Summer Update

At the most recent full Shropshire Council, the most notable item on the agenda was the formal withdrawal of the County’s Local Plan.

The Council has been grappling with significant issues in its planning framework:

• Formal Withdrawal of Local Plan: The draft Local Plan (2016-2038) is being formally withdrawn from examination following a recommendation from the Planning Inspectors. The Inspectors concluded that the required modifications to make the Plan “sound” are “significant and not ‘limited’,” and that the Council’s proposed six-month work program was “overly ambitious.”
• Reasons for Unsoundness: Key issues identified by the Inspectors (ID47, ID48) include:
  • Failure to adequately address the unmet housing and employment needs from the Black Country (1,500 dwellings and 30ha employment land).
  • Over-reliance on “windfall” sites to meet housing and employment requirements, which lacks “clear evidence to demonstrate that this approach is likely to ensure that the Plan’s housing and employment requirements will be delivered.”
  • Insufficient extension of the Plan period (from 2016-2038) to account for delays, resulting in a maximum of 12 years remaining from anticipated adoption.
  • Lack of an alternative strategic employment allocation for Shrewsbury to replace SHR166 (45ha site) due to Historic England objections.
  • Concerns regarding the transparency and logic of the Council’s Sustainability Appraisal process in selecting growth options.
• Impact of Withdrawal: This means the Council “will not be able to adopt the Local Plan as hoped in 2025.” The existing Core Strategy (2011) and SAMDev Plan (2015) will remain in effect, which “does place a risk to the degree of weight that can be attached to it in decision making” due to their age.
• New Local Plan Timeline: Work on a new Local Plan will commence in January 2026 under the Government’s new plan-making system, with an expected adoption by 2028. This new plan will cover the period 2025-2045.
• Government Guidance Shift: A “clear shift in position” from the Government in July 2024 explicitly stated that “pragmatism should be used only where it is likely a plan is capable of being found sound with limited additional work.” This directly influenced the Inspectors’ decision.
• Planning Reform Consultations: Shropshire Council is responding to several government consultations on planning reform, including:
• Speeding up build out and improving transparency: The Council supports measures to incentivize faster home building but emphasizes that new responsibilities for Local Planning Authorities “must be ‘matched’ by appropriate additional resourcing.” They also suggest a national template for build-out schedules.
• Reforming site thresholds: The Council generally agrees with a gradated approach to site sizes for residential development (new medium-scale category for 10-49 dwellings), but stresses that requirements should not be “streamlined” for environmental considerations like heritage and archaeology. They also advocate for defining “Designated Rural Areas” to allow affordable housing contributions from all sites within them.
• Reform of planning committees: The Council “opposes the introduction of a national scheme of delegation,” arguing it would “erode the ability to provide local democratic oversight and accountability of planning decisions.” They prefer retaining all minor and medium-scale residential development applications within “Tier B” (allowing committee consideration in sensitive cases) rather than placing them in “Tier A” (officer delegation).

I made the following statement about the withdrawal:

“Thank you chair, Councillor Ed Bird, Shifnal South. We are disappointed that Shropshire Council’s Local Plan (2016-2038) is formally withdrawn from examination. The inspector’s verdict threw planned development in our county into significant uncertainty.

This withdrawal leaves our county exposed. Without an adopted Local Plan or a demonstrably five-year land supply, Shropshire Council loses its ability to control development, potentially handing the advantage to developers who may seek to build wherever they wish, not necessarily where our communities need them or where it best serves our local infrastructure.  I am sure everyone here today is concerned regardless of their political hue.

Now, we face the challenge of a new Local Plan for the period 2025-2045. This is not merely a restart; it’s a restart under new, more demanding government targets. The government has significantly increased Shropshire’s housing requirements.

The council administration’s proposed response to the national planning reforms, approved by Cabinet on July 9th, attempts to address some of these issues, but it remains to be seen if they can truly meet the challenge. The Council itself acknowledges that the government’s reforms “could have implications for the Council” and “new responsibilities for Local Planning Authorities with associated resource implications for planning services”. They admit that these proposals, including “additional strategic master-planning” and “administration and monitoring of build-out report proposals,” will constitute an “additional resource burden on Local Planning Authorities”.

Regarding the Green Belt and the introduction of “grey belt” guidance:

• The government now provides guidance on identifying “grey belt land” – areas within the Green Belt that make “no or only a weak contribution” to Green Belt purposes. This is of particular concern to Shifnal, the area I represent.
• This identification is meant to “inform” Green Belt boundary reviews during plan-making.
• While identifying “grey belt” does not automatically mean it should be developed, it is a significant consideration, especially where it doesn’t “fundamentally undermine the five Green Belt purposes” of the remaining Green Belt.
• Our previous plan faced demands to consider opening up controversial Green Belt areas. The Council must now clearly articulate how it will navigate this “grey belt” guidance in the new plan, especially given the increased housing targets.

The Council’s proposed response to the national reforms expresses concerns about:

• A purely numerical threshold for mixed-tenure development being too inflexible and potentially leading to “artificial limitation of dwellings”.
• The overly high threshold of 50 dwellings for build-out statements, arguing it would “miss a significant component of development…particularly in more rural areas”. We, as Conservatives, believe transparency should apply to all development, ensuring accountability across the board.
• The erosion of local democratic oversight through a national scheme of delegation for planning committees. While we support mandatory training for committee members, we must retain local control over sensitive planning decisions, especially for minor commercial and residential developments.

We all acknowledge administration now faces an enormous challenge. They are aiming for an adopted plan by 2028, with work to commence in January 2026 and a draft ready for consultation in autumn 2026. This is an ambitious timeline, especially considering the Inspectors deemed their previous six-month plan “over ambitious”.

Questions:

Given the withdrawal of the Local Plan, the implications of new government planning changes, and the approach to the Green Belt and “grey belt” land, I have the following questions:

1. Our previous plan faced demands to consider “opening up controversial areas of green belt”, and a new Green Belt Study is currently underway. With increased housing targets and discussions around identifying areas within the Green Belt that make a weak contribution to its purposes, how will the Liberal Democrat administration navigate identifying and potentially releasing such land, and what specific protections will be put in place for our cherished Green Belt given this intensified development pressure?
2. The Council’s proposed response to national planning reforms expresses strong opposition to a “national scheme of delegation” for planning committees, arguing it “will erode the ability to provide local democratic oversight and accountability of planning decisions”. What concrete actions will the Liberal Democrat administration take to safeguard local democratic control over planning, and will you formally oppose the reclassification of “minor commercial development, minor residential development, and reserved matters” applications into a category that removes local oversight?
3. The government’s planning reforms propose significant “new responsibilities for Local Planning Authorities,” including “additional strategic master-planning” and “administration and monitoring of build-out report proposals”. How will the Liberal Democrat administration propose to fund these considerable “additional resource burdens on Local Planning Authorities”, especially given the Council’s ongoing challenge to manage “unprecedented financial demands” and ensure its “financial survivability”?”

Reinstatement of Litter Bins

Several residents have contacted me regarding the removal of litter bins in their areas, most notably in Greenfields crescent. I have asked officers to replace the bins and provide a deadline for when this will be done.

A4169 Innage Road Parking Restriction Consultation

The section of Innage Road between the railway bridge and Five-Ways roundabout has been reviewed on a number occasions to try and address vehicle congestion at peak times. Officers have asked to undertake another consultation following a WSP report on the performance of the Five-Ways roundabout. The reason given was that it has been a concern that previous responses to consultation at this location have been restricted to the nearest residents and wider publicity is required. Therefore, along with the usual notices being posted for the parking restriction and letters being delivered to the addresses immediately affected, information boards have been placed in the grass verge on Innage Road to encourage a wider response from the public. The press notice, letters, notices and signs have been made public (17^th July) and a “Get Involved” page will be active.

Responses to the three-week consultation will be recorded and assessed in the usual manner, after which the decision report will be written.

Parking Restrictions

I have requested council officers to look into the parking restrictions on Bradford Street in the Town as they limit access to residents at peak periods when they might wish to stop off on the way to work or the school drop off.

I would also like to see proper double yellow lines on the side of the coop rather than a single sign which is hardly noticed by drivers.

Discussion about Street Scene in Shifnal 

I will be attending a meeting next week to discuss management and upkeep of the Town Centre which is currently undertaken by Shropshire Council (Street Scene). Our preference is that this work should be taken over by the Town Council, offering residents much more local accountability and quicker response times.