WAVERLEY Borough Council has been accused of betraying a promise to allocate further homes at Dunsfold Park aerodrome to alleviate the pressure to build on the borough’s green spaces.

As reported in last week’s Herald, Waverley’s executive committee signed off a raft of modifications to part one of its emerging Local Plan on August 22 - including plans to share an uplift in housing, as demanded by a government inspector, between the borough’s existing settlements.

This includes an additional 450 homes in Farnham by 2032 - on top of the 2,330 already proposed - but controversially no uplift to the 2,600 homes already allocated at the borough’s largest brownfield site, Dunsfold Park.

As a consequence, Farnham Town Council’s own planning blueprint, the Farnham Neighbourhood Plan, now faces a possible early review and costly second referendum to accommodate the uplift, less than a month after its adoption.

Responding, town council leader Carole Cockburn accused Waverley of “scuppering” the Neighbourhood Plan last week - and in a letter to this week’s Herald Mrs Cockburn also accuses Waverley of betraying an assurance given prior to last week’s meeting to assign at least a proportion of the additional homes at Dunsfold Park.

She said: “In answer to a direct question from the Inspector [at July’s Local Plan examination hearings], it was made clear that Dunsfold Park could deliver 3,000 homes before 2032 and, in informal discussions with members of the Dunsfold Park team, I was assured that a figure of 3,200 was not unrealistic.

“Both [Waverley leader] Julia Potts and [portfolio holder for planning] Brian Adams also assured me that they would respect the Farnham Neighbourhood Plan and would not add to Cranleigh’s load by concentrating some of the extra houses at Dunsfold Park. This approach was confirmed by officers in informal discussions.

“Imagine most backbenchers’ surprise when, without a word of warning and following consultation only with the Dunsfold Park team, revised housing figures were released and there was no uplift at all on Dunsfold Park.”

Dunsfold Park Ltd, whose initial plans for 1,800 homes at the former Second World War airfield are awaiting determination by the Secretary of State, has declined to comment on the site’s capacity to take more housing.

But in a blow to those calling for a larger development at Dunsfold Park, Waverley’s leader Miss Potts told The Herald there is “no evidence” to suggest more than 2,600 homes could be built at the aerodrome in the next 15 years.

“The inspector agreed the Dunsfold aerodrome allocation for 2,600 new homes was an appropriate part of the Spatial Strategy,” said Miss Potts, who is also the councillor for Upper Hale.

“The council also agrees this is a sustainable figure and has seen no evidence, at present, to demonstrate that more than 2,600 homes could be guaranteed to be delivered within the plan period.

“More growth may be an option for the next plan period, but this would need to be considered in light of evidence and its potential impacts on the open space of the new settlement.”

She added Waverley has “no choice” but to comply with the increase in housing numbers and is working to distribute the extra homes “in the fairest way possible”.

Miss Potts said Waverley is “committed to supporting and respecting the Farnham Neighbourhood Plan” and “will do all it can to balance the integrity of the Farnham Neighbourhood Plan with the increase in housing numbers”.

She continued: “It was made clear during meetings with councillor Cockburn that the uplift required for Farnham could be delivered in two different ways: either through Local Plan Part 2 or through an early review of the Farnham Neighbourhood Plan.

“Either option will involve the council working closely with Farnham Town Council [and] whichever option is chosen, the neighbourhood plan will continue to be given significant weight in planning decisions.”

David Howell, chairman of The Farnham Society planning committee, has also expressed concern that Waverley’s modifications pose a “real threat” to the Farnham Neighbourhood Plan.

“Waverley will do anything it takes to get their Local Plan through,” said Mr Howell, adding that the modifications re-open the door to speculative development in the borough and Farnham in particular.

He also expressed concern that - with appeals against Waverley’s refusal of planning permission for more than 350 homes in the Farnham area set to be determined by the Secretary of State by mid-September - Waverley’s proposed modifications may have weakened the Neighbourhood Plan at just the wrong time.

The Protect Our Waverley (POW) campaign group, which objects to any development at Dunsfold Park, has also responded critically to Waverley’s Local Plan modifications this week.

In a letter to The Herald, the group calls on Waverley to challenge the “highly inflated” housing target proposed by the Local Plan inspector, which it says will impact on “every community from end to end of the borough”.

In an attempt to “unite” the borough, POW says the Local Plan process has pitched different communities against each other and has “lost sight of its obligations to the residents of Waverley as a whole”.

Taking particular umbrage at the inspector’s demand that Waverley meet 50 per cent of Woking’s unmet housing need - POW added that Woking should be required to satisfy its own housing need through an upcoming review of its own Core Strategy, adopted in 2012.

Waverley is expected to open a six-week public consultation on the Local Plan part one modifications in September, with all comments received to be passed to the inspector for review.

The inspector will take into account the responses before issuing his report later in the year