Another Gloucestershire council is set to express its dissatisfaction with the Government over what it deems "ridiculous" housing targets, amid concerns that the new homes will cater more for commuters to Bristol and Cardiff than local residents.
Forest of Dean District Council is preparing to voice its objections to the Government regarding the revised target of 13,200 homes they are expected to deliver by 2043.
The council recently agreed to launch a consultation on the local plan, which serves as the framework for development within the district.
However, there is significant apprehension that a potential population surge of over 40% could harm the statutory Forest of Dean, as well as the Wye Valley, Malvern Hills, and other national landscapes.
Councillors have resolved to contest the Government's housing projections, following in the footsteps of Cotswold District Council, whose leaders have similarly condemned the targets.
Councillor Philip Burford (I, Hartpury and Redmarley) put forward a motion to postpone the consultation until the council has formally challenged the Government's housing targets for the Forest of Dean.
During the meeting on July 24, he argued that the housing targets would lead to a population increase of around 40% by 2043, which he believes is not sustainable.
He explained that councils across the nation face identical challenges, with many having contacted the Government to contest the housing targets. "Most of them are stating the special characteristics of their areas," he said.
"We have sites of special scientific interest in the Wye Valley, Malvern Hills and Walmore Common.
"We have Ramsar sites (wetlands of international importance), we have special areas of conservation.
"We have locally valued landscapes and that's before we even start thinking about mentioning the statutory Forest.
"And don't forget the vale of Gloucester and all of our best and most versatile farmland."
Councillor Ian Whitburn (I, Coleford) argued that the council should take a stand.
"We should refuse to do this plan until we get some help from the Government to lower these figures," he said.
"We need more social housing, we need loads of it. If there was any money in this for social housing that would be good – but there isn't.
"We all know what we are doing at the moment is building houses for people who live in Bristol, people who live in Gloucester, Cheltenham and Cardiff to travel to work in those places.
"You try getting in and out of Bristol and coming through Cheltenham at night and in the mornings and the same in Gloucester.
"We've got no jobs in the Forest for these people, so that's going to be more travel.
"Which, I would suggest, is against Green policy because people aren't going to be cycling to Bristol.
"There's only one train station, they are not going to be going on the train. They are going to be driving.
"It's going to be terrible for us here in the Forest. We are going to lose loads of farmland.
"As much as we need houses for local people, these will be four bedroom detached homes people can make a lot of money on.
"These are not going to be social housing, unfortunately."
Council leader Adrian Birch (G, Tidenham) concurred with the concerns raised.
He proposed that they present a robust case to the Government against their "ludicrous" housing targets while moving forward with the consultation on the local plan.
"We need to get this local plan approved by the time this district ceases to exist," he emphasised.
"Any delay at this stage could be catastrophic to that programme.
"I know it is not ideal and there will be significant debate to be had in weeks and months to come.
"I think it would be disingenuous to our residents not to undertake the consultation in the timescale we've set.
"By all means, let's make whatever representations we can but it would be foolish of us not to proceed on the basis of the original paper because we owe it to our public to do so.
"We need their voice as much as we need yours."
The council resolved to press on with the local plan consultation slated to commence on July 31.
Additionally, council leaders agreed to pen a letter to the Government expressing their objections to the housing targets.
