Council sets out options to tackle huge government housing targets ahead of public consultation

The short version

The emerging Cotswold Local Plan now proposes a strategic development of around 1,020 homes south-west of Kemble, together with employment land, a local centre, a new primary school and substantial green infrastructure.

That is an exceptionally large proposal for Kemble. It would transform the village and make it roughly three times its present size. I understand why many residents will feel shocked and anxious about it. I do too. The numbers are very large, and I do not believe the Government’s housing target for the Cotswolds reflects the realities of a rural district where much of the land is protected.

The proposal is not planning permission, and there are important decisions, consultation opportunities and safeguards still to come. But I also want to be candid: given the Government’s housing target, the site’s size and its rail connection, development on this land is now very likely. The question is not whether we should pretend it might simply disappear. It is whether the Council can secure a coherent, properly planned development with the infrastructure Kemble needs, rather than leave the village exposed to less coordinated proposals.

My job as Kemble’s ward councillor is to be honest about the scale of what is proposed, to keep pressing for a more realistic national target, and to fight for the strongest possible protections, infrastructure and community benefit for Kemble.

What has changed since the last consultation?

At the previous Regulation 18 consultation, the draft plan referred to around 590 homes within the plan period and a wider, longer-term capacity of up to 1,070 homes.

The new Regulation 19 material proposes 1,020 homes by 2043. The overall potential scale of the land is therefore broadly similar to the larger number people saw previously. The major change is the delivery assumption: the Council now expects nearly all of the development to be capable of coming forward within this Local Plan period.

That higher delivery figure is based on the latest site work and on the landowner’s indication that different parts of the site could be brought forward by more than one developer at the same time. The current evidence anticipates first homes complete in around 2033/34 and a potential build-out rate of up to 150 homes a year. Those are planning assumptions, not a guarantee that development will happen exactly that way.

The concept framework currently shows:

• about 1,020 homes across an 83.6-hectare site;
• around 9 hectares of employment land;
• land for a two-form-entry primary school;
• a local centre;
• strategic open space, green infrastructure and sustainable drainage; and
• separate access points from the A429, with walking and cycling connections.

There is one important positive feature of the location. The site is on the far side of the railway line, beyond Top Farm and opposite Cotswold Airport. That creates a degree of physical separation from the existing village and gives an opportunity to plan a distinct new neighbourhood, rather than simply extending one existing street after another. It still adjoins Kemble, however, so that separation does not remove the impact on the village or the need for strong connections and safeguards.

Much remains to be designed, tested and secured. In particular, residents are entitled to clear answers on the timing and funding of the school, safe access to the station and village, traffic and road safety, health provision, water and wastewater capacity, landscape impact, flood risk, biodiversity, and the long-term management of green spaces.

Why is this happening?

The Government has imposed a very high housing requirement on Cotswold District Council. The Council has challenged the target with Government on three occasions, asking for a more realistic figure that properly reflects the Cotswolds’ rural character and extensive protected landscape. Those requests have not succeeded.

The consequence is that the Council has to demonstrate that it has looked seriously at all viable land capable of helping to meet the requirement. It cannot simply choose the locations it would most prefer. Sites enter the process because landowners and developers put them forward through the Call for Sites. The Council then assesses them against planning evidence: access, landscape, heritage, flood risk, ecology, infrastructure and deliverability, among other matters.

That does not make every offered site acceptable. But where there are not enough alternatives and a site cannot be ruled out on strong planning grounds, excluding it without robust evidence risks the Local Plan failing examination.

It is important to be honest about what that could mean in Kemble. A failed Local Plan would not make this land or the housing target disappear. The landowner and developers would be likely to pursue planning applications anyway, potentially through separate parcels or phases. With no up-to-date Local Plan and no five-year housing land supply, the national planning balance would be less favourable to the Council. We would have less ability to plan the development as one place, link housing to a coordinated infrastructure package, and require the school, roads, station connections, drainage, green space and other facilities to be delivered at the right time.

That is not an argument for accepting a poor allocation. It is an argument for using the Local Plan process to make the strongest possible case for a smaller impact where evidence supports it, and for clear, enforceable requirements where development is likely to proceed.

Kemble’s rail station is one reason the site has been considered strategically important. It also makes the test much tougher: if a development of this size is justified partly by access to rail, it must provide safe, direct and convenient walking, wheeling, cycling and public-transport connections from the outset. The station cannot be used as a reason for growth while access, capacity and parking pressures are left unresolved.

My view

I support building more genuinely affordable homes. Like many families, mine knows how difficult it is for younger people to find a secure and affordable home locally. But accepting the need for homes is not the same as accepting any scale of development, in any form, with infrastructure promised later.

The proposed scale for Kemble is too large to treat as routine development. It would fundamentally change the village. The Local Plan must require infrastructure first, not as an aspiration after houses have been occupied.

I will therefore continue to press for:

• a clear, public phasing plan showing how many homes are expected each year and what must be delivered before each phase;
• a funded education plan, including clarity about the proposed new primary school and the future of the existing school;
• safe, direct routes to the station, village centre, schools and Kemble Wick, backed by proper transport measures rather than more car dependency;
• binding requirements for roads, drainage, water, wastewater, electricity and healthcare capacity;
• firm protection for the setting of Kemble, Ewen and the conservation areas, the Special Landscape Area, ancient woodland and wildlife;
• genuinely net-zero homes, high-quality design, renewable energy and long-term stewardship of open space; and
• real engagement with residents and the Parish Council before the detail is fixed.

Note: Some of this is part of a planning permission, rather than the local plan

The immediate timetable

Before the Regulation 19 consultation opens, the draft Local Plan is due to be considered through the following Council meetings:

Subject to those decisions, the Regulation 19 consultation is expected to begin in the week commencing 24 August 2026 for 6 weeks The Council will publish the consultation documents, the formal dates and the way to comment.

I am also working with Kemble & Ewen Parish Council to arrange a village meeting once the Regulation 19 material is published. This will be an opportunity to examine the documents together, hear residents’ concerns and identify the issues that need a strong, evidence-based response. Details will be announced as soon as they are confirmed.

What Regulation 19 means

Regulation 19 is the final formal consultation on the version of the Local Plan that the Council intends to submit for examination. It is different from the earlier options consultation.

At this stage, comments should focus on whether the Plan is legally compliant and “sound”. In plain English, that means asking whether it has been properly prepared, is justified by evidence, can actually be delivered, and is consistent with national policy.

For Kemble, useful representations will need to be specific. They might address whether the proposed 1,020 homes are genuinely deliverable, whether infrastructure is costed and timed, whether the transport evidence is adequate, whether school and healthcare capacity are secured, or whether the landscape, heritage, flood-risk and ecological evidence is strong enough. General concern is understandable, but evidence-based points are more likely to carry weight at examination.

What happens after Regulation 19?

The broad process is:

1. Regulation 19 consultation. Residents, the Parish Council, statutory bodies and others submit formal representations on the proposed Plan.

2. Submission to the Planning Inspectorate. The Council sends the Plan, its evidence and the representations to an independent Planning Inspector appointed by Government.

3. Independent examination. The Inspector tests whether the Plan is sound and legally compliant. There may be public hearing sessions, where the Council, parish councils, residents’ representatives, landowners and developers can take part.

4. Inspector’s report and possible changes. The Inspector may recommend modifications. The Council cannot simply ignore those recommendations if it wants to adopt a sound Plan.

5. Adoption. If the process is successful, the Council can adopt the Plan. The current aim is adoption in 2027, but this depends on the examination process.

6. Planning applications. A Local Plan allocation is not a consent to build. Developers would still need to submit planning applications with detailed layouts, roads, drainage, landscape, ecological and transport assessments, infrastructure proposals and legal agreements. Each application would have its own public consultation and would be decided by the Council.

This means that there are two important opportunities to influence the outcome: first, through the Local Plan, which sets the principle, scale and required infrastructure; and later through the detailed planning applications, which decide the design, phasing and conditions on the ground.

What I will do

I will keep residents updated, work with Kemble & Ewen Parish Council, and make sure that concerns are put to the Council in a form that can be tested by the Inspector. I will continue to argue nationally for fairer housing targets for rural areas like ours.

My focus is to make sure Kemble is not asked to carry the consequences without the infrastructure, safeguards and local voice it deserves. No one should pretend that 1,020 homes is a small change, or that the site is likely to go away if the Local Plan does not allocate it. The task now is to be clear-eyed about it, make our case properly, and insist that any growth is genuinely planned around the needs of the existing and future community.

This article is written by Cllr Mike McKeown in his capacity as ward councillor for Kemble. It is not an official statement by Cotswold District Council.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

Why are so many homes proposed for Kemble?
Because a local landowner put this site forward through the Council’s Call for Sites, and under the Government’s much higher housing targets, CDC must test almost all available land. Kemble is one of the few areas outside the protected Cotswolds National Landscape and has a mainline station, making it more suitable for growth under national policy. In effect, CDC hasn’t chosen this site — it’s included because of Government requirements, limited alternatives, and the need to show enough land for housing.

Does this mean new houses are already approved?
No. The Local Plan sets the framework – individual planning applications will follow later, the site is approved.

Why are we being told to plan for more homes?
The targets come from Government. CDC must plan for them even if it disagrees.

Can CDC refuse to include certain land?
Only if there are strong planning reasons. Otherwise, a Planning Inspector would find the plan unsound and the local plan could not be adopted, leaving the Cotswolds open to ongoing speculative development and the Kemble site would almost certainly go ahead anyway.

What happens if we don’t have a Local Plan?
Developers could bring speculative applications with weaker design standards and less infrastructure.

Does the new Local Plan also update planning policies as well as development areas?
Yes. The Local Plan review is updating both the planning policies (which guide how decisions are made) and the development areas (the locations where new homes and jobs may go). 

Is this about the Kemble & Ewen Parish or the Kemble Ward?
This proposal specifically affects the Kemble & Ewen Parish – and particularly the village of Kemble itself. While the Kemble Ward covers a wider area, the proposal in the draft Local Plan relate to land within the parish boundary.

What is a five-year housing land supply?
Every council must be able to show that it has enough land identified to deliver at least five years’ worth of new homes based on Government housing targets.If the Council can’t show this, it loses much of its control — developers can submit speculative planning applications on unallocated sites, and national policy makes these much harder to refuse, even if they don’t fit the Local Plan. Having a five-year land supply is what helps the Council stay in control of where and how new homes are built.

If additional developments get planning permission under speculative development, does that count towards the housing target?
Yes. Any new homes granted planning permission – whether through the Local Plan or speculative development – do count towards the district’s overall housing target. However, speculative developments are much harder to plan properly and often lack the coordinated infrastructure that comes from being part of an agreed Local Plan.

Why not meet the housing target by building a new town or large village instead?
That option has been considered, but it depends on landowners offering large, suitable sites. In the Cotswolds, no landowners have proposed a single site big enough to accommodate a new town or large village that woild cover all the requirements. Because the Council can only assess land that has been formally submitted through the Call for Sites, it must instead plan for housing across multiple smaller locations. This is why several villages, including Kemble, are being considered for growth rather than one new settlement.

Will there be public events as part of the consultation?
Yes. CDC plans to hold public drop-in sessions and exhibitions during the six-week consultation period. These will take place across the district, giving residents the chance to view maps, speak to officers, and ask questions. The dates and venues will be announced shortly on the Council’s website.

How will infrastructure be planned and delivered?
Alongside the Local Plan, CDC is updating its Infrastructure Delivery Plan. This identifies the roads, schools, healthcare, drainage, and utilities needed to support new development. At the planning stage, developers will be required to contribute to or deliver these improvements through Section 106 agreements and/or the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL).

What happens if not enough sites are found to meet the housing target?
If CDC cannot identify enough suitable land, it must show that it has:

• Worked with landowners and developers to bring sites forward; and

• Negotiated with neighbouring councils to share housing numbers.
  Only if these steps fail might the Government reconsider the district’s housing requirement.

Can residents influence the final plan?
Absolutely. This is the most important opportunity to have your say. Clear, evidence-based feedback now helps CDC demonstrate why certain sites should or shouldn’t go forward — which can be crucial when the plan is reviewed by the Government’s Planning Inspector later on.