EDITORIAL NOTE: this article was updated on 3/3/21 to reflect that Mr Munday's comments were not his personal views.

Frome residents have suffered a setback in their efforts to secure a treasured green space for the local community.

The Friends of Easthill Field campaign group was formed in late-2020 after Mendip District Council announced proposals to build 77 new homes on the site as part of a wider programme of delivering more low-cost housing.

As part of a push to protect the land, campaigners applied for the site to become an asset of community value – meaning they could try to buy it if the land was sold on the open market for development or other purposes.

But the council has ruled that their bid did not meet the necessary criteria to be added to the asset register.

The issue was debated at a virtual meeting of the council's asset of community value panel on Wednesday afternoon (February 24).

Simon Bishop from the Friends of Easthill Field said: "The existence of the land in itself furthers social well-being. Studies show that green spaces improve individuals' health and well-being.

"This piece of land is unique. If this land is lost to the local community, there is no similar piece of land in the local area. It is appreciated by all who live locally, and it connects people to one another."

Ian Munday, the councils's senior property officer, quoting from the nomination by the Friends of Easthill Field said "the future development of the site would be a permanent loss to the current and future communities of this habitat".

However, the council's property team argued the land was not "actively used for the purposes of social value" and therefore did not meet the listing criteria.

Mr Munday confirmed the panel's decision (which was taken in confidential session) in a letter to the Friends of Easthill Field on Thursday (February 25).

He said: "The Localism Act requires that where land should be listed as an asset of community value, a nominator must satisfy the council that there is 'an actual current use of the building or other land that is not an ancillary use' and that such use 'furthers the social well-being or social interests of the local community'.

"The mere existence of the land cannot, in itself, meet this test and it is the burden of the nominators to explain and evidence the uses which are taking place on the land and how those meet the social well-being and/or

social interests criteria.

"There was minimal evidence provided by the nominators, or in the letters of support, which indicated uses taking place on the land which could be considered actual,current and primary (being more than ancillary).

"Therefore, the panel decided not to list the land as an asset of community value."

The council subsequently confirmed the panel's decision and said it would not comment further on "procedural decision-making."

The proposals to build homes on the Easthill site were 'paused' by the council in late-November 2020 pending further reports, with council leader Ros Wyke promising that any decision on the site would be taken in public.

The Friends of Easthill Field have vowed to continue their fight to prevent the land from being developed.

Simon Bishop said: "Obviously we are extremely disappointed. With the written support of many in our community, we felt we had made a good case that the land furthers the social well-being and social interests of the community and that it has been used in such a way in the recent past.

"This whole campaign has shown us how much Easthill Field is used and valued by this community and we are spurred on by the support we continue to receive.

"Our online petition to save Easthill Field has more than 1,000 signatures, and we hope to exceed 1500 signatures soon so that the future of the land is debated at at a full council meeting."

To sign the petition, visit www.change.org/Save-EASTHILL-Field-NOW.