To receive any questions or petitions from members of the public, notice of which has been given in accordance with Procedure Rule 14.  Deadline for notification for this meeting is 5.00pm on Friday 13 October 2017.

The following statement and question, in relation to Agenda Item 9 Consultation on the Preferred Scale and Distribution of Development for the Shropshire Local Plan Review (the Preferred Options) were submitted by local resident, Mr Charles Green:

Question

Is Cabinet aware that major elements of the Preferred Options now placed before them ignore the clear preferences of the immediately preceding round of consultation, as expressed by those participating in that consultation; and therefore that by endorsing these Preferred Options Cabinet will be wilfully ignoring the democratically expressed views of its electorate? Why have a consultation and then ignore the results of that consultation?

Statement giving background to the question

For Housing Numbers, the majority preference was for Moderate Growth, which was the lowest of the options at 26,250 new dwellings from 2016 to 2036. But instead, the stated Preferred Option now is for the highest growth figure of 28,750 new dwellings, which was specifically rejected by most people. There is, in any case, a cogent argument that all these figures are well in excess of any demographically assessed genuine need for new dwellings.

For Economic Growth, the clear preference was for Productivity Growth, which was characterised as creating more ‘higher value’ jobs whilst potentially setting a lower employment land requirement and a lower overall provision of new jobs. The number of new jobs mentioned under this option was 9,300. Instead, the Preferred Option is now for 14,900 new jobs, an increase of 60%, and an option that was not offered in the previous consultation. It is this high Economic Growth Preferred Option that is now driving the Preferred Option for the highest of the housing numbers, rather than the lowest option that the electorate clearly preferred.

This step-change in the offer for Economic Growth derives from the Council’s recently launched Economic Growth Strategy. The process for that step-change in offer began before the consultation results from the Issues and Options stage of the Local Plan Review were known, and its thrust is not consistent with what was preferred from that Local Plan Review consultation.  Shropshire Council therefore appears to be trying simultaneously both to dupe and to ignore its electorate.

The Portfolio Holder for Planning and Regulatory Services provided the following response:

Answer

The consultation on Issues and Strategic Options was particularly valuable as an early step in seeking views from across a range of communities, businesses, organisations and individuals on Shropshire’s future growth up to 2036.  Consultations like this are an important part in plan making, both in terms of gauging ‘headline’ preferences, but also to understand the reasons behind these preferences.  However, responses to consultations do not stand alone, and a range of other material factors will always influence the direction of a Local Plan and its emerging strategic priorities. 

In producing the draft Preferred Options for the Scale and Distribution of Development, Shropshire Council officers have considered the consultation responses received during previous stages of consultation, both in terms of the proportion of respondents that expressed preference for a specific option and the specific comments made when identifying this preference.

The document referred to by Mr Green in his comments is the Issues and Strategic Options Consultation Response Summary published in July 2017.  Looking specifically at housing requirement, this document provides a broad overview of the responses to each option but does not provide any ‘weighting’ to these comments, as implied by Mr Green.  The consultation responses themselves have subsequently been ‘weighed’ against other material issues and emerging evidence in arriving at the housing requirement Preferred Option now presented for further consultation.

In summary, the other material issues Shropshire Council officers have considered include:

·         The evidence base produced to support the Local Plan Review;

·         The need to balance housing and employment growth;

·         Government objectives to deliver the right housing in the right places in order to address the national housing crisis;

·         The objectives of the Shropshire Economic Growth Strategy;

·         Strategic investment opportunities identified within Shropshire;

·         The role of Shropshire within the wider region, and the opportunity to help support the delivery of the objectives of the West Midlands Combined Authority; and

·         Aspirations to deliver more family and affordable housing, increase economic growth and productivity, deliver important infrastructure; increase education opportunities, and upskill communities.

The Preferred Options for the Scale and Distribution of Development are considered to represent a sustainable strategy for Shropshire and will support the long term sustainability of the County. The Preferred Option is proposed for consultation to enable the different elements of the option and the supporting evidence to be considered and commented upon.  This consultation will invite partners, stakeholders and the public to give their views on the Preferred Option as the potential strategy for the Local Plan Review.

Mr Green asked the following supplementary question, ‘Do you as a Cabinet really believe that persistent growth is the way that the Council should be going, as set out in the Preferred Options document tabled before you?  Any views given by the public in the next round of consultation can just as easily be ignored by the Council as they have been in the last consultation’.  The complete submission from Mr Green is attached to the formal record of the meeting.

The Portfolio Holder for Planning and Regulatory Services responded that the Council was not suggesting infinite growth as the way forward and considered that other points raised by Mr Green in the preamble to his supplementary question had been answered.  He stated that he would consider whether a written, more detailed response would be necessary.