DEVELOPERS in Haslemere have been condemned for breaking the terms of their planning permission. Two new homes currently under construction in Farnham Lane have failed to live up to the conditions set out in the planning application. Now Waverley councillors and local residents have hit out at the actions of the developers and demanded that retrospective permission for the changes should be refused. The biggest change to the original plans has seen the roof space in both buildings converted to be used for living space, adding an extra storey to what should be two-storey homes. However, this is only the start of a number of adjustments which differ from the planning permission which was granted by Waverley. In a letter to the council, Farnham Lane resident David Precious highlighted some of the other problems with the construction. He stated that each roof now has three roof lights which overlook properties to the south of Farnham Lane. He also claimed that both houses have also been built on different sites, one closer to Farnham Lane and the other closer to neighbouring property Fylingdales. The letter also explained that the external character of the homes has been changed from a "country house" style to a simple, flat design. The issue was discussed at a Waverley Borough Council development management committee meeting last week, when councillors were asked to grant retrospective permission for the altered plans. Speaking at the meeting, Mr Precious condemned the developers of the site. He said: "The developer has ignored the approved plans and built two much larger six-bedroom houses over three storeys instead of five bedrooms over two storeys. "Farnham Lane is an old historical sunken lane in a sylvan setting. The lane is narrow, a no-through road, and already has major traffic and safety issues. "Houses of this style and bulk do not fit well with the surroundings. "If approval is given for this significant breach, then the floodgates will be opened for developers to get approval for one design and just knowingly build something else and get approval later." Mr Precious also called for councillors to refuse the application, and added that a safeguard should be put in place to remove permitted development rights for the future for the roof space and roof lights. Haslemere town councillor Janet Smart was also at the meeting to add her support to the protest. She said: "Several changes have been made to the original application and Haslemere Town Council feel this is a very serious contravention of the original plans." Former Waverley mayor Jacquie Keen backed Mr Precious, saying she was furious with the developers. She said: "Why are we sitting here if there's no point? I find it a disgrace, and if it went on across the borough it would not be allowed. I will not support this." A spokesman for applicant Good Harvest Homes apologised for the situation and explained that mistakes had been made during the planning process. He said: "The decision was taken to convert the roof space, and the architect was instructed to apply for permission as such, but they failed to do this. "We apologise for this, and as a developer we failed to pick up on it. I apologise on behalf of Good Harvest Homes." However, with the work already completed it was left up to the council to decide whether to grant retrospective planning permission. In a bizarre twist, the planning officer recommended that permission should be granted. This led to a heated debate among the councillors, before the officer claimed he had not seen the letter from Mr Precious, and declared that the meeting should be deferred until he had done so. However, Mr Precious said he had sent a copy of the letter to the planning officers, and he was left frustrated by the delay. He added: "I must admit I find it quite incredible that the planners do not give all the relevant information to the councillors. "They seem to be holding back on information that may go against their cause." The item will be discussed again at a Waverley development management committee meeting at the end of June.
