PLANNERS have been warned that they may have shot themselves in the foot by delaying a decision on a controversial Hampshire housing scheme without saying why.

Their failure to list their objections to the proposed development to build a 100-bed hotel and more than 300 homes on the Webbs chicken factory site in Lymington could result in the multi-million-pound plan being approved at a public inquiry.

The Paxton Holdings scheme was criticised at a meeting yesterday of the district council's planning and development control committee, which deferred the application for further negotiations.

Chairman Pat Wyeth repeatedly asked members to itemise the points they wanted raised at the talks, but was not given the information she sought.

Instead councillors continued to attack the scheme in general terms.

Planning officers said Paxton could lodge an appeal on the grounds of non-determination and warned that the committee's failure to give its reasons for deferring the application could weaken the council's case.

Chris Elliott, head of development control, claimed that the authority could find itself "up a creek without a paddle" at a public inquiry.

Privately, one councillor who voted against deferral said the committee had taken a "disastrous" decision.

However, the move was defended by Lymington resident Richard Webb - one of the leading objectors to the scheme.

Mr Webb, who has no connection with the former factory, said: "The officers feel they've been given an impossible task, but councillors were right to defer the application. They listened to the people.

"Everyone has now got to pull together and find a solution."

Councillors had been recommended to approve the application but criticised several aspects of the scheme, including the design and the number of homes.

Lymington member Kevin Ault described the plan as a "dreary compromise development".

Brockenhurst councillor Maureen Holding said the high-density scheme was more suited to places such as Hull, Liverpool and Manchester.

Committee vice-chairman Ann Drake expressed similar views.

She added: "I'm very disappointed in this scheme, which is greedy development at its worst. We have only one opportunity to get this right and get it right we must, so it's back to the drawing board."

Paxton representatives refused to comment after the meeting.