DEVELOPERS, councils and residents were at odds this week over controversial plans to allow the construction of homes on the Walldown Triangle.

Proposals to allocate the site for housing in the local plan were scrutinised at the planning inquiry into the proposed development blueprint for the district.

Previously East Hampshire District Council had allocated the 4.7 hectare site for around 60 large homes but evidence from wildlife experts has resulted in it proposing that now the site should only be allocated for 30 large homes.

But the news had not gone down with developers who want more homes on the site, the town council, which wants fewer homes built, and residents who do not want any homes built there at all.

The district councilÕs change of heart was announced at the local plan inquiry on Tuesday after it heard from experts that, if the site were developed, new measures would have to be in place to protect the neighbouring wildlife.

EHDC is now proposing that a 50 metre buffer zone is imposed - effectively reducing the size of the developable site and resulting in the proposed number of homes allocated being halved.

Planner Ian Godfrey explained: ÒWe were given the advice that the 50 metre woodland belt would need to be in place. We went along with that advice and have reduced the size of the site and the number down to 30.Ó

But the allocation change was not well received by developer Rydon Homes Ltd, which is is looking to put a housing development on the Hollywater site.

Planning consultant Christopher Hough, who was speaking on behalf of the developer, said that it was not appropriate to halve the number of allocated homes as details about the effects of the buffer zone were limited.

This was the case because, in theory, gardens may be allowed within the buffer zone, meaning that the space saved could lead to the site accommodating far more than 30 homes.

Mr Hough said that a development brief would be needed to make that determination and urged the inspector to reject the proposed amendment from the district council and keep the allocation to 60 homes.

He said: ÒWe cannot have a fully detailed analysis and debate about this, it is not clear cut.

ÒIf it is just put down to 30 without a brief and then a planning application is submitted for 45 homes, a councillor at the planning committee can stand up and say Ôit is only allocated for 30Õ without knowing all of the background information.

ÒI would not like the figure of 30 to be seen as a ceiling.Ó

The planner also asked for the inspector to approve a proposed amendment which would see the Triangle site developed into houses more quickly.

At present EHDC has allocated the site in its ÒreserveÓ list meaning that it would only be used if it were needed as part of an overall plan to use up brownfield sites before greenfield sites.

But Mr Hough asked that the Triangle be moved into the councilÕs baseline list meaning that it would become a priority for development.

He argued that the site is more sustainable than the other in Whitehill allocated in the local plan as a baseline site - 50 homes on the Moorlands sandpit in Hogmoor Road - because it is closer to the town centre and has better public transport links.

However, EHDC opposed this move and wants the Triangle, which is predominantly greenfield, to remain high up on the reserve list.

The district council and developers were not the only ones who aired their views at the crunch inquiry hearing.

Whitehill Town Council argued that the housing allocation on the site should be reduced even further, to between eight and 10 homes, to help address the need for larger executive-style homes in the parish.

Town and district councillor Michael Watkinson told the inspector that large developments of housing in previous decades meant that Bordon and Whitehill has an unusually high number of smaller homes.

He said that larger homes were needed to prevent residents from leaving the town in search of a large four or five bedroom home, with the Walldown Triangle site helping to address that need.

ÒWe need larger houses on larger plots,Ó he said.

ÒThis site, and that of Hogmoor Road, will not meet that need in full but it is a move in the right direction because all that we have been doing is moving backwards.Ó

While the councils and developers argued over how many homes should be built on the site, residents from Hollywater and Whitehill put forward their case as to why no homes should be constructed there at all.

The inspector Richard Hollox heard from residents that the site is of great environmental importance and is the home of rare birds as well as badgers.

The residents also argued that the site was liable to flooding and that MoD land, if it becomes available, should be used for housing instead of the Triangle.

l The inspector will consider all of the views expressed at the hearing and make a final recommendation in his report, which is due in December next year.