ARGUMENTS over the direction of growth in Ilminster have “finally been put to bed”, according to campaigners who have welcomed a decision that points to Canal Way as the most sustainable location.

Months of consultation and millions of pounds have been spent by South Somerset District Council on the document which will guide the future development of the district.

In Ilminster the matter has not been straight forward, as the preferred direction of growth has flip-flopped between Shudrick Valley to the east and Canal Way to the west, leading to the requirement for a sustainability appraisal.

Last week, the News reported that Ilminster Town Council recommended approval for more than 300 homes on land at Shudrick Lane, days before the inspector opted for Canal Way as the preferred direction of growth.

Campaigners in the town have attempted to halt the potential for developments being brought forward at both ends of the town, which they say would place an unbearable strain on Ilminster and its infrastructure.

In his conclusions of the sustainability appraisal, inspector David Hogger said that the Shudrick Valley option was not robust and not the most sustainable option – determining that the change of plan to Canal Way was indeed sound.

He said: “It is recognised by the council that there is little to differentiate between the sites at Canal Way and Shudrick Valley.

However, the Canal Way option has no significant negative impacts, whereas the Shudrick Valley option has disadvantages in terms of the loss of high quality agricultural land and the effect that development would have on the landscape and historic environment.

“I consider the most damaging of these impacts would be on the landscape of this part of the valley, which enjoys a feeling of enclosure and is typified by small fields, hedgerows and trees.

“It is correct that the Shudrick Valley site scores marginally higher than the Canal Way site in terms of services and facilities, economy and traffic. The Shudrick Valley site is closer to the town centre and its associated facilities, but I walked to the town from Canal Way and although it is a longer distance, the route is level and relatively straightforward.

“For the avoidance of doubt, I have attached no weight to the potential for a new school to be located at Canal Way because it is currently not a commitment of the Education Authority.”

He added that, although an alternative route for traffic to avoid the town centre is proposed by the development at Shudrick Valley, the benefits of Shudrick Valley are not sufficient to outweigh the negatives.

The findings are yet to be adopted by the district council, but spokesman for the campaign group Save Shudrick Valley Rob Drayton is confident the conclusions will help the authority refuse the application for 330 homes when it comes before the Area West committee.

He said: “Save Shudrick Valley Group welcomes the announcement on the Local Plan by the inspector, in particular his lengthy comments on Ilminster.

“It finally puts to bed the argument over direction of growth - but most importantly it gives very strong planning reasons why the proposed development in Shudrick Valley should not go ahead. This fully endorses what we have been campaigning for over nearly three years.

“I would hope now that the town can pull together to get what is best for Ilminster out of this plan.

“That can include extra playing field space, income for facilities, improvements for everyone and with the support of everyone we should campaign to demand that money from the sale of the land at Canal Way is used to build the much needed new first school which will have a site allocated there.

“We need to make sure the infrastructure is ready and that we use the comments made by the inspector to put pressure on to get a measured growth that the town deserves, not a sudden burst of over development that cannot be managed.

“We would expect South Somerset District Council to refuse the planning application for development in Shudrick Vallley following this announcement and look forward to the Local Plan’s adoption in March.”