Agenda item

The purpose of this report is to request that Members of the LDF Working Group recommend to the Council’s Executive that they approve the Biodiversity Audit, subject to recommendations of the Group, as evidence base to support the Local Development Framework.

Members received a report which requested the LDF Working Group to recommend to the Council’s Executive that they approve the Biodiversity Audit, subject to recommendations of the group, as evidence base to support the Local Development Framework.

The Biodiversity Audit identifies species and habitats which are of national or local conservation concern and provides baseline information on which to prioritise any further action. Species and habitat action plans will be developed for these priorities with specific targets and proposals for action. The initial “City of York Biodiversity Audit” took place in 1996, but this was essentially a review of the City’s known wildlife and not intended to be a local strategy or action plan. Since then the criteria used by Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) to establish Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINCs) has been changed. This, along with the decision to develop the Local Development Framework, has meant all existing data needed to be reviewed.

Officers advised members that there has never been an overall survey of York and its sites and species of interest and that initially aerial photographs of York were studied on a field by field basis to identify possible sites of interest. 300 plus sites were identified which have now been surveyed and subdivided into categories of high to low interest.

Following a presentation, Member’s made the following comments:

• Concerns were raised on the issue of buffering and how areas adjacent to sites of interest can be used to help protect such sites and how areas need to be included in any policies. Officers advised that work will be undertaken to ensure that the Core Strategy Policy is worded correctly to enable the correct assessment of such areas to be carried out.

• Member’s expressed concern that some areas appeared to be missing from the audit such as railway land. Officers explained that there are problems with railway owned land such as the high fees charged to obtain access. Members asked that railway land be identified in the document as areas of potential interest and be investigated further if necessary.

• Members queried whether the document should be subject to public consultation. Officers advised a SINC panel would be set up to look at wider consultation, particularly at social value sites. Members were reminded that confidentiality is important as some sites are private land and not publicly accessible.

RESOLVED:(i)That the biodiversity audit be approved for publication as part of the Local Development Framework evidence base.

REASON:      So that the Biodiversity Audit can be used as part of the Local Development Framework evidence base and to avoid delays to the Core Strategy production.

RESOLVED:(ii) delegate to the Director of City Strategy, in consultation with the Executive Member and Shadow Executive Member for City Strategy, the making of any incidental changes arising from the recommendation of the LDF Working Group, and further survey information prior to its publication as part of the Local Development Framework evidence base.

REASON:      So that any recommended changes can be incorporated into the Biodiversity Audit.