FARNHAM Town Council leader Carole Cockburn has accused Waverley of putting “two fingers” up to the Farnham Neighbourhood Plan after council chiefs agreed to a possible early review of the community-led planning blueprint this week.

Waverley’s executive committee met on Tuesday evening to endorse a raft of modifications to the borough’s draft Local Plan, including where to allocate an uplift in housing from 519 to 590 new homes per annum, as demanded by a government inspector in July.

This includes an additional 450 homes that must be built in Farnham by 2032, on top of the 2,330 already proposed and accommodated in the Farnham Neighbourhood Plan, which now faces an early review and possible second referendum to meet the shortfall.

Waverley’s modifications are expected to go out to public consultation on September 4 - but have already met fierce opposition from Farnham councillors who have warned that the decision undermines the borough’s only ‘made’ neighbourhood plan.

The Farnham Neighbourhood Plan was only adopted on July 28 having undergone four years of consultation, a referendum backed by a massive 88 per cent of voters in May and survived a High Court legal challenge by a consortium of developers.

However, giving a emotional statement at Tuesday’s meeting, the plan’s chief architect Carole Cockburn strongly condemned Waverley’s actions which she warned could render the entire Neighbourhood Plan process a “waste of time”.

“I don’t think you’ve undermined the Neighbourhood Plan, I think you’ve given it two fingers,” the Tory councillor for The Bourne told executive members on Tuesday.

“We are affecting the lives of every single resident in this borough, and yet you’ve just come up with these arbitrary figures which have been rushed and lack any logic. You’ve not thought this through.

“We always knew at the end of the plan we were going to have to do some sort of review to address any shortfall, and we’ve worked openly and honestly with your officers throughout the entire process.

“So to read what you have effectively done; you haven’t undermined the Neighbourhood Plan, you’ve scuppered it.

“Every single site in the Neighbourhood Plan was looked at in detail and the people of Farnham chose the sites that they thought they could live with in the town at the moment.

“Then you come along and single-handedly pluck out a figure and basically say it’s back to square one, back to the drawing board. I don’t understand how you can do that without talking to the parishes, talking to the towns, taking the time. It just seems to us like an unnecessary rush.”

John Williamson, leader of Waverley’s opposition Farnham Residents group and councillor for Farnham Castle, added: “In my view short term expediency is being used by Waverley to try and get the Local Plan approved, and it’s to the detriment of the already-made Neighbourhood Plan.

“What’s being proposed this evening is a convenient way of working rather than the right way of working.

“It’s up to this council to do the right thing for the borough, and weakening the strength of the Neighbourhood Plan doesn’t seem the best way forward. There are alternative solutions which are available, and they should be followed.”

A number of councillors - including Tory councillor for Dunsfold John Gray - also criticised Waverley’s decision not to increase the 2,600 homes allocated at the borough’s largest brownfield site, Dunsfold Park, to help meet the shortfall - instead targeting greenfield releases around existing settlements.

Repeating his calls for 4,000 or more homes at Dunsfold Park, Farnham Residents councillor Andy MacLeod also criticised Waverley’s housing figures as “fantasy” - commenting that government targets require the borough to build three times more homes per year than the current rate.

The Farnham Moor Park councillor said: “We should be protecting the green fields in the borough by putting the extra 1,350 houses on Dunsfold Park. I appreciate we’re being told that Dunsfold Park might not necessarily be able to achieve that in the period of the Local Plan, but the thing I’d say to that is that is far more achievable than the figures projected in Waverley’s report.”

This view was endorsed by fellow Farnham Residents councillor Jerry Hyman, who reminded members that the inspector himself highlighted Dunsfold Park’s capacity to take more than 2,600 homes at July’s examination.

He also called on the executive to defer its decision and allow a call-in to the overview and scrutiny committee, which he chairs, commenting “for the sake of our borough, please confirm that you will allow scrutiny before this important decision is made”.

Responding, Waverley leader Julia Potts denied Mr Hyman’s request to defer the recommendation, and executive members agreed unanimously to proceed with the consultation.

Miss Potts added: “As a Farnham councillor and resident, I’m well aware of the sensitivities in Farnham and the concerns about the Neighbourhood Plan. Everyone’s worked incredibly hard on that, and we as the local planning authority along with Farnham Town Council fought a very difficult legal challenge to that very plan.

“We are aware of the concerns, and we’ve tried our best to address those concerns by allowing Farnham to make the decision whether to bring those modifications and additional numbers through as Part Two of the Local Plan or an early review.

“But we need to move forward. We are not trying to rush this, but we do want to make sure that we keep up momentum.

“We want plan-led development and we want appropriate development. But the only way that we’ll have appropriate development with the right funding for the infrastructure we need is to have a sound Local Plan, and the only way for us to have a sound Local Plan is to go through a process of consultation on the proposed modifications.”