The Liberal Democrat administration in Bath and North East Somerset is facing internal disputes over a significant forthcoming wave of housing development poised to reshape parts of the district.
The government has mandated that Bath and North East Somerset Council must accommodate 27,340 new homes across the district within the next 18 years. The council’s draft local plan proposes that approximately a quarter of this housing growth will occur in Bath, despite the city comprising around half of the district’s population.
Members of the council cabinet, mostly representing wards within or adjacent to Bath, contend that expanding housing within the city is severely constrained by its UNESCO World Heritage Site status. Consequently, they suggest that surrounding villages and towns within North East Somerset must absorb a disproportionately large share of new homes. This stance has sparked criticism from councillors outside the city.
READ MORE: ‘Aggressive’ Bath man restrained after refusing to leave hospital fined
READ MORE: Councillor Defends Record on Worle Library Closure Amid Mixed Views
At a council cabinet meeting on 10 September, as the draft local plan was poised for its final public consultation phase, some backbench Liberal Democrat councillors representing North East Somerset voiced strong objections. The plan designates 5,900 new homes for Bath, while Keynsham-a town with a population nearly five times smaller-is allocated nearly as many at 5,700 homes. This is in addition to plans for a new town development at Hicks Gate nearby.
Andy Wait, Liberal Democrat councillor for Keynsham East, criticised the council for “poor planning” in failing to engage with UNESCO to adapt Bath’s World Heritage Site constraints. While acknowledging external factors like increased housing targets imposed by successive governments, he emphasised that the draft plan remains the council’s responsibility.
Liberal Democrats hold a majority on the 59-member Bath and North East Somerset Council with 38 seats. Despite this, council leaders maintain that the Labour government has imposed housing requirements so substantial that local choice is limited. Matt McCabe, cabinet member for planning and housing, described the housing target increase-from an initial 14,000 homes to 27,340-as “shockingly high,” calling it a “tidal wave of development that we are powerless to stop.”
The raised targets have left the council behind schedule, weakening its ability to refuse unsuitable planning applications until the local plan is formally adopted. Several substantial applications have already been submitted.
With some 6,000 individuals on the social housing waiting list in Bath and North East Somerset, the housing crisis is most acute in Bath itself. However, the administration highlights significant restrictions on the city’s capacity to expand. The local plan focusses on brownfield sites along the river and smaller peripheral areas such as the contentious South Stoke Plateau for city growth.
Earlier proposals included a substantial suburban expansion westward from Twerton towards the Globe Roundabout, with 2,000 homes planned. However, the government’s planning inspectorate warned that without UNESCO’s support, the plan would be rejected. Bath’s designation explicitly emphasises the significance of its “hollow in the hills” setting, making suburban sprawl a threat to its World Heritage status-a status neither the council nor government wishes to risk.
Matt McCabe acknowledged public concerns, stating that many perceive the local plan as endorsement of enforced development levels, which he denies. He believes the plan represents the best chance to protect communities from speculative building while ensuring new developments integrate well rather than becoming mere “commuter boxes in fields.”
Not all local councillors are convinced. Green party councillor Sam Ross expressed doubts about the availability of school capacity for the 330 homes allocated to Clutton, which would expand the village by 50%. Similar concerns about doubling village sizes were voiced by Farrington Gurney Parish Council and a Haydon resident opposed to a site recently refused planning permission.
Shaun Stephenson-McGall, Liberal Democrat councillor for Timsbury, indicated possible opposition, noting that the village, with around 2,000 residents, would grow by an “extraordinary” 37%. Labour councillors representing areas outside Bath also questioned the strategy; opposition leader Robin Moss sought clarity on why World Heritage status precludes housing development, pointing to other World Heritage cities where locals remain housed affordably.
Paul May, Liberal Democrat cabinet member for Whitchurch near Bristol, expressed serious concerns for his community, with plans proposing over 1,700 new homes there-tripling the village size. Nonetheless, he supported moving forward with public consultation, arguing that a local plan allows more cohesive infrastructure planning than piecemeal development applications.
It is important to note that inclusion in the local plan does not equate to immediate construction but signals that future applications aligned with the plan are likely to gain approval.
The council is expected to launch a six-week public consultation imminently, representing the final opportunity for community input before the plan’s submission to government authorities. Once approved, the local plan will govern planning decisions in the area until 2043.