In recent months, the view of local people on planning has generally been ridden over roughshod by planners. Today though, an outline application for 400 homes along Canal Way made it through unscathed. And not so much as a mention of the 5 year land supply until it was nearly all over.
The application is a joint application between Somerset Council and Persimmon Homes. But when Cllr Wale asked if that meant councillors had a declarable interest and could not vote, the council’s legal officer Dawn Leramon, said it was not a problem. Councillors could vote and there was law in place to support this.
The problem with Canal Way is that it was in the Local Plan. It was in the agreed direction of growth for Ilminster. There were in short not enough reasons to turn it down.
We can record the fact that of 101 comments received from local people, 100 were objectors. We can note in passing the complaints of the public speakers. That not getting a financial contribution to a cycleway along the edge of the site flew in the face of Somerset Council’s pretensions to a zero carbon future.
The fact the site flooded was mentioned more than once. Not to worry. The Lead Local Flood Authority said it wouldn’t once the houses were built with appropriate mitigation.
Or the fact that this one development would increase Ilminster’s population by around 20%. Where was the employment to come from? What about the capacity of the roads? Cllr Adam Dance noted local GP surgeries and dentists were already at capacity.
Cllr Best pointed out that while a new primary school (included in the original application but now removed) may not be needed, what of the impact on local secondary schools? As a councillor for Crewkerne he was concerned that Wadham School was already at capacity and would have to take more pupils form a new Ilminster development.
Sue Osborne raised the issue of the loss of agricultural land. Not just on the application site but as we mentioned previously, the fallowed land that will be required for phosphate mitigation. Cllr Osborne did have a conflict of interest and so left the room having said her piece.
In the end the planning officers waved away the objections. All could be covered off because various statutory consultees had registered no objection.
Cllr Oliver Patrick led the round of councillors in support of the application and it was duly carried. Whether the objections raised had merits or not, the town of Ilminster will find out in two or three years time. By which time if they were right, it will of course be too late.
The whole planning process is flawed!
The use of s106 is a scandal allowing builders and councils to circumvent established systems of building control.
Allowing shoddy homes and unadopted roads,sewers and public open spaces to be basically abandoned.
Then the sting in the tail !!
Homeowners are charged uncapped,unregulated “Management Fees” turning what should be a Freehold home into a “Fleecehold “