PLANS to build 100 houses at a poultry farm in Chiltley Lane would leave residents unable to use public transport and force them into their cars adding to considerable traffic congestion during rush-hour around Liphook on the school run.

Timothy Leader put the case – on behalf of East Hampshire District Council – against an application by Bloor Homes to allow the proposed housing scheme, when a public inquiry opened this week at the village’s Millennium Centre.

He claimed the pultry farm scheme conflicted with the local development plan and that conflict was not outweighed by the scheme’s generally sustainable location and its usual benefits.

He said if the appeal was allowed it would harm the countryside, consume resources the Local Plan conserves for the future and thereby undermine the integrity of the plan-led system, as well as frustrate predictable and efficient decision making.

Mr Leader pointed out that East Hampshire possessed an up-to-date development plan comprising a joint core strategy, which was adopted in June 2014, as well as a housing and employment allocations plan which was adopted only last week, on April 7.

He said: “Consequently, the plan meets the district’s full objectively assessed need for market and affordable housing.”

Mr Leader added that the requirement for an additional 175 dwellings in Liphook had now also been provided for in full.

“Where a development plan is up-to-date and there is a five-year supply of land for housing, good reasons will not usually be made out by a scheme that offers the usual benefits, is said to be sustainable but for its conflict with a plan or because it will boost the supply of housing,” he explained.

Mr Leader also stated it would disempower people to shape their environment if an unsustainable plan was imposed upon them.

Alistair Halliday spoke on behalf of Chiltley Farm Action Group, which was set up in 2014 to gather views of residents on potential developments across Liphook.

Mr Halliday said: “We have spent a great deal of our time studying Bloors’ plans and the appellants’ case as well as becoming increasingly familiar with the relevant planning policies and directives. Taking all these factors into account, we believe strongly the proposed development should be rejected and this appeal should be dismissed.

“The site is inappropriately and unsustainably located. It is simply in the wrong location. It lacks sustainability and would be a car-led development because of its distance from the facilities, schools, services and shops of Liphook.

“Accessibility and traffic issues are a major concern and it will significantly increase congestion in the village and exacerbate known safety concerns.

“The proposed development would harm the recognised special character of the area and the plans are not in keeping with the existing environment. They unacceptably impact on the living conditions of the residents.

“The application site lies outside the settlement policy boundary of Liphook, within the countryside. In addition, this is a deeply unpopular development.

“There is overwhelming residents’ opposition, expressed at numerous community events as well as online, and 250 residents submitted objections at the planning stage, while at a public consultation on June 17, 2014, to help the district council prepare a local interim planning statement, residents of Liphook made their feelings known with a demonstrable preference for the alternative sites to the north of Liphook.”

Mr Halliday concluded the development was not required, and inappropriately located in planning terms, as well as lacking sustainability or integration.

“The only schools located within walking distance of the proposed development are in fact fee-paying prep schools with long waiting lists," he said.

“The scheme would harm the recognised special character of the area and unacceptably impact on the living conditions of existing residents.There are other more appropriate and viable sites available in the parish.”

Representing Bloor Homes, Rupert Warren QC argued the site lay in a sustainable location and the scheme would represent “sustainable development”.

He said: “Although the site lies outside the currently-defined settlement boundary and would in relatively minor respects be contrary to the development plan, the appeal scheme would bring substantial benefits without causing anything more than minimal harm. It should be permitted whether or not there is a five-year housing land supply in East Hampshire.

“The scheme would comprise 100 units, of which 40 would be affordable, both of which would contribute substantially to the needs of the district. Developing the site for housing would remove HGV traffic and the chicken farm use from the site adjacent to Chiltley Lane.

“There would be substantial public transport benefits as a result of the proposals, not just in terms of the appeal site but affecting the Berg estate also.”

According to Mr Warren, Bloor Homes has promised to pay £272,000 to Hampshire County Council for the funding of an extension to the 250 bus service over the next 10 years, which currently only runs three half days per week.

He added: “These are benefits which weigh heavily in favour of the grant of permission and the scheme represents a real opportunity for sustainable, beneficial development, which ought to be taken.”