What is the difference between a Spatial Strategy and a Development Scenario ?
Posted by crookbarrow on February 3, 2009
This question lies at the heart of the West Midlands Regional Spatial Strategy (WMRSS) Proposed Phase 2 Revision which is now the subject of Examination in Public.
When the Proposed Phase 2 Options were subject to consultation between January and March 2007, I asked for (and was most helpfully supplied with !) a very useful background document which dealt with the “Implications of the Housing Options.”
This “Implications” document referred to a number of Spatial Options against which the housing “development scenarios” (ie Options 1,2 & 3 in the Consultation report) could be assessed.
From recollection, these Spatial Options were as follows :
- Focusing development on the Major Urban Areas
- More development of Sub-Regional Centres
- Development of New Settlements (ie Eco-Towns)
- More dispersed patterns of development
In my response to the 2007 WMRSS Consultation, I pointed out that Option 1 above came out the most favourably against a range of environmental criteria, including impact on climate change, and Option 2 least favourably. I also expressed reservations (subsequently justified !) about the Government’s housing-based growth agenda.
In the event, the West Midlands Regional Assembly opted for both Spatial Option 2 and Housing Development Scenario 2. Whilst a subsequent report from the Government Office for the West Midlands has gone for something between Spatial Option (and Housing Development Scenario) 2 and 3.
My own preferred Housing Development Scenario (and indeed Spatial Strategy !) remains that contained in the existing WMRSS (ie incorporating the Phase 1 Revision), which approximates to Option 1 in the proposed Revision. However, I question whether even this scenario will be realisable in the period to 2016.
All comments welcome !
