'21

Duplicates national policyPolicy E2 'North Lancashire Green Belt'22

Duplicates national policyPolicy E6 'Agricultural Land'23

Duplicates national policyPolicy E9 'Water Conservation'24

Duplicates national policyPolicy E10 'Contaminated Land andLandfill Gas Migration'

25

Duplicates national policyPolicy E15 'International Sites'26

Duplicates national policyPolicy E18 'Development affectingProtected Species'

27

Duplicates national policyPolicy E19 'Agricultural Development'28

Adds nothing to existing Policy FrameworkPolicy E25 ‘Derelict and Degraded Landin the Open Countryside'

29

Duplicates Policy E38 of the Local PlanPolicy E43 'Development in theLancaster City Centre ConservationArea'

30

Duplicates Policy E3 of the Local PlanPolicy R5 'Golf Courses'31

Duplicates national policyPolicy R8 'Recreation Facilities in theGreen Belt'

32

No foreseeable prospect of implementation.Policy R15 'Primary and SecondarySchools'

33

Duplicates general policies on Development inCountryside

Policy R17 'Community Centres in theRural Areas'

34

Implemented.Policy R20 'Emergency Services'35

Table 5.9

Replacement Core Strategy PolicySuperseded Lancaster District Local PlanPolicy

SC1 ‘Sustainable Development’Policy H1 ‘Plan Monitor and Manage’1

SC2 ‘Urban Concentration’



Replacement Core Strategy PolicySuperseded Lancaster District Local PlanPolicy

SC4 ‘Meeting the District’s Housing Requirements’

ER5 ‘Town Centres and Shopping’Policy S2 ‘New Retail Development’2

ER6 ‘Developing Tourism’Policy TO1 ‘Tourism in Morecambe’3

E2 ‘Transportation Measures’Policy T1 ‘Transport Strategy’4

E2 ‘Transportation Measures’Policy T4 ‘Rail Freight’5

E2 ‘Transportation Measures’Policy T5 ‘Primary Bus Corridor’6

E2 ‘Transportation Measures’Policy T22 ‘Traffic in Carnforth’7

SC5 ‘Achieving Quality in Design’Policy E47 ‘Access Corridors’8

SC8 ‘Recreation and Open Space’Policy R9 ‘Recreation Opportunity Areas’9

SC6 ‘Community Safety’Policy R22 ‘Crime Prevention’10

Table 5.10

Replacement Core Strategy PolicyPolicy of the Lancaster District Local PlanSuperseded in Part

SC3 Rural CommunitiesPolicy H7 ‘Housing in Villages’1

SC4Meeting The District’s Housing RequirementsPolicy H10 ‘Affordable Housing’2

SC3 Rural Communities

SC4Meeting The District’s Housing RequirementsPolicy H11 ‘Affordable Housing in Rural Areas’3

SC3 Rural Communities

EC1 Higher and Further EducationPolicy EC1 ‘Bailrigg Business Park’4

ER2 RegenerationPolicy EC14 ‘Luneside’5


Replacement Core Strategy PolicyPolicy of the Lancaster District Local PlanSuperseded in Part

ER4 Town Centres and ShoppingPolicy S1 ‘Retail Hierarchy’6

E2 Transportation MeasuresPolicy T13 ‘Car Parking in Lancaster CityCentre’

7

E2 Transportation MeasuresPolicy T15 ‘Car Parking in Lancaster CityCentre’

8

E2 Transportation Measures also see Figure 8Policy T24 ‘Cycle Network’9

E1 Environmental CapitalPolicy E1 ‘The definition of the Green Belt’10

SC2 Urban Concentration

SC7 Development and the Risk of FloodingPolicy E11 ‘Development and Flood Risk’11

ER7 Renewable EnergyPolicy E22 ‘Wind Farms’12

ER2 Regeneration Priority AreasPolicy E26 ‘Middleton Wood’13

SC8 Recreation and Open SpacePolicy E30 ‘Green Corridors’14

SC8 Recreation and Open SpacePolicy E31 ‘Key Urban Landscapes’15

ER1 Higher and Further EducationPolicy R12 ‘Lancaster University’16

ER1 Higher and Further EducationPolicy R13 ‘St Martin’s College’17

ER1 Higher and Further EducationPolicy R14 ‘Lancaster and Morecambe College’18

Table 5.11



Appendix 6 GlossaryComparative Indicator

Describes how the indicator compares to that of a wider or alternative geography.

e.g. The relationship between the unemployment rate in Lancaster district and England & Wales.


Suggested by published guidance and collected nationally, previously by the Regional Assembly. Designed toenable the performance of authorities to be consistently compared across the Country.

Local Output Indicators

Developed to monitor specific local matters.

Local Progress Indicator

Assess how the indicator has changed over time

e.g. Lancaster District's unemployment rate in 2006 compared to the rate in 2005

Significant Effect Indicators

These are linked to the sustainability appraisal objectives and indicators. They should assist in comparing andpredicting effects and actual effects measured during implementation of a policy.

Use Class Order

A1 Shops - Shops, retail warehouses, hairdressers, undertakers, travel and ticket agencies, post offices,pet shops, sandwich bars, showrooms, domestic hire shops, dry cleaners and funeral directors.A2 Financial and professional services - Banks, building societies, estate and employment agencies,professional and financial services and betting offices.A3 Restaurants and cafés - For the sale of food and drink for consumption on the premises - restuarants,snack bars and cafes.A4 Drinking establishments - Public houses, wine bars or other drinking establishments (but not a nightclubs).A5 Hot food takeaways - For the sale of hot food for consumption off the premises.

B1 Business - Offices, research and development, light industry appropriate in a residential area.B2 General industrialB3-B7 Special Industrial Groups - See 'Use Classes Schedule'.B8 Storage or distribution - This class includes open air storage.

C1 Hotels - Hotels, boarding and guest houses where no significant element of care is provided.C2 Residential institutions - Residential care homes, hospitals, nursing homes, boarding schools,residential colleges and training centres.C2A Secure Residential Institution - Use for a provision of secure residential accommodation, includinguse as a prison, young offenders institution, detention centre, secure training centre, custody centre, shortterm holding centre, secure hospital, secure local authority accommodation or use as a military barracks.C3 Dwellinghouses - Family houses, or houses occupied by up to six residents living together as a singlehousehold, including a household where care is provided for residents.


D1 Non-residential institutions - Clinics, health centres, crèches, day nurseries, day centres, schools,art galleries, museums, libraries, halls, places of worship, church halls, law court. Non residential educationand training centres.D2 Assembly and leisure - Cinemas, music and concert halls, bingo and dance halls (but not nightclubs), swimming baths, skating rinks, gymnasiums or sports arenas (except for motor sports, or wherefirearms are used).

Sui Generis - Theatres, houses in multiple paying occupation, hostels providing no significant elementof care, scrap yards. Petrol filling stations and shops selling and/or displaying motor vehicles. Retailwarehouse clubs, nightclubs, launderettes, taxi businesses, amusement centres. Casinos.



Home - Lancaster City Council - Annual Monitoring Report 2010 2010... · Collateandconsider...

Documents

Transcript of Home - Lancaster City Council - Annual Monitoring Report 2010 2010... · Collateandconsider...