Interim Phosphate Delivery Plan Stage 1 Report

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Interim Phosphate Delivery Plan Stage 1 Report Herefordshire Council Interim Phosphate Delivery Plan Stage 1 – Guidance on calculating phosphate budgets for new developments draining to the River Wye SAC Report for Herefordshire Council Ricardo for Herefordshire Council – ED14585 ED14585 | Issue number 1 | Date 25/03/2021 Ricardo Confidential Herefordshire Council Interim Phosphate Delivery Plan – Stage 1 phosphate budget calculation guidance Ref: ED 14585 | Final Report | Issue number 1 | Date 25/03/2021 Customer: Contact: Herefordshire Council Dr Jenny Mant, Water Team – London Office Customer reference: 13 Eastbourne Terrace, ED14585 London, W2 6AA T: +44 (0) 1235 753 422 E: [email protected] Confidentiality, copyright and reproduction: Author: This report is the Copyright of Herefordshire Dr Gabriel Connor-Streich, Declan Sealy Council and has been prepared by Ricardo Energy Approved by: & Environment, a trading name of Ricardo-AEA Ltd under contract ED14585 dated 12/10/2020. The Dr Jenny Mant contents of this report may not be reproduced, in Signed whole or in part, nor passed to any organisation or person without the specific prior written permission of Herefordshire Council. Ricardo Energy & Environment accepts no liability whatsoever to any third party for any loss or damage arising from any interpretation or use of the information contained in this report, or reliance on any views expressed therein, other than the liability that is agreed in the said contract.” Date: 25/03/2021 Ref: ED14585100 Ricardo is certified to ISO9001, ISO14001, ISO27001 and ISO45001 Ricardo Confidential ii Herefordshire Council Interim Phosphate Delivery Plan – Stage 1 phosphate budget calculation guidance Ref: ED 14585 | Final Report | Issue number 1 | Date 25/03/2021 Executive summary The River Wye Special Area of Conservation (SAC) is a higher-level national network site1 (hereafter national sites) that supports a diverse and rare ecology; however, the ecology of the SAC is under pressure due to phosphorus (P) pollution from point and diffuse sources. Following the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) ruling known as the ‘Dutch Nitrogen Case’2, mitigation to achieve ‘nutrient neutrality’ is required for new developments that would otherwise contribute additional nutrient loads to a European designated site that is close to unfavourable condition or in unfavourable condition due to nutrient pollution. Thus, all new developments that increase wastewater discharges to parts of a SAC that are close to or in unfavourable condition due to nutrient pollution must be able to demonstrate nutrient neutrality in order to be compliant with the ‘Habitats Regulations’ as demonstrated through a Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA). The first step in demonstrating nutrient neutrality for new developments in the Wye SAC catchment is the production of a phosphate budget. Following advice from Natural England (Natural England, 2020), this report details a methodology for calculating a phosphate budget for new developments, including the rationale behind the values chosen as inputs to the various components of the phosphate budget. The phosphate budget is calculated in four stages as the balance between: 1. The increase in P loading to National sites that result from the increase in wastewater from a new development, which is based on population increase, water use and nutrient concentrations in discharges from wastewater treatment works (WwTW) and package treatment plants. 2. The P export from the past and present land use of the development site. 3. The P export from the future mix of land use on the development site e.g. urban land, greenspace. 4. Calculation of the net change in P loading to a designated site using the outputs from Stages 1-3, i.e. the P budget, which includes the addition of a 20% precautionary buffer. Inputs to the various components of each of these four stages were determined using scientific literature, best practice industry guidelines, secondary data and modelling. Where estimates for an input were subject to uncertainty, the precautionary principle was applied in order to determine a suitable value. The values recommended are in Table 1.1. It should be noted that the Natural England guidance on which this methodology is based only covers nutrient budget calculations for residential developments. Agricultural and industrial development that may subject to an HRA due to increased nutrient loading is subject to ongoing guidance development. The inputs into the Stage 1 phosphate budget calculations incorporate data from the most recent census (2011) on occupancy rates, per person water usage based on industry best practice water efficiency standards that have been adopted in the 2015 Herefordshire Local Plan and the phosphate concentration in the treated wastewater from the development. The latter input is determined by the type of treatment applied to wastewater at the receiving treatment works, with guidance also provided for new developments that will be served by package treatment plants. The Stage 2 phosphate budget calculations account for the phosphate load from the current land use on the development site. This phosphate load is offset against the new phosphate load from the development. Phosphate export coefficients are provided for greenfield and urban land based on values determined through literature review and secondary data. For agricultural land, Farmscoper3 modelling was used to determine phosphate export coefficients for the 9 farm types detailed in Natural England’s (Natural England, 2020) advice. Sensitivity testing of the Farmscoper model was used to determine suitably precautionary values for agricultural phosphate export, with these values taking 1 Prior to Brexit these sites were part of the Natura 2000 network and generally referred to as “European designated sites”. 2 Joined Cases C-293/17 and C-294/17 Coöperatie Mobilisation for the Environment UA and Others v College van gedeputeerde staten van Limburg and Other 3 Farmscoper Version 4 produced by ADAS and available to download from: https://www.adas.uk/Service/farmscoper, accessed on: 18/01/2021 Ricardo Confidential iii Herefordshire Council Interim Phosphate Delivery Plan – Stage 1 phosphate budget calculation guidance Ref: ED 14585 | Final Report | Issue number 1 | Date 25/03/2021 account of emerging research highlighting long-term issues related to legacy phosphate leaching from post-agricultural soils. Stage 3 of the phosphate budget calculations accounts for the phosphate export from the mix of urban and greenspace land uses on the post-development site. These inputs use the urban land use and greenspace phosphate export coefficients determined in Stage 2 of this methodology. The difference between the new phosphate load from a development (Stages 1 and 3) and the phosphate load from previous land use on the development site (Stage 2) results in the net change in phosphate loading to the River Wye SAC (Stage 4). There are uncertainties inherent in all of the inputs used in Stages 1-3 of the phosphate budget calculation methodology. This uncertainty is recognised by Natural England through the addition of a 20% precautionary buffer to the net change in phosphate loading calculated in Stage 4. If the final output from the phosphate budget calculations results in additional phosphate loading to the areas of the River Wye SAC that in unfavourable condition or close to being in unfavourable condition, the additional phosphate load will need to be mitigated so as to reduce phosphate to at least the pre-existing load, thus achieving nutrient neutrality. Table 1.1: Summary of key values advised for phosphorus budget calculations Stage Value type Component Value Units Occupancy rate 2.3 Persons/dwelling 1 Population Water usage 120 Litres/day Agricultural phosphorus Variable – dependant on combinations of rainfall, 2 kg P/ha/year export soil drainage and farm type coefficients Greenspace 0.02 Urban land Variable Non- Woodland 0.02 agricultural 2 & 3 kg P/ha/year export Shrub 0.02 coefficients Water 0.00 Community food growing Variable Ricardo Confidential iv Herefordshire Council Interim Phosphate Delivery Plan – Stage 1 phosphate budget calculation guidance Ref: ED 14585 | Final Report | Issue number 1 | Date 25/03/2021 Table of Contents Executive summary ................................................................................................. iii Table of Contents ..................................................................................................... v Table of Figures....................................................................................................... vi Table of Tables ........................................................................................................ vi Glossary ................................................................................................................... vi 1 Introduction ........................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Purpose of the report .............................................................................................................. 1 2 Background to Nutrient Neutrality and the River Wye Catchment ................ 2 2.1 The Dutch Nitrogen Cases ...................................................................................................... 2 2.2 River Wye SAC and Phosphorous Pollution ........................................................................... 3 2.3 The River Wye Nutrient Management Plan (NNP) and
Recommended publications
  • The Story of a Worcestershire Harris Family – Part 2: the Siblings
    Foreword Through marriage, the male line of descent of our Harris family has Our work on Part Two of our story has brought an added bonus. By links with Clark, Matthews, Price, Jones and Graves families. delving more deeply into the lateral branches of our tree, our findings have thrown new light on the family of our first known ancestor, John Through the siblings of the Harris males and the families of their Harris, who married Mary Clark in Eastham on 30 December 1779. spouses, we are also linked to such diverse family names as Apperley, Baldwin, Birkin, Boulton, Bray, Browning, Butler, Craik, Brian Harris, Cowbridge, February 2012 Davies, Davis, Garbett, Godfrey, Gore, Gould, Griffiths, Hall, Harrod, Hehir, Homer, Hughes, Moon, Passey, Pitt, Postans, Pound, Preece, Prime, Robotham, Sewell, Skyrme, Sprittles, Stinissen, Thomas,Thurston, Tingle, Turner, Twinberrow, Ward, Yarnold and many more. They are part of a network of Harris connections which takes us beyond the boundaries of Worcestershire, Herefordshire and the rest of the British Isles to Belgium, Australia, Canada and the USA. It may come as a surprise that two of the siblings of Edward James Harris who emigrated to Canada before WWI had already married and started a family in England before leaving these shores. They were George and Edith. Even more surprisingly, Agnes and Hubert, who arrived in Canada as singletons, chose partners who were – like themselves – recently arrived ex-pats and married siblings from the same family of Scottish emigrants, the Craiks. Cover photographs (clockwise from top): There are more surprises in store, including clandestine christenings in a remote Knights Templar church, the mysterious disappearance of 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Heritage at Risk Register 2013
    HERITAGE AT RISK 2013 / WEST MIDLANDS Contents HERITAGE AT RISK III Worcestershire 64 Bromsgrove 64 Malvern Hills 66 THE REGISTER VII Worcester 67 Content and criteria VII Wychavon 68 Criteria for inclusion on the Register VIII Wyre Forest 71 Reducing the risks X Publications and guidance XIII Key to the entries XV Entries on the Register by local planning authority XVII Herefordshire, County of (UA) 1 Shropshire (UA) 13 Staffordshire 27 Cannock Chase 27 East Staffordshire 27 Lichfield 29 Newcastle­under­Lyme 30 Peak District (NP) 31 South Staffordshire 32 Stafford 33 Staffordshire Moorlands 35 Tamworth 36 Stoke­on­Trent, City of (UA) 37 Telford and Wrekin (UA) 40 Warwickshire 41 North Warwickshire 41 Nuneaton and Bedworth 43 Rugby 44 Stratford­on­Avon 46 Warwick 50 West Midlands 52 Birmingham 52 Coventry 57 Dudley 59 Sandwell 61 Walsall 62 Wolverhampton, City of 64 II Heritage at Risk is our campaign to save listed buildings and important historic sites, places and landmarks from neglect or decay. At its heart is the Heritage at Risk Register, an online database containing details of each site known to be at risk. It is analysed and updated annually and this leaflet summarises the results. Heritage at Risk teams are now in each of our nine local offices, delivering national expertise locally. The good news is that we are on target to save 25% (1,137) of the sites that were on the Register in 2010 by 2015. From St Barnabus Church in Birmingham to the Guillotine Lock on the Stratford Canal, this success is down to good partnerships with owners, developers, the Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF), Natural England, councils and local groups.
    [Show full text]
  • Bromyard Bringsty Ward Profile
    Bromyard Bringsty ward profile How to use this profile This profile is intended to be a single source of useful information and statistics about a ward and the areas within it. Used with other knowledge and intelligence, it will help users' understanding of the community. Uses of this evidence include strategies, funding bids, business plans, school projects. It includes statistics for a wide range of topics, grouped into three broad themes: People – including age profile, health and social care, employment, education Community and relationships – including ethnicity, make-up of households, democratic participation Place – including homes, the environment, physical assets and facilities Quick facts 68 square kilometres 26.2 square miles Town and Fringe (urban/rural classification) 3,400 residents 12% 57% people aged under 16s 16-64 31% 4% people aged people aged 65+ 85+ 1,480 1,700 households* dwellings** * One or more people who share cooking facilities and a living / sitting room or dining area ** A building or structure that can be lived in The data comes from different sources and dates, which were the most relevant and up-to-date available at the time of production (April 2019), but may not always be. See the reference list at the end for original sources if you need to make sure you have the latest data. Ward profiles form part of our joint strategic needs assessment of the health and well-being of Herefordshire’s people and places. Please see the Understanding Herefordshire website for more in- depth analysis of particular subjects, including comparisons of areas and trends over time: https://understanding.herefordshire.gov.uk/ If you would like help to understand this document, or would like it in another format or language, please call the Intelligence Unit on 01432 261944 or e-mail [email protected] For a large print copy, please call 01432 261944 LOWER SUPER OUTPUT AREAS AND PARISHES WITHIN THE WARD LSOAs are statistical geographies of about 1,500 people.
    [Show full text]
  • Heritage at Risk Register 2017, West Midlands
    West Midlands Register 2017 HERITAGE AT RISK 2017 / WEST MIDLANDS Contents Heritage at Risk III The Register VII Content and criteria VII Criteria for inclusion on the Register IX Reducing the risks XI Key statistics XIV Publications and guidance XV Key to the entries XVII Entries on the Register by local planning XIX authority Herefordshire, County of (UA) 1 Shropshire (UA) 13 Staffordshire 28 East Staffordshire 28 Lichfield 29 Newcastle-under-Lyme 30 Peak District (NP) 31 South Staffordshire 31 Stafford 32 Staffordshire Moorlands 33 Tamworth 35 Stoke-on-Trent, City of (UA) 35 Telford and Wrekin (UA) 38 Warwickshire 39 North Warwickshire 39 Nuneaton and Bedworth 42 Rugby 42 Stratford-on-Avon 44 Warwick 47 West Midlands 50 Birmingham 50 Coventry 54 Dudley 57 Sandwell 59 Walsall 60 Wolverhampton, City of 61 Worcestershire 63 Bromsgrove 63 Malvern Hills 64 Redditch 67 Worcester 67 Wychavon 68 Wyre Forest 71 II West Midlands Summary 2017 ur West Midlands Heritage at Risk team continues to work hard to reduce the number of heritage assets on the Register. This year the figure has been brought O down to 416, which is 7.8% of the national total of 5,290. While we work to decrease the overall numbers we do, unfortunately, have to add individual sites each year and recognise the challenge posed by a number of long-standing cases. We look to identify opportunities to focus resources on these tough cases. This year we have grant-aided some £1.5m of conservation repairs, Management Agreements and capacity building, covering a wide range of sites.
    [Show full text]
  • West Midland Bird Club
    West Midland Bird Club Annua! Report No 42 1975 Photographs: M C Wilkes The front cover shows a Nuthatch in a typical gravity defying posture. The photograph below portrays a female Kestrel at its nest, the young can be seen to the right of the picture. West Midland Bird Club Annual Report No 42 1975 Being the Annual Bird Report of the West Midland Bird Club on the birds in the counties of Warwickshire. Worcestershire, Staffordshire and West Midlands. Contents 2 Officers and Committee 3 Editor's Report 6 Treasurer's Report and Financial Statement 8 Secretary's Report 9 Branch Reports 10 Membership Secretary's Report 10 Ringing Secretary's Report 11 Field Meetings Report 11 Ladywalk Reserve 11 Duck Counts at Blithfield Reservoir 12 Birds of Staffordshire—Recent Additions 18 1975 Bird Record Localities 24 Classified Notes 104 Recoveries in 1975 of Birds Ringed in the WMBC Area 110 Recoveries in WMBC Area of Birds Ringed Elsewhere 113 Arrival and Departure of Migrants 120 Key to Contributors 121 List of Species Requiring Descriptions Price £1.00 2 Officers and Committee 1976 President Vacant Vice-Presidents A J Harthan, Dovers Cottage, Weston-sub-Edge, Chipping Campden, Gloucestershire C A Norris, Brookend House, Welland, Worcestershire Chairman A T Clay, The Coppice, Park Lane, Great Alne, Warwickshire B49 6HS Secretary A J Richards, 1 Lansdowne Road, Studley, Warwickshire B80 7JG Membership D M Hawker, 19 Wycome Road, Hall Green, Secretary Birmingham B28 9EN D M Thomas, 43 Mayhurst Road, Hollywood, Treasurer Birmingham B47 5QG G R Harrison, ' Bryher,' Hatton Green, Hatton, Editor Warwickshire CV35 7LA Field Meetings N P Coldicott, 18 Greenhill, Burcot, Bromsgrove, Secretary Worcestershire Ringing P Ireland, 33 Banbrook Close, Solihull, West Secretary Midlands B92 9NF Conservation G C Lambourne, The Cottage Farm, Redditch, Officer Worcestershire B98 OAP Chairman ARM Blake, 102 Russell Bank Road, Four Oaks, Research Sutton Coldfield, West Midlands Committee Kidderminster M R Jones, 7 Lyndhurst Drive, Kidderminster Branch Secretary Staffs.
    [Show full text]
  • Family Dispersal in Rural England: Herefordshire, 1700-1871
    FAMILY DISPERSAL IN RURAL ENGLAND: HEREFORDSHIRE, 1700-1871 by KATHERINE JOAN LACK A thesis submitted to The University of Birmingham for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY School of History and Cultures College of Arts and Law The University of Birmingham March 2012 University of Birmingham Research Archive e-theses repository This unpublished thesis/dissertation is copyright of the author and/or third parties. The intellectual property rights of the author or third parties in respect of this work are as defined by The Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 or as modified by any successor legislation. Any use made of information contained in this thesis/dissertation must be in accordance with that legislation and must be properly acknowledged. Further distribution or reproduction in any format is prohibited without the permission of the copyright holder. ABSTRACT This thesis tested a methodology for tracing eighteenth- and nineteenth-century migrants, based on the Cambridge Group reconstitution methods. It began with a sample from Whitbourne parish in the under-researched county of Herefordshire, investigating the effect of regional urbanisation and industrialisation on migration choices. Longitudinal family dispersal patterns were traced, and comparisons were made with studies in other regions. The method focused on out-migration, setting spatial mobility in its wider context, and increasing its representativeness by incorporating additional search strategies for less visible groups, including married women. A high tracing rate was achieved, and the method is proposed as a viable tool for analysing migration from small rural parishes which are considered unsuitable for conventional reconstitution studies. The west midlands industrial areas were not apparently a destination for this population until the second quarter of the nineteenth century, but there were early migrants to Worcester, London, and later to Cheltenham, Cheshire and elsewhere, especially for domestic service and urban service trades.
    [Show full text]
  • The Housing (Right to Enfranchise) (Designated Protected Areas) (England) Order 2009
    Status: This is the original version (as it was originally made). This item of legislation is currently only available in its original format. STATUTORY INSTRUMENTS 2009 No. 2098 HOUSING, ENGLAND The Housing (Right to Enfranchise) (Designated Protected Areas) (England) Order 2009 Made - - - - 4th August 2009 Laid before Parliament 12th August 2009 Coming into force - - 7th September 2009 The Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, in exercise of the powers conferred by paragraphs 4A(3) of Schedule 4A to the Leasehold Reform Act 1967(1); having published the criteria to be taken into account when deciding whether to designate an area as a protected area as required by paragraph 4A(4) of that Schedule; and having taken steps to consult those likely to be affected by the Order as required by paragraph 4A(5) of that Schedule, makes the following Order: Citation and commencement and interpretation 1.—(1) This Order may be cited as the Housing (Right to Enfranchise) (Designated Protected Areas) (England) Order 2009 and shall come into force on 7th September 2009. (2) In this Order “the 1967 Act” means the Leasehold Reform Act 1967. Designated protected areas in the West Midlands 2. The following areas in the West Midlands region are designated protected areas for the purposes of paragraph 4A(1) of Schedule 4A to the 1967 Act (certain leases in protected areas)— (a) those parishes in the district of Herefordshire and in the counties of Shropshire, Staffordshire, Warwickshire, West Midlands and Worcestershire specified in Schedule 1 to this Order; and (b) those areas in the parishes and the unparished areas in the district of Herefordshire and in the counties of Shropshire, Staffordshire, Warwickshire, West Midlands and Worcestershire specified in Schedule 2 to this Order each shown bounded with a black line and crossed hatched on one of the maps contained in the volume entitled “Maps of the (1) 1967.
    [Show full text]
  • Bringsty Ward Profile
    FACTS & FIGURES ABOUT HEREFORDSHIRE: BRINGSTY WARD PROFILE The aim of this profile is to draw together useful information about a particular area of Herefordshire, and how it compares to the county overall. It is hoped that it will help users build a picture of the area, and provide evidence that can be used for a range of purposes, including funding bids, strategy documents, business plans and school projects. W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W If you would like help to understand this document, or would like it in another format or language, please call the Research Team on 01432 260498 or e-mail [email protected] For a large print copy, please call 01432 260498 Area profiles are available on the Herefordshire Council website: www.herefordshire.gov.uk/factsandfigures, or by contacting the Research Team. Ward Area Profile Bringsty Ward LOWER SUPER OUTPUT AREAS (LSOAS) AND PARISHES WITHIN BRINGSTY WARD W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W Data has traditionally been available for administrative wards, but these aren't really suitable for statistics as they vary widely in population size and boundaries can change W frequently. The Office for National Statistics (ONS) used the 2001 Census to define statistical geographies (lower super output areas) of about 1,500 people. Wherever possible information for LSOAs in the ward is presented in this profile along with the ward as a whole. If this data is not available or numbers are too small, ward-level only is given.
    [Show full text]
  • Heritage at Risk Register 2020, Midlands
    Midlands Register 2020 HERITAGE AT RISK 2020 / MIDLANDS Contents The Register IV Nottinghamshire 74 Content and criteria IV Ashfield 74 Bassetlaw 75 Key statistics VI Broxtowe 79 Key to the Entries VII Gedling 80 Mansfield 81 Entries on the Register by local planning IX authority Newark and Sherwood 82 Rushcliffe 85 Derby, City of (UA) 1 Rutland (UA) 86 Derbyshire 2 Herefordshire, County of (UA) 87 Amber Valley 2 Bolsover 4 Shropshire (UA) 98 Chesterfield 5 Staffordshire 113 Derbyshire Dales 5 East Staffordshire 113 Erewash 6 Lichfield 114 High Peak 7 Newcastle-under-Lyme 116 North East Derbyshire 9 South Staffordshire 117 Peak District (NP) 9 Stafford 117 South Derbyshire 10 Staffordshire Moorlands 119 Leicester, City of (UA) 13 Tamworth 120 Leicestershire 16 Stoke-on-Trent, City of (UA) 120 Charnwood 16 Telford and Wrekin (UA) 123 Harborough 18 Warwickshire 124 Hinckley and Bosworth 21 Melton 22 North Warwickshire 124 North West Leicestershire 25 Nuneaton and Bedworth 127 Oadby and Wigston 27 Rugby 127 Stratford-on-Avon 129 Lincolnshire 27 Warwick 133 Boston 27 West Midlands 136 East Lindsey 30 Lincoln 38 Birmingham 136 North Kesteven 40 Coventry 141 South Holland 44 Dudley 143 South Kesteven 46 Sandwell 145 West Lindsey 51 Walsall 146 Wolverhampton, City of 147 North East Lincolnshire (UA) 56 Worcestershire 149 North Lincolnshire (UA) 58 Bromsgrove 149 Northamptonshire 61 Malvern Hills 151 Corby 61 Redditch 153 Daventry 61 Worcester 153 East Northamptonshire 65 Wychavon 154 Kettering 67 Wyre Forest 157 Northampton 67 South Northamptonshire 68 Wellingborough 71 Nottingham, City of (UA) 72 II HERITAGE AT RISK 2020 / MIDLANDS THE REGISTER Many structures fall into the ‘not applicable’ category, The Heritage at Risk Register includes historic for example: ruins, walls, gates, headstones or boundary buildings and sites at risk of being lost through stones.
    [Show full text]
  • Heritage at Risk Register 2016, West Midlands
    West Midlands Register 2016 HERITAGE AT RISK 2016 / WEST MIDLANDS Contents Heritage at Risk III The Register VII Content and criteria VII Criteria for inclusion on the Register IX Reducing the risks XI Key statistics XIV Publications and guidance XV Key to the entries XVII Entries on the Register by local planning XIX authority Herefordshire, County of (UA) 1 Shropshire (UA) 13 Staffordshire 29 East Staffordshire 29 Lichfield 30 Newcastle-under-Lyme 31 Peak District (NP) 32 South Staffordshire 33 Stafford 33 Staffordshire Moorlands 35 Tamworth 37 Stoke-on-Trent, City of (UA) 37 Telford and Wrekin (UA) 39 Warwickshire 41 North Warwickshire 41 Nuneaton and Bedworth 44 Rugby 44 Stratford-on-Avon 46 Warwick 50 West Midlands 53 Birmingham 53 Coventry 57 Dudley 59 Sandwell 61 Walsall 62 Wolverhampton, City of 64 Worcestershire 66 Bromsgrove 66 Malvern Hills 67 Redditch 69 Worcester 70 Wychavon 71 Wyre Forest 74 II West Midlands Summary 2016 here are 430 entries on the 2016 Heritage at Risk Register for the West Midlands, some 8% of the national total of 5,341. In 2015 we have continued to see the Tremoval of entries from our Register, reflecting the national trend and clear testament to the hard work of all who engage with conservation across the region. Our local Heritage at Risk team, led by Rhodri Evans, continue to work in partnership with owners, local authorities and other stakeholders to find sustainable solutions for sites on the Register and have identified ten varied top priorities for the coming year. The Register is a dynamic list and, even with the successes we have seen, we continue to add entries, such as increasing numbers of places of worship.
    [Show full text]
  • Heritage at Risk Register 2015, West Midlands
    West Midlands Register 2015 HERITAGE AT RISK 2015 / WEST MIDLANDS Contents Heritage at Risk III The Register VII Content and criteria VII Criteria for inclusion on the Register IX Reducing the risks XI Key statistics XIV Publications and guidance XV Key to the entries XVII Entries on the Register by local planning XIX authority Herefordshire, County of (UA) 1 Shropshire (UA) 14 Staffordshire 28 East Staffordshire 28 Lichfield 30 Newcastle-under-Lyme 31 Peak District (NP) 32 South Staffordshire 32 Stafford 33 Staffordshire Moorlands 34 Tamworth 36 Stoke-on-Trent, City of (UA) 37 Telford and Wrekin (UA) 40 Warwickshire 42 North Warwickshire 42 Nuneaton and Bedworth 44 Rugby 45 Stratford-on-Avon 47 Warwick 51 West Midlands 54 Birmingham 54 Coventry 58 Dudley 61 Sandwell 63 Walsall 64 Wolverhampton, City of 65 Worcestershire 67 Bromsgrove 67 Malvern Hills 69 Redditch 72 Worcester 72 Wychavon 73 Wyre Forest 77 II West Midlands Summary 2015 or the first time, we’ve compared all sites on the Heritage at Risk Register – from domestic houses to hillforts – to help us better understand which types of site are Fmost commonly at risk. There are things that make each region special, and once lost, will mean a sense of our region’s character is lost too. Comparing the West Midlands to the national Register shows that 34.5% of all castles and 16.1% of all enclosures are in our region. There are 450 entries on the West Midlands 2015 Heritage at Risk Register, making up 8.2% of the national total of 5,478 entries.
    [Show full text]
  • Designated Protected Areas) (England) Order 2009
    STATUTORY INSTRUMENTS 2009 No. 2098 HOUSING, ENGLAND The Housing (Right to Enfranchise) (Designated Protected Areas) (England) Order 2009 Made - - - - 4th August 2009 Laid before Parliament 12th August 2009 Coming into force - - 7th September 2009 CONTENTS 1. Citation and commencement and interpretation 4 2. Designated protected areas in the West Midlands 4 3. Designated protected areas in the South West 5 4. Designated protected areas in the North West 5 5. Designated protected areas in the East of England 6 6. Designated protected areas in the North East 6 7. Designated protected areas in the South East 6 8. Designated protected areas in the East Midlands 7 9. Designated protected areas in Yorkshire and the Humber 7 SCHEDULES SCHEDULE 1 — DESIGNATED PROTECTED AREAS IN THE WEST MIDLANDS – ENTIRE PARISHES 8 PART 1 — HEREFORDSHIRE 8 PART 2 — SHROPSHIRE 9 PART 3 — STAFFORDSHIRE 10 PART 4 — WARWICKSHIRE 11 PART 5 — WEST MIDLANDS 12 PART 6 — WORCESTERSHIRE 12 SCHEDULE 2 — DESIGNATED PROTECTED AREAS IN THE WEST MIDLANDS –BY MAPS 13 PART 1 — HEREFORDSHIRE 13 PART 2 — SHROPSHIRE 13 PART 3 — STAFFORDSHIRE 14 PART 4 — WARWICKSHIRE 14 PART 5 — WEST MIDLANDS 14 PART 6 — WORCESTERSHIRE 15 SCHEDULE 3 — DESIGNATED PROTECTED AREAS IN THE SOUTH WEST – ENTIRE PARISHES 15 PART 1 — BATH AND NORTH EAST SOMERSET 15 PART 2 — CORNWALL 16 PART 3 — DEVON 17 PART 4 — DORSET 18 PART 5 — GLOUCESTERSHIRE 20 PART 6 — NORTH SOMERSET 21 PART 7 — SOMERSET 21 PART 8 — SOUTH GLOUCESTERSHIRE 22 PART 9 — WILTSHIRE 23 SCHEDULE 4 — DESIGNATED PROTECTED AREAS IN THE SOUTH WEST
    [Show full text]