Bathurst Development Limited (BDL), the principal developer for the 2,350-home project at The Steadings on Cirencester’s outskirts, has requested Cotswold District Council to amend its planning obligations concerning the timing of a new on-site primary school. The proposed change seeks to defer the school’s construction from completion before 500 homes are occupied to before 1,000 homes, citing sustained low birth rates in the area as the primary reason.
The Steadings’ primary school remains a key feature of the development plans, but BDL argues that the original trigger point no longer reflects current demographic realities. Their submission, made on November 3, emphasizes record low birth rates for three consecutive years and notes over 400 unused school places in the local vicinity.
BDL highlighted that a newly constructed school building in Siddington, funded and delivered by the company, was opened in April 2025. Initially intended as a temporary home for The Steadings Primary School, that facility is currently used by Siddington pupils due to insufficient demand from The Steadings area. Low pupil numbers have delayed children from moving into the new school, which BDL attributes mainly to falling birth rates and surplus capacity in neighboring schools.
READ MORE: Pub Landlord Blames Government Policies for Price Hikes and Reduced Opening Hours
READ MORE: ITV’s Dr Amir Khan Shares Simple Two-Word Tip to Lower ‘Silent Killer’ Blood Pressure
As of November, there were approximately 440 reception and school places available locally for the 2025/26 academic year—equivalent to more than two full primary school classes. This surplus offers flexibility for families moving into The Steadings in the short to medium term to utilize existing schools before the on-site primary school is constructed.
The request to adjust the school-building trigger has sparked considerable concern among residents, with dozens formally objecting to the proposal. BDL maintains that infrastructure investments are tied to occupancy thresholds and that the reduction in anticipated primary-aged children since the original 2016 planning application justifies revisiting these obligations.