Verbal Update from Councillor K. May, Portfolio Holder for Health and Wellbeing, Economic Development and Regeneration.
Minutes:
The Portfolio Holder for Health and Wellbeing, Economic Development and Regeneration and the Head of Economic Development and Regeneration for North Worcestershire delivered a presentation on the subject of the changing economy in Bromsgrove district (attached at Appendix 1). During the delivery of this presentation a range of points were highlighted for Members’ consideration:
· The Portfolio Holder for Health and Wellbeing, Economic Development and Regeneration had requested a review of the economic priorities for the district.
· The local economy had implications both for the sustainability of the Council and for the economic health of the community.
· The review had been commissioned from an external consultant and had already informed constructive discussions during a workshop session held for Cabinet Members and members of the Bromsgrove Economic Development Theme Group.
· The Council had 5 economic priorities for Bromsgrove district which had been adopted in June 2015.
· Since the priorities were adopted progress had been made in delivering on these and performance was generally good. However, there remained a number of challenges for the district.
· Whilst there were highly skilled residents living in the district many of them commuted to work in other parts of the country.
· Jobs within the local economy tended to be lower skilled/paid.
· The demographics of the population impacted on the local economy.
· House prices in the district were relatively high creating affordability problems for people working in the local area; there was reduced number of people in their 20s and 30s living in Bromsgrove as they struggled to get on the property ladder.
· Whilst the Council had not joined the West Midlands Combined Authority (WMCA) their ambitious economic plans would impact in the district; including new retail, commercial and residential opportunities in Longbridge.
· There were various options available to the Council to help address some of the challenges impacting on the local economy.
· The report in respect of economic priorities, originally scheduled for the consideration of Cabinet in March, had been postponed until April to provide more time for officers to meet with key partners to discuss how to address these challenges further.
· A further report would be presented for the consideration of the Board in due course detailing the outcomes of these discussions.
Following the presentation Members discussed matters in detail:
· The need for more houses, including affordable housing, to be built in the district and the impact that this might have on house prices.
· The potential to enhance the local economy and to increase Council revenue generated from any growth in local business rates.
· The benefits of a mixed demographic in the local population and a balanced economy.
· The likelihood that young people in their 20s and 30s would take into account their ability to afford to start a family when selecting a location in which to live.
· The potential impact of local infrastructure on whether people were likely to select Bromsgrove district as a place to live.
· The role of the Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs) in shaping the local economy and the extent to which the Worcestershire LEP took into account the economic needs of the north of the county.
· The value of Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs), both as local employers and in terms of contributing to business rates.
· The economic benefits of the district’s location close to national motorway networks and to the Birmingham conurbation.
· The availability of land that could be prioritised for development for commercial rather than residential use and the size of this land.
· The extent to which commercial developments were taken into account in the Local Plan No. 4 alongside housing developments and the need to continue to review planning policy documents on an ongoing basis.
· The beneficial impact of local transport links on the local economies in Barnt Green and Hagley respectively.
RESOLVED that the report be noted.