CONTROVERSIAL plans for a massive new housing development on The Causeway at Petersfield have been thrown out by East Hampshire district councillors.

At a special meeting on Thursday evening councillors looked at the outline application submitted by Phillips Build for 275 houses, a primary school, community centre and public open space at Causeway Farm

Members of the south planning committee unanimously decided to refuse the application on 19 separate grounds.

Members said the plans were premature in relation to the second review of the Local Plan, both because the plas was only at the draft stage and because the site was included in the plan as a potential reserve housing site.

Members said the outcome of the development plan process would be severely prejudiced if the plan was given the go-ahead.

Planning officer Jeremy Heppell told the meeting that 284 letters of objection had been received, including a letter from The Petersfield Society.

The Environment Agency commented that flooding had taken place on the site in the past and Òthere is an unacceptable high risk of flooding in the future.Ó

The agency was also worried it would create a precedent for more building in the area, which would increase the risk of flooding elsewhere.

The agency said a flood risk assessment should be carried out.

The Hampshire Wildlife Trust asked for a survey of wildlife and trees, and the East Hampshire Badger Group was concerned about the badgers on the site.

Members of the Ramblers Association said they objected because the area was susceptible to flooding and because it would mean the loss of recreation land of natural beauty.

Planning control manager Ian Ellis said he had spoken to the county education department about the provision of a new school on the site: Òbut the county believe that continuing to invest in the expansion of the existing schools is the best way of dealing with the current and future needs for primary and junior education.Ó

Mr Ellis said Hampshire County Council did not wish to take up the school planned for the Causeway, but had a preference for a contribution towards education if councillors were minded to approve the application.

Speaking for the action group SCRAP on behalf of objectors, Greg Cummings said the group supported the democratic process for managing development - the Local Plan and in the plan in current use Causeway Farm was outside the policy boundary.

ÒThis application must be judged about the first review of the Local Plan,Ó he said.

The emerging plan, he added, showed the Causeway as only on the reserve list in two phases, sixth and 16th out of 16 sites on the reserve list.

ÒThis application is totally out of court, it could be described as queue jumping,Ó he told the meeting Òand could open the door to other ad hoc applications.Ó

For the developer, Martin Hawthorn of planning consultants Hawthorn Kamm told planners: ÒThe reason this application is before you is because of the dissatisfaction with the manner in which your council has dealt with the application at Ramshill.Ó

He said there had been no appropriate sequential testing and the planning officersÕ stance was Òconstantly evolving.Ó

Mr Hawthorn said he was confident that the flooding problem could be overcome and he believed that sequentially the Causeway site was superior to Ramshill.

District councillor for the Heath ward, Teresa Jamieson, told fellow councillors: ÒIf this plan went ahead it would jeopardise our whole Local Plan process. These sites that are part of our emerging local plan will be considered by a government inspector and only then become part of the future plan of this district. It is vital that development is undertaken steadily and with planning not at the developersÕ whim to make a profit.Ó

She said she found the ignoring of issues such as badgers, trees, hedgerows and wildlife on the site: Òquite disrespectful to the environment.Ó

Objector Philip Haines said after the meeting: ÒWe now have to wait to see if the Government Office of the South East (GOSE) will call in the Ramshill development, which has been approved, which could lead to another public inquiry at which Causeway Farm would be promoted by the developers as an alternative.

ÒWe will be lobbying GOSE not to call in the Ramshill application as this would also jeopardise the whole Local Plan process.

ÒWe will also be developing our arguments, based on significant information which has become available as a result of this ill-timed application, to push for removal of Causeway Farm as a reserve site at next yearÕs Local Plan public inquiry.

ÒAlthough there was only a short amount of time to launch this campaign we managed to print and distribute 500 leaflets, displayed over 100 posters in Petersfield, built the causewayfarm.com website and have built up a significant database of objectors. This will be a long campaign so we are encouraging other objectors to register on the website so that they can be kept up-to-date with further news.Ó