PLANS for a 138-home development in Poole have been narrowly rejected by councillors, despite planning officers recommending that they be approved.

Members of Poole council’s planning committee refused East Street Developments’ application to develop the site adjacent to the Siemens factory in Sopers Lane due to concerns about over-development of the land, lack of amenity space and its access onto the road.

The site was previously occupied by a factory owned by Poole Pottery before it was demolished in 2011 and it has now been allocated in the council’s draft local plan as an area suitable for “approximately 100 dwellings”.

Concerns had been raised by residents over the access to Sopers Lane and the impact extra vehicles would have on the road.

The Society For Poole objected to the development saying that improvements to the road needed to be made before any development.

“Whilst the use of the site for housing is supported, concerns are raised about the adequacy of tree screening for the new buildings, the means of access, and how construction staff/vehicles will be prevented from disrupting the use of the existing overloaded road network,” a representative said.

“It is suggested that if only one access from the existing road network is to be provided, then a roundabout should be incorporated.”

The proposed scheme consisted of a mix of houses and blocks of flats, nine of which would have been affordable.

Bike storage and 166 parking spaces would have been provided.

At Thursday’s meeting of the council’s planning committee, members agreed, by five votes to four, to reject the application following a warning from ward councillor John Rampton that it “could become a breeding ground for anti-social behaviour”.

He described the proposal as “like a cramped version of a bad 1960s estate” and said that while he welcomed development of the site, the proposed scheme was too large.

Cllr Judy Butt said: “I’m absolutely for development of this site in some form but I do not support this application in any way, shape or form.

“This development is completely at odds with the Waterloo area.”

Councillors opposed the scheme on grounds that there was “inadequate” play provision included in the plans, that it was over-development of the land and the Sopers Lane access was “harmful”.