LIFT off for 2,600 new homes at Dunsfold Aerodrome was granted by Waverley’s Local Plan examination inspector Jonathan Bore, when he agreed it was a suitable allocation.

But it’s still up in the air, until the decision is taken on outline plans for 1,800 houses at Dunsfold Park are decided at appeal.

The decision has been promised by March 31 – but objectors fear it’s a foregone conclusion it will be granted, given the Government’s push for more housing.

Mr Bore said: “The allocation at Dunsfold Aerodrome is a key part of the sustainable growth strategy for the borough.

“It provides an excellent opportunity to meet a significant part of the housing needs, including affordable housing, on a brownfield site.

“The Dunsfold Aerodrome allocation is essential not only to relieve pressure on greenfield land but to ensure the delivery of sufficient housing to meet Waverley’s needs.”

The borough’s Local Plan part one has been found to be sound but it comes at a cost – it will only be adopted if Waverley agrees to increase the number of houses it builds annually from 519 to 590, along with changes in green belt policy and a new design scheme for Dunsfold Aerodrome.

Waverley’s full council will be asked to accept the modifications and formally adopt the plan at its next meeting on Tuesday, February 20.

Condemning the report’s findings, Protect Our Waverley campaign group chairman Bob Lees said: “Jonathan Bore has surprised no one by the conclusions reached in his report.

“He has not wavered from the position he took during the public examination last summer, when he unjustifiably ‘talked up’ the housing-need target to the unsustainable level of 590 dwellings per year.

“Waverley Borough Council, to their detriment and shame, did not challenge that at the time or subsequently, and the result is a plan which blights every part of the borough.

“Once again, local opinion has been ridden roughshod over and ignored and the most unsustainable site for development, Dunsfold Aerodrome, has been elevated to almost ‘holy grail’ status.”

Waverley’s portfolio holder for planning Chris Storey said: “Having an adopted Local Plan gives us greater power to fend off unsuitable speculative developments. I hope councillors will agree to adopt the plan with the necessary modifications.”

Haslemere’s allocation for housing until 2032 is 890 homes, Chiddingfold needs to build 130 and Milford and Witley have a combined housing target of 480.

Farnham, which sees its housing target increased from 2,330 to 2,780, has urged that Dunsfold’s allocation is increased and Witley parish, which includes Milford, should also build more to ease the pressure on the town because there are two mainline stations in the patch.

Waverley has not yet identified where the additional 450 homes in Farnham will be located, and councillors are concerned the modifications requested will undermine its Neighbourhood Plan, which was only officially adopted on July 28.

Witley Neighbourhood Plan is in the making, and its steering group also fear ‘false promises’ have been made by Waverley about where the 480 new homes can be built.

In Local Plan part one, surplus land at Milford Golf Club is allocated as a ‘strategic’ site for 180 houses, but it is in the green belt.

Mr Bore has requested it be removed to help meet housing targets. But the land is the subject of a restrictive covenant owned by adjoining householders who are determined to prevent a major development on their doorstep.

The historic covenant allows some development, but not on such a large scale. It stipulates “one detached dwelling house to the acre with one lodge and one cottage suitable for and intended for occupation by a gardener, chauffeur or other employee of the occupier of the said dwelling house”.

Witley Neighbourhood Plan steering group also fears Waverley will not be able find the necessary suitable alternative natural greenspace (SANG) for the green belt sites it proposes for new homes.

The group has queried why a proposal by Milford company Secretts to build 200 houses at Hurst Farm – which is partly brownfield comes complete with a SANG, and received the most support from residents, – was left off the shortlist of suitable sites.