Decision details

The Scrutiny Commission received a report which outlined the countywide partnership work undertaken in preparation of the strategic growth plan for Leicester and Leicestershire. It was noted that all of the Leicestershire authorities were taking the report through the same governance process with the same recommendations.

A member expressed concern that there were confused messages about whether the document was public or private and clarity over the capacity for dwellings in the A46 growth corridor. Questions were raised as to whether it would be feasible due to the infrastructure.

In relation to development of the A46 corridor, it was acknowledged that this had been needed for some time and was also being requested via the Midland Connect strategy along with an A4 expressway. A member raised the concern that the A5 had been highlighted as an issue twenty years earlier but had still not been resolved, and the A46 corridor could follow a similar pattern. It was highlighted that the report stated the strategy was predicated on being infrastructure-led and was a requirement in order to deliver the growth. Furthermore, the local MP had agreed to host a meeting of all A5 corridor MPs with transport ministers to secure support for investment in the A5.

Concern was expressed about the documents that would be presented to the public as part of the consultation. In response it was explained that there would be a suite of documents, including a quick and easy explanation of the plan, and that public exhibitions were still being considered as part of the consultation on the local plan review. Members felt that an exhibition or public events were necessary.

Further concern was expressed in relation to the A47, particularly due to developments coming forward and the increased traffic causing bottlenecks, which would become more problematic over the ensuing five to ten years.

Whilst not feeling comfortable endorsing the report, the Scrutiny Commission agreed to note the report and that it would be presented to Council. It was also proposed that the consultation process and timetable be enhanced.

RESOLVED –

(i)            The report and intention to present it to Council be noted;

(ii)           It be RECOMMENDED that the consultation process and timetable be enhanced.