AN EPIC legal battle by environmental campaigners to reduce Waverley Borough Council’s “excessive” Local Plan housing requirement has been rejected by the Court of Appeal.

The council set aside a fighting fund of £300,000 of taxpayers’ money to defend itself – both at the High Court in 2018 and again at appeal – for its target to build 11,200 homes by 2032.

The joint challenge by Surrey Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE) and Protect Our Waverley (POW) centred on whether Waverley had to increase its housing quota by 1,600 to cover half of Woking Borough Council’s shortfall – increasing the number of new homes required in Waverley to 11,200 by 2032.

CPRE and POW said they were not only protecting a predominantly rural borough from inappropriate development, but also raising a key national issue by challenging the requirement for one council to have to shoulder another’s shortfall.

Welcoming the appeal judgement on Hallowe’en, Waverley leader Cllr John Ward said: “Now we can get on with progressing Local Plan Part 2, which will provide more of the detail to support Local Plan Part 1, such as housing site allocations.”

CPRE Surrey director Andy Smith objected the decision would “encourage significant inroads” into protected areas.

Mr Ward said: “I hope we can now move on.

“However, I will say that I think it is an extreme shame that we have been forced to pay to successfully defend this plan twice now, at a great expense to Waverley’s council tax payers.

“This Court of Appeal hearing could have been avoided – we sat down with both Protect our Waverley (POW) and Campaign to Protect Royal England (CPRE) Surrey to attempt to overcome their concerns out of court, but they were adamant that they wanted to go ahead with this unnecessary legal action.

“Having our Local Plan firmly in place is so important – it provides certainty and allows us to control future development, so we can shape our borough for future generations.”

The judgement confirmed the Local Plan inspector’s inclusion of 50 per cent of Woking’s unmet need was lawful and dismissed the claim he should have examined the objectively assessed need for both areas in more detail.

Mr Smith said: “We are naturally disappointed. The case was considered to be arguable in the High Court and of sufficient importance to warrant live-streaming in the Court of Appeal.

“CPRE Surrey could not let this matter go unchallenged given the implications for a predominantly rural borough with Thames Basin and Wealden Heaths Special Protection Areas, the Surrey Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and Areas of Great Landscape Value.

“We regret this decision, which we believe will encourage significant inroads into outstanding countryside which under Government policy should be constrained.

“We remain committed to seeking to protect Surrey’s countryside from the wrong housing in the wrong places and hope the many newly-elected Waverley members who value the importance of the Green Belt, will give priority to building genuinely affordable housing, rather than market housing.”

POW chairman Bob Lees added: “We are very disappointed. However, we will not be taking the matter further.

“We are nevertheless grateful to all our supporters over the past three years who have enabled us to challenge fully Waverley’s development plans.”