Comment

Representation ID: 15430

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Shropshire Homes

Agent: Pegasus Planning Group Ltd

I&O_15989
At Table 5.2, the SA contains a high-level assessment of spatial options A, B and C against key objectives – which score the same against all objectives, with the following (not all) notable exceptions: • Option A (Retain the Green Belt) scores worse (amber) than the other two options in respect of infrastructure – reducing the need to travel and encouraging sustainable modes of transport. • Options B (current LP level and distribution) and C (sustainable transport corridors) score worse (red) in respect of conserving and enhancing the historic environment objective. • Options B & C score better than option A under climate change and reduction of air pollution objectives. o single spatial option, in isolation, will be sufficient. Clearly, the SA also takes a very high-level approach, when in reality, development and allocations should be settlement capacity and site-led, to deliver the best and most suitable options for development across the plan area. In respect of the settlement specific policies assessed in the SA, we do not have any particular comments to make at this stage, given allocations have not yet been formally identified or assessed. Due to the early stage of the Local Plan making process, we note the SA (and Consultation Paper) at this stage only refer to delivery of a minimum of 1,914 dwellings per annum. As required at NPPF paragraph 36, Local Plans must be justified – taking into account reasonable alternatives. One such alternative will be to explore a higher growth option which is higher than the standard method figure, which is a minimum starting point.