Agenda item
Member Questions
No Member Questions have been submitted prior to the publication of the agenda.
A Member of the Council may ask the Leader or a Cabinet Member a question on any matter in relation to which the Council has powers or duties or which affects the Cotswold District. A maximum period of fifteen minutes shall be allowed at any such meeting for Member questions.
A Member may only ask a question if:
a) the question has been delivered in writing or by electronic mail to the Chief Executive no later than 5.00 p.m. on the working day before the day of the meeting; or
b) the question relates to an urgent matter, they have the consent of the Leader to whom the question is to be put and the content of the question is given to the Chief Executive by 9.30 a.m. on the day of the meeting.
An answer may take the form of:
a) a direct oral answer;
b) where the desired information is in a publication of the Council or other published work, a reference to that publication; or
c) where the reply cannot conveniently be given orally, a written answer circulated later to the questioner.
Minutes:
1. Councillor Jon Wareing
Councillor Wareing began by commending officers and members for producing what was described as an infrastructure-led draft Local Plan, recognising the importance of planning, delivering and maintaining infrastructure alongside development.
He noted that many communities across the Cotswolds were already experiencing infrastructure deficits arising from previous development and argued that housing growth, economic development and tourism all created demands on infrastructure that should be planned for according to their impacts, rather than solely their sources.
He observed that, while the draft Local Plan recognised the effects of tourism in the Cotswold Lakes and included policies for managing visitor impacts in that area, it did not contain an equivalent strategic policy framework for settlements experiencing sustained visitor pressures, such as Bourton-on-the-Water and Bibury. He referred to the National Planning Policy Framework and examples from the Lake District National Park Authority, suggesting that the concept of "settlement carrying capacity" should form part of the Council's spatial planning strategy.
He therefore asked whether the Cabinet would amend the draft Local Plan by introducing settlement carrying capacity as a strategic planning consideration through a new core policy. He proposed that such a policy should establish a framework for identifying settlements experiencing exceptional and sustained visitor pressure and ensure that the environmental, physical, social and community impacts of visitor demand, together with infrastructure capacity and settlement resilience, were recognised within the District's spatial strategy, thereby providing an enduring planning framework for the future unitary authority.
The Leader thanked Councillor Wareing for his question and invited officers to respond to the technical aspects before asking the Cabinet Member for Tourism to comment.
The Director of Communities and Place advised that the draft Local Plan already contained policies addressing tourism-related development, specifically Policies 46 and 47. The Local Plan was not the principal mechanism through which visitor activity or tourism levels could be controlled. Officers considered that the proposed policies represented the fullest extent to which such matters could appropriately be addressed within planning policy.
The Director further confirmed that the Cotswold National Landscape Management Plan also contained relevant policies, including Policies CB15 and CE14, which addressed aspects of visitor management within the National Landscape. Councillor Evemy requested that these policies be shared with Councillor Wareing for reference.
Councillor Tony Dale, Cabinet Member for Leisure , Culture and Visitor Experience acknowledged the significant challenges experienced by communities affected by high visitor numbers, including Bourton-on-the-Water, Bibury, South Cerney, Siddington, Fairford, Lechlade, Maiseyhampton and other settlements across the district. He advised that the planning system was not designed to regulate visitor numbers directly and that the principal challenge lay in managing the impacts of tourism rather than controlling demand.
Councillor Dale stated that officers had extended planning controls as far as was considered appropriate within the Local Plan while remaining consistent with planning legislation and the requirements of the Planning Inspectorate. He also appealed for visitors to respect local communities by parking responsibly, complying with regulations and protecting the environment, noting that further powers to manage visitor numbers would require action by central Government.
Councillor Tristan Wilkinson, Cabinet Member for Economy and Council Transformation supported the points raised, stating that although the Local Plan might not be the appropriate planning mechanism, the issue of tourism impacts should not be overlooked. He referred to the increasing pressures experienced in Bibury since the COVID-19 pandemic and noted that Fairford had also experienced increased visitor activity associated with RAF Fairford. He observed that the global profile of the Cotswolds meant visitor numbers were likely to continue increasing and that destinations could rapidly become popular through social media. He concluded that the impact of tourism on local communities should be addressed through an appropriate policy or other mechanism.
Councillor Evemy agreed that the issue represented a significant challenge, referring to the phenomenon of "TikTok tourism" experienced in Bourton-on-the-Water and Bibury, where locations attracted very large numbers of short-stay visitors through social media exposure. He noted that the Council had supported local research into tourism impacts through funding generated by the Bourton-on-the-Water tourism parking levy and confirmed that the Council would continue working with Gloucestershire County Council and other partners to identify possible solutions.
Councillor Wareing asked a supplementary question clarifying that his concern extended beyond tourism to the wider issue of settlement carrying capacity and the cumulative impact of increased activity on infrastructure. He referred to existing traffic pressures in settlements such as Moreton-in-Marsh and noted that planned housing growth would place further demands on the strategic north–south transport corridor. He asked that, if settlement carrying capacity was not considered an appropriate matter for inclusion within the Local Plan, how and through what mechanism such issues should be addressed.
The Leader, acknowledged that the impacts on the A429 corridor, including Moreton-in-Marsh and Stow-on-the-Wold, would form an important part of the forthcoming consultation. He agreed that the challenges faced by Moreton were particularly acute but recognised that similar issues affected a number of settlements across the district.
He confirmed that officers had noted the points raised and would consider whether any additional guidance, including supplementary planning guidance or other planning mechanisms, could assist. Whilst the draft Local Plan could not be amended before consideration by Council the following week, he encouraged Councillor Wareing, local residents and the Parish Council to submit detailed representations during the Regulation 19 consultation so that these issues could be considered through the examination process.