A TOWN council has slammed one of its members for refusing to accept a vote to build a new community hall.

Councillor Charles Tucker was one of two Pershore Town Councillors to vote against the plan to build a new hall on the cemetery field off Defford Road, telling the Journal that it would be a "gift to developers."

A spokesman for Pershore Town Council said: "Cllr Tucker was one of only two councillors to vote against the community hall, and it is very sad that he believes that there has been a “long simmering row” as this is far from the case. Cllr Tucker did put forward his opinion that it would be a gift for developers but the majority of members did not agree with him.

"The community hall has been discussed by the town council for a considerable amount of time and a great deal of professional advice has been taken from architects and surveyors.

"There have been public meetings, two consultations and the decision has been taken through the council’s democratic process with only two councillors voting against.

"80 percent of residents agree that a new hall is needed and the majority indicated their preference for a new build on the field off Defford Road as the best option.

"This is because the council can build a large, purpose built hall, to include the long awaited Family History Centre, that already has an adjacent free car park. There was never any suggestion that the field should be sold but concerns were raised that a developer may show interest in the land at some stage in the future.

Cllr Bob Gillmor, town mayor said, “I am very disappointed that one member refuses to accept the council’s democratic decision and the expressed view of residents. We have seen no evidence to suggest that the hall would “open the flood gates” to developers and the council looks forward to providing what it believes will be a well used asset for our growing town.”

Cllr Tucker claimed that the latest consultation which produced 142 responses, with 63 people in favour of the hall at the cemetery and 31 wanting it at the town hall was not enough to base a decision on.

He also claimed it would open the doors to a proposal for 170 houses bordering Tiddesley Wood to be passed.

He said: "I cannot understand why town councillors are determined to ignore the likely consequences of this decision, which will be a gift to developers who want to build houses up to the edge of Tiddesley Wood.

"By extending the town beyond its existing boundary it will give a green light for housing development in open countryside”.

"I was dumbfounded when one councillor said that he thought the council might sell the cemetery field to a developer if the hall was not built. This field was bought many years ago to extend the cemetery, not to profit from development.”