VILLAGERS are in shock after a government planning inspector ruled that 320 homes can be built on Hampshire farmland.

This is despite fierce opposition to the highly controversial scheme at Parkers Farm in Rownhams.

But bosses at Commercial Estates which is behind the plans are delighted with the outcome of the appeal that the company lodged after Test Valley councillors failed in 2014 to make a decision on the contentious application within the 13-week time frame for determining major schemes.

Jon Allen of Commercial Estates Group (CEG) said: “This location provides an opportunity to achieve sustainable development, as well as helping to meet the local housing needs of the area.

“Now that planning permission has been granted, we will work with the Local Authority to sensitively consider the local environment and character of the area, particularly in terms of the open space proposed, in order to deliver a scheme which is of true value and benefit.”

Commercial Estates proposals, which also includes a 60 bed care home and a livery yard for 30 horses, led to a campaign across Rownhams and nearby Nursling to stop the development.

Tony Seaton, chairman of Say No to Parkers Farm action group, said: “We are horrified by the inspector’s decision but not surprised.

"It’s down to the shortage of housing land supply again, but also the abysmal failure of Test Valley Borough Council to get its Local Plan in place and plan-led development.

"Nursling and Rownhams is going to be swamped with about 800 new homes in the next three or four years. Soon there won’t be any green fields left in the parish .”

Phil Bundy, chairman of Nursling and Rownhams Parish Council, who tried to fend off the development said it is bad news for residents. which will go on land south of the M27 and on the eastern side of Rownhams Lane, said it was bad news for residents.

“I am extremely disappointed that local opinion once again counts for absolutely nothing. I am not aware of anyone in the village who supported this application.”

Commercial Estates outline application was submitted to borough planners in March 2014 but officers failed to make a decision within the 13 week timeframe set by the Government for determining major planning applications. A council official claimed at the time outstanding issues with the scheme had not been resolved.

In his report Government appointed planning inspector John Braithwaite states that the loss of 7.9 hectares of grade 3A agricultural land is the only adverse effect of the proposed development to be what he described as “weighed in the planning balance”.