PROTESTERS packed into the public gallery at Waverley Borough Council offices on Tuesday for a major planning inquiry to decide if up to 157 houses can be built on “three attractive virgin open fields” at Waverley Lane, Farnham.

A resounding 1,192 objections were triggered by the outline application submitted by Wates Developments Ltd, the UK’s largest family-owned construction company, which was refused in July 2015 by Waverley planning officers using their delegated powers.

Wates went to appeal after Waverley rejected the scheme on the grounds the harmful impact on the landscape outweighed the benefits of extra housing.

Planning inspector David Rose announced at the start of the inquiry last Tuesday morning it was expected to last seven days, concluding on Wednesday, August 24.

Battle has now commenced in earnest, with five witnesses due to give evidence in support of the scheme for Wates’ large legal team, headed by barrister Sasha White QC. They are up against two witnesses for Waverley barrister Wayne Beglan, and objections from South Farnham Residents Association, Farnham Town Council, Bourne Conservation Group, and county, borough and town councillors.

The key issue for Mr Rose to decide is whether the benefits of more housing outweigh the impact of the proposal.

Taking up the cudgels for Wates in his opening statement, Mr White said the plan must be granted in order to meet Waverley’s increased housing targets and “assist the overarching policy aspiration of this Government to significantly boost the supply of housing”.

Mr White dismissed Waverley’s contention it had a five-year supply of housing and the scheme was therefore surplus to requirements.

“This is an authority who have a history of failure with at least seven years of consistent failure to meet their housing requirement,” he told the inquiry.

“It is now contended they have a five-year supply of housing. That is not accepted. It relies on a quarterly assessment which has no support whatsoever in the National planning Policy Guidance (NPPG) and has never been produced by this local planning authority before.”

Mr White said Waverley’s contention was “flawed”, because the figure produced “only amounts” to a 4.6-year housing supply, because the objectively assessed need for the district was actually higher than previously accepted and also did not factor in extra housing to help Woking.

He accused Waverley of being “grossly over-optimistic” both in terms of the housing sites identified and their availability, and cited the 40 per cent element of affordable housing in the scheme and the 1,499 households on Waverley’s housing needs register as meeting a “compelling need”.

He said criticisms of the design did not “come close to justifying refusal” and the harm to the landscape was not “substantial or significant”.

Battling for Waverley, Mr Beglan said the plan was contrary to environmental planning policy and that as Waverley was now able to demonstrate a five-year housing land supply, there was no requirement for 157 houses on a greenfield site.

“The immediate area is recognised as being integral to one of the main and important southern approaches to Farnham - along Waverley Lane - which receives particular consideration in the Farnham Design Guide 2010,” he said.

“The proposed Waverley Local Plan and the draft Farnham Neighbourhood Plan do not support the appeal site for housing allocation. Rather, and to the contrary, the neighbourhood plan proposes the appeal site together with other areas should be protected as an area of high landscape value and sensitivity.

“That assessment reflects the strong objection to the application by Farnham Town Council, South Farnham Residents Association and the 1,192 letters of objection to the scheme. That may be contrasted with the five letters of support. In those circumstances, the importance of considering and applying localism is reinforced by the NPPG.

“The proposal would lead to substantial urbanisation both within the fields and along this important approach to Farnham, in light of its location, the density, the number of dwellings proposed, and the proposed vehicle access points, it would have a serious detrimental impact on landscape character, harming the intrinsic character, beauty and openness of the countryside, and the character and appearance of the area.”

Also weighing in against the plan, Zofia Lovell, chairman of South Farnham Residents Association, said in the group’s opening statement: “From the very beginning the proposal to develop the land at Waverley Lane raised considerable concern, not just in the immediate area, but also in the broader community. The unprecedented 1,192 written objections demonstrates the strength of feeling in the broader community.

“Due to their special landscape quality and importance, the Waverley Lane Fields, were not included in the Neighbourhood Plan as a suitable site for development and that decision was strongly supported at public consultation in public workshops and with local business people.

“Local residents consider the density and nature of the proposed development to be out of keeping with their neighbourhood. Indeed the Farnham Design Statement guidance for the area seems to have been largely ignored by the appellant.

“The appellant’s landscape consultant, mistakenly believes that just because Waverley Borough Council have approved development on some green field sites in Farnham, that the land under discussion can be viewed in the same light.”

A Wates spokesman said: “We continue to be positive about the planning merits of our scheme, in particular the creation of much needed new homes in the area. Equally, the significant investment in the local infrastructure, including roads and schools have all been prioritised through consultation and we feel that the proposal is wholly sustainable and worthy of approval through the inquiry process.”