The Government’s housing allocation figures for the Forest are ’flawed and fictitious’ - according to the district councillor promoting a 5,000-home settlement at Churcham.

Cabinet member for Climate and Planning Chris McFarling (Green) said: “It is not my intention to build any more houses than we actually need, and we have challenged the Housing Minister Robert Jenrick over this. The figures for new housing are flawed. They are fictitious.”

Councillor McFarling told campaigners at an online meeting on Thursday (March 18) that no development would go ahead if there was perceived harm to nature and the environment.

“Not in my name would we harm the home of nightingales at Highnam Wood,” he said. “And if our plans exacerbate environmental problems and we potentially end up with houses that would flood and we can’t resolve these constraints, then it won’t work, and we’ll tell the Government we can’t do it.

He added: “It also has to be a sustainable development that benefits the Forest and not a dormitory town serving Gloucester or as an extension to the city.”

Both are key arguments against the development as far as the Churcham Communications Action Group are concerned.

But the new town is in fact the Preferred Option for the council, because according to Forward Plans Manager Nigel Gibbons, adding more homes to existing communities would do more harm than good. “It would spread the pain but load a number of areas with insufficient capacity for transport and environmental considerations,” he told the online meeting.

The Churcham development, involving developers Hitchins, would provide 27% of the Forest’s housing allocation needs with Newent, Beachley and Lydney providing the rest. There was restricted scope for expansion at Cinderford and Coleford had responded strongly against breaking the town’s ‘green’ ring, he said.

The meeting heard that two other new town settlements had been considered: The Grange Court Eco-village of 5,000 homes, near Westbury-on-Severn, and the Redmarley/M50 Glitch Brook plan.

However, the Churcham plan, involving 435 acres of farmland, has the advantage that the landowners have already come to an options agreement with Hitchins, who have published their ambitious ‘West of Severn’ scheme. It will involve the construction of two new roundabouts on the A40, three schools, a business park and sport facility as well as a park and ride and railway station.

Councillor McFarling and Mr Gibbons insisted that all parish councils, district councillors and neighbouring authorities had been consulted on the development via email. This was, however, in dispute as the six parishes affected by the Churcham development resorted to a Freedom of Information request to find out the details earlier in January.

A timeline of what will happen over the next few years included the circulation of an Action Group Report by the council next week, followed by the Forest of Dean councillors’ response, a draft plan for the development in 12 months’ time, followed by a formal consultation and a published submission for public examination by the Secretary of State in 2023. If plans win approval, homes will start to be built in 2030, according to Councillor McFarling. Hitchins had estimated this would happen three years earlier.

The Churcham Communications Action Group will be addressing the full council on April 15 as a result of their 6,800-signature petition - though Chris McFarling may not be able to attend as he is standing for election in the county council elections in May.

Their spokesman Councillor John Francis, chairman of Churcham Parish Council said afterwards: “I just can’t see the ‘Preferred Option’ benefiting the Forest of Dean. Does the Forest really realise the scale of this? A new town of over 11,000 people as a new shiny suburb of Gloucester which will get all the investment, so why bother going into the Forest at all?

“I suppose we can sit on our great white elephant and watch the Forest wither! Mind you with the projected increase in flooding I’ll be glad to be on an elephant as Churcham is the lowest part of Gloucestershire!”