Decision

The Officer introduced the report and advised that Siddington had undertaken its Regulation 14 consultation, taking account of comments received before submitting the amended Plan to the Council under Regulation 15.

The Council formally accepted the submission and a Regulation 16 consultation was then held, with comments received from residents, businesses, statutory consultees and other stakeholders. The comments would be passed to an independent examiner.

As the Local Planning Authority, the Council was also required to submit its own comments to the examiner.

The officer outlined the Council’s proposed response to the Siddington Neighbourhood Plan Regulation 16 consultation.

The Council supported the principle of the proposed green gap between Cirencester and Siddington, but recommended that its boundary be amended to take account of proposed housing allocations supported by more recent landscape evidence. The ‘green gap’ would not represent a blanket restriction on development, but proposals would need to demonstrate that they would not compromise the visual or physical separation between the settlements.

The Council was also broadly supportive of the proposed settlement boundary, although this had been drawn tightly around the existing built form because the emerging housing allocations could not yet be incorporated until they were formally adopted.

The remaining policies were considered, with officers generally supporting the approach but recommending amendments to ensure that the wording was locally specific, effective and consistent with the Local Plan and National policy. These included housing mix, design, the reuse of the former Talland School heritage asset, local green spaces, important views, trees and hedgerows, flooding, sustainable transport and active travel, and community facilities. In relation to local green spaces, the officer noted that some designations already formed part of the adopted Local Plan, while the proposed Canal Lane designation might require further consideration as to whether the whole area met the relevant criteria. Concerns regarding the proposed footpath connection to Tesco had also been raised by local residents and would be available for the examiner to consider.

The officer advised that the next step would be to procure an independent examiner through the Council’s procurement process. Quotes would be sought from experienced examiners and assessed on cost, timescale and experience. A fast examination timetable was proposed, with the aim of holding the referendum on 25 February. If this timetable could not be achieved, the referendum would need to be delayed until the local elections on 6 May.