Ilminster Town Council vote against Canal Way option

First published in News

CAMPAIGNERS are warning a planning free-for-all could be the result of disagreements over the proposed ‘direction of growth’ of Ilminster.

Six town councillors voted in favour of development along Shudrick Valley at a meeting held as part of a consultation on South Somerset District Council’s Local Plan, while three voted against and one abstained; four others were not present.

The town council’s view will be passed on to the district council, which is proposing to modify the Local Plan to make the preferred ‘direction of growth’ the Canal Way area after a planning Inspector raised concerns in July about the suitability of its former preference, Shudrick Valley, as the location for around 30 new homes.

Almost 100 people turned up to the meeting to voice their views, with many people fighting to stop future development in Shudrick Valley and others presenting a petition with more than 300 signatures against building in Canal Way.

The latter group expressed concern over the effect on Herne Hill should development take place in the Canal Way area.

Rob Drayton, of the Save Shudrick Valley Group, said: “The decision by the town council was no more than we expected. But what did surprise us was the fact there were only six votes in favour.

“The petition from campaigners in Canal Way states that the town council is ‘strongly behind the Shudrick Lane development’ – six out of 14 councillors is not even 50% and is not a great mandate, certainly not strong support.

“It was again made clear by the district council that if the option for direction of growth is changed yet again with a fourth attempt at getting it through, and the plan is then deemed unsound by the inspector then we could face a planning free-for-all and that is not in the town’s best interests.”

The consultation is now over and will be discussed by the district council’s Planning Management Board, executive and full council, before the final proposed modifications are due to be submitted to the inspector in March.

Comments (2)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

12:11am Thu 16 Jan 14

orchardman says...

One would have thought that on such an important issue such as this, a virtual full turnout of the council would have been expected!. One, maybe two absentees could be expected, but four seems to be a bit on the high side.
One would have thought that on such an important issue such as this, a virtual full turnout of the council would have been expected!. One, maybe two absentees could be expected, but four seems to be a bit on the high side. orchardman
  • Score: 2

9:12am Thu 16 Jan 14

Dick Turpin Works For Council says...

Of course, there is a third option, other than the Shudrick Valley vs Canal Way debate. That is to have no more mass-building of houses in Ilminster at all, which seems perfectly sensible to both me and to others who have expressed an opinion.
Of course, there is a third option, other than the Shudrick Valley vs Canal Way debate. That is to have no more mass-building of houses in Ilminster at all, which seems perfectly sensible to both me and to others who have expressed an opinion. Dick Turpin Works For Council
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree