Why you should be interested in the Local Plan
News headlines saying housing targets to become 'advisory' were misleading
The Government has a public consultation open until 2 March 2023 to make changes to their requirements around Local Plans.
To see the Government public consultation click here
​
The proposals are quite broad ranging but some do concern housing numbers.
​
Of particular interest may be the "importance of being able to plan for growth in a way which recognises places’ distinctive characters and delivers attractive environments which have local support."
​
​
​
​
WHAT PEOPLE WHO RETURNED OUR PAPER SURVEYS SAID
The Local Plan consultation is now closed. People's comments aren't visible at first, but at some point you will be able to see what others have said. A summary will be made as well.
In the meantime I can share the results of our own survey of just three wards. Forest of Dean Green Party leaflets containing the survey were delivered to some 4,800 residential properties in Newnham, Pillowell and Bream wards during the public consultation period. The following does not include responses to the Forest of Dean Green Party online questionnaire.
75 leaflet responses were returned — about 1.56% of the households leafleted. This is obviously only a small proportion of residents, but it is a higher proportion of target households than responded to the last (2020) Council public consultation. The results are here put forward, not as a representative sample of residents views, but as an insight into the views of those who were interested enough to respond to our survey. The settlements in the wards leafleted are villages and hamlets.
The Villages
The first question asked how many houses the resident would like to see put forward for their own village. 54% said that they didn’t want any new houses in their village and 46% said they would. Despite almost half supporting more houses being built in their own village, over 80% of respondents think that the numbers proposed for the major villages and other villages is too high. For both major and other villages, those who said that they would like over 40 new houses in their village (with the highest number at 100), thought that the village numbers are about right. At this stage with the actual numbers in any particular village unknown, residents have had to estimate a number that will be allocated for their own village in the next stage of the Local Plan process. 3% thought the housing number too low for the villages. 1% didn’t have a view with regard to major villages & 7% didn't have a view with regard to other villages.
Lydney
74% of respondents think the number of houses for Lydney is too high, 9% thought the number about right and 8% too low. 8% didn’t have a view.
Newent
53% of respondents think the number of houses for Newent is too high, 14% thought the number about right and 7% too low. 26% had no view on the matter.
Beachley
The views on Beachley are less divergent than for other settlements; 41% of respondents think the number of houses for Beachley is too high; 28% about right; 18% too low; 9% didn’t have a view.
Where should the houses go?
The last question asked residents to choose locations for where more of the houses should be allocated than is currently proposed. Respondents were invited to select more than one option. Cinderford was not put forward as an option as it is severely constrained.
Beachley was the most popular location with 36%.
This was followed by a New Settlement (if a suitable location can be found) with 34%.
20% think Coleford should take more houses and 14% felt the same about Lydney.
15% said they didn’t know where the houses should go.
Only 8% chose Newent and 3% chose the villages for more houses.
Some of the percentages don’t add up to 100 because they are the percentage of the survey respondents rather than the percentage of those who answered that question (as some people didn’t answer every question).
The percentages for the last question are also based on the total of respondents, (who were invited to select more than one option - meaning that the percentages add up to more than 100).
​
To see the survey questions, click here
​​
The public consultation on this stage of the Local Plan process is now closed
The new proposal puts more houses in major villages and brings a new policy to put houses in small villages
AN INCREASE IN NEW HOUSES FOR THE VILLAGES
​
The latest stage of the Local Plan requires space for 907 new houses to be found among the major villages, in addition to 321 sites already in the pipeline. The major villages are listed as Tutshill/ Sedbury, Bream and Mitcheldean as well as Drybrook, Newnham, Lydbrook and Yorkley/ Pillowell/ Whitecroft. This is in addition to any sites for 5 houses or less, which are counted separately. This would mean over 120 additional houses per village, except that the houses won't be evenly spread across the villages so some will have more and some less.
​
Added to these, the latest proposal calls for 554 new houses to be found among the other villages not listed above, in addition to 138 sites already in the pipeline. Again this is in addition to any sites for 5 houses or less, which are counted separately. The houses won't be evenly spread across the villages as they are likely to be in those that are most accessible.
The latest proposals put numbers for houses in small villages.
Some new housing in small villages may be beneficial, but this plan relies on villages to meet the numbers of houses required to be in the Plan, which could lead to housing on inappropriate sites.
Acknowledgement Google maps
MAJOR EXPANSION OF LYDNEY TO BECOME “THE GATEWAY TO THE FOREST”
​
The latest stage of the Local Plan puts another 1,326 new homes to be built on farmland around Lydney, on top of the approx 1,134 that are already in the pipeline for the town. The 'aim' is for there also to be supporting infrastructure and facilities. There isn't any strategy put forward to reduce congestion on the A48.
​
To fit in all the houses at Lydney will require ignoring a recent Landscape Policy . Click here to see enlarged document
MORE HOUSES NEWENT
​
The latest stage of the Local Plan puts another 600 new homes to be built on farmland around Newent.
This is on top of the approx 376 that are already in the pipeline for the town.
The aim is to improve connectivity and facilities.
​
Map courtesy of OpenStreetMap
REGENERATION OF BEACHLEY MoD SITE
The MoD site at Beachley is expected to become vacant. As previously developed land, it becomes a priority for regeneration. However, Beachley is located directly under the old Severn Bridge and the road to it is already congested with traffic at Sedbury. The Local Plan currently puts 600 new dwellings at Beachley and aspires to better transport links and for employment uses and some facilities on site.
​
Map courtesy of OpenStreetMap
"As previously developed land, Beachley MoD site must be included in the Local Plan. However, so many houses are only sensible if regeneration funding is available to solve the strategic problems or it becomes a self-sufficient settlement"
What about the other towns?
Cinderford
Cinderford is given only another 100 new houses as it is mainly surrounded by Forest that cannot be built on, with 569 sites not yet built out from the current plan. The farmland to the south-east is steeply sloping and may not be feasible to build on.
Coleford
Coleford is only down for 107 new houses but another 487 are in the pipeline.
The doctor's surgery is moving to the edge of the town, on land off The Gorse.
​
KEY
Forest is shown in dark green
Golf courses and meadows are shown in bright green
Farmland is shown in cream
Built up areas are shown in grey
Courtesy of OpenStreetMap
This proposal is unlikely to provide a 5 year housing land supply
This strategy is very similar to the existing Local Plan, (that isn't providing a 5 year land supply) as they both rely heavily on Lydney to provide housing. The Local Plan should provide a range of locations and types of site, which is compromised by concentrating so much of the new housing in and around Lydney. Without a 5 year land supply, the Local Plan cannot hope to control where development takes place.
The Local Plan is supposed to be as sustainable as possible, with a focus on trying to reduce reliance on car travel.
​
The latest proposal will increase car travel because it is allocating so many houses to settlements without facilities and services that are not well served by public transport. It also does nothing to reduce existing traffic congestion.