TOWN councillors in Petersfield have again proposed their own land at Penns Field for housing development. They were asked to suggest sites which could be included in East Hampshire District Council's strategic housing land availability assessment. The land at Penns Field was one of the sites included in the district council's Local Plan. It was also proposed to build 90 houses on the 10-acre greenfield site behind Heathfield Road. But the government inspector who examined the Local Plan at a public inquiry dropped a bombshell in April 2005 when he relegated the controversial council-owned site to the back burner. It was removed from the 'baseline' site list for immediate development to a 'reserve' list which would only come forward for consideration if more housing land was needed. There was huge controversy and a bitter political battle seven years ago when the then mayor of Petersfield John Crowhurst pushed for the sale of the council-owned site. And there was further outrage when it was included in the Local Plan and earmarked for 90 new homes. But town councillors knew that if the site remained as a baseline site in the local Plan it could net the town council an estimated £8m if it was sold to a developer for housing. It was the biggest deal in the 28-year history of the town council when councillors finally signed and sealed an agreement with Kebbell Homes in February 2001. The developers are believed to have gambled around £250,000 for the 'option' to build on the land when it came forward in the Local Plan. And councillors could have expected several million pounds more when planning permission was granted. At the time it was described as a 'lottery win' for Petersfield. But the town council's dreams of using the cash for improvements were dashed when the planning inspector sidelined the site. This week, Chris Jenner asked: "Is it time to wave Penns Field under their noses again?" Councillors rejected a suggestion to include Tilmore allotments on a suggested housing site list. They said the site was too close to a dangerous junction. It would also mean that there were no allotments in Petersfield – the only remaining plots being at Sheet.
