The consultation process - in particular on the change from Option 2 to Option 1 - has been so opaque that gossip is now rife about underhand behaviour. I doubt this is the case, but it has been so ill-publicised,  so vaguely announced, that there has been frankly negligible opportunity for comment. I'm not  a lawyer (and this whole document seems designed for lawyers rather than the concerned citizen), but I DO have 8 years experience as a Councillor on a Planning Committee; and in my opinion it has absolutely NOT complied with the spirit of consultation, of which SSDC has been such a champion in the past.

I also think that the choice of Option 1 (and the original assessment) completely underestimate the landscape value of this corner of Ilminster. This beautiful valley , with its wooded sides and its ancient archaeology is part of the setting that makes Ilminster the lovely place that it is: to cover it with houses would be unforgiveable: and in 20 years' time we will be looking for the next area, and the next - how on earth is this 'sustainable' by any coherent definition of the word?

I don't know if that's a legal reason, but it's my objection. Both the proposal, and the manner by which it was reached, are entirely flawed.