Skip to main content

Agenda item

Cotswold District Local Plan (2011-31) Regulation 18 Consultation

Purpose

To seek approval to consult on the Preferred Options for development in the Cotswold District for the Regulation 18 consultation, and further technical documents as and when necessary; and to approve the updated Local Development Scheme to progress the Plan to submission in winter 2026 and adoption in winter 2027.

 

Cabinet Member

Councillor Juliet Layton, Cabinet Member for Housing and Planning

 

Lead Officer

Geraldine Le Cointe, Assistant Director for Planning Services

Jo Symonds, Head of Planning Policy and Infrastructure

Minutes:

The purpose of the report was to seek approval to consult on the Preferred Options for development in the Cotswold District for the Regulation 18 consultation and to approve the updated Local Development Scheme to progress the Plan.

 

The Leader of the Council, Councillor Mike Evemy, and the Deputy Leader, Councillor Juliet Layton, introduced the report. They raised the following points:

 

  • It was noted that within the Regulation 18 consultation, it would be preferable to indicate potential development sites.
  • It was noted that many Members had attended the all-member briefing the previous Tuesday, and thanks were given to those who participated and engaged in the process.
  • Town and parish council forums were being set up for early November, with invitations due to be sent out. One forum was planned for the north of the district and one in Cirencester.
  • The Council aimed to prevent problems caused by speculative housing development without supporting infrastructure in settlements through the Local Plan.

 

In questioning and discussion, the following points were noted:

  • Delivering a Local Plan in a short timeframe carried risks, particularly the risk of delays and financial resourcing. The oversight board maintained an ongoing risk register, reviewed monthly.
  • Much of the policy work had already been completed, including a previous Regulation 18 consultation.  A few additional policies would be added for the current consultation.
  • The upcoming consultation was a Regulation 18 consultation, followed by a further Regulation 19 consultation, providing two additional stages for public input.
  • The Leader of the Council would continue to lobby and make representations to Government to highlight the impact of these numbers whilst continuing to plan responsibly.
  • The development strategy assessed the 49 largest settlements based on services, facilities, employment, public transport, and size, categorising them as principal, non-principal, or rural settlements to locate development near existing infrastructure.
  • Figures for Avening had included extant planning permissions, which were already counted in the total.
  • The consultation focused on high-level development strategy options, avoiding site-specific allocations.
  • Site-specific details would be considered at the Regulation 19 stage, with numbers based on current understanding and ongoing evidence-based studies, which could result in sites being added or removed.
  • Ward members were recognised as playing an important role in the consultation process, supported by comprehensive briefing documents. Members were encouraged to use their leadership positions to influence discussions, attending village meetings where requested and when they felt their presence would be helpful, without needing to attend all.
  • Feasibility studies are ongoing, assessing required infrastructure and costs to deliver sites. There were annual limits on how many homes each site could deliver, which were factored into housing projections to avoid overestimation.
  • The planned level of growth in each settlement would reflect the services and facilities available there whilst for non-principal settlements, any planned development that adds new facilities (for example, a shop) would be factored into the final level of growth for that area.
  • The Regulation 18 consultation was an important opportunity for residents to share their views and feedback on the proposed strategies with all input being carefully considered as plans were refined.
  • As the Council could not accommodate all 18,000 homes locally, it must work with neighbouring authorities under the duty to cooperate to explore whether they can take some of the housing numbers, helping to evidence that the full figure was not feasible and supporting the case for a reduction to the target.
  • There was genuine support for building new homes, especially smaller developments that help keep villages vibrant and support local families — however, the large-scale numbers currently proposed were seen as excessive and unrealistic for the area.
  • The Council was keen to avoid development that could undermine longer-term opportunities, particularly around sites that may be needed for strategic infrastructure like a link road. However, without a five-year housing land supply, each planning application must be judged individually, increasing the risk of appeals if applications are refused.
  • Officers acknowledged that the draft documents were technical but confirmed that extensive communication and engagement was planned to ensure residents could access clear, plain-English information. Every household would receive a newsletter about the Local Plan, explaining how to get involved and why it matters. Further communications would intensify ahead of the 5 November consultation launch. A live Q&A document had been issued to support members in responding to residents and parish councils.
  • The Moreton-in-Marsh Working Group would meet as part of the wider consultation plans.
  • The County Council’s spatial planning team had identified land between Kemble Railway and Cirencester for a potential mass transport link, which would connect the railway to the town for the first time and significantly improve connectivity. Whilst the scheme remained under consideration and had received funding for part of the outline business case; further work on this was planned. A public transport study had found that the estimated £50 million cost of the link did not compare favourably with potential bus service improvements.
  • While a new 5,000-home settlement would be of interest, only a proportion of those homes would count towards the Council’s overall housing figure due to the expected timescales.

 

Recommendation:

That the Council continues to lobby government for a significantly lower housing target for the Cotswold District given:

a)    80% of the district is within the Cotswold National Landscape area.

b)    The infrastructure challenges across the district (sewage capacity, rural roads, public transport, etc.)

c)    Lack of access to facilities and employment in many areas.

d)    The need for government support to address some of these challenges (e.g. funding for a bypass).

e)    The reality of what scale of development and supporting infrastructure will be deliverable in the remaining developable parts of the district.

 

Councillor Angus Jenkinson proposed supporting the recommendations in the Cotswold District Local Plan (2011-31) Regulation 18 Consultation and submitting the above recommendation to Cabinet.  Councillor Michael Vann seconded the proposal which was put to the vote and agreed by the Committee.

 

RESOLVED: to NOTE the Cotswold District Local Plan (2011-31) Regulation 18 Consultation and submit one recommendation to Cabinet.

Supporting documents:

 

Related Pages