WAVERLEY Borough Council’s lack of a five-year supply of deliverable housing, meaning applications must be determined “in favour of sustainable development”, was cited by two planning inspectors in recent appeals.

Waverley’s refusal to permit the demolition of existing buildings at 18 Critchmere Hill, Haslemere, and build two identical pairs of semi-detached houses was upheld on appeal by planning inspector Robert Jackson.

But the borough council’s rejection of an application to replace three agricultural barns in Fisherstreet, near Haslemere, with a single dwelling was dismissed by planning inspector Rachel Walmsley.

Turning down the Critchmere Hill plan, Mr Jackson said: “I have concluded the proposal would be significantly harmful to the character and appearance of the area and have an unacceptable impact on the living conditions of both 16 and 22 Critchmere Hill, through a mix of overbearing effect and loss of light and outlook.”

Miss Walmsley allowed the appeal at Garden Cottage Farm, in Shillinglee Park Road, to build a new house on the footprint of two of the barns and to remove the third barn, despite the change from agricultural to residential being counter to national policies seeking to restrict new residential development in the open countryside.

The situation was complicated by Waverley planners having granted consent in 2014 for the three barns to become three dwellings, but refusing permission for the three barns to become a single dwelling last year.

Judging replacing the barns with a single dwelling to be less intrusive than the “fall-back” position in the extant permission to build three, she said. “In light of this fall-back position, the location of the proposal is not sufficient reason to justify dismissal of the appeal.

“Furthermore, the proposal would be appropriate in design and scale and would not have a detrimental impact on the character of the site or its surroundings . Having regard to the fall-back position I find the proposed development WAVERLEY Borough Council’s lack of a five-year supply of deliverable housing, meaning applications must be determined “in favour of sustainable development”, was cited by two planning inspectors in recent appeals.

Waverley’s refusal to permit the demolition of existing buildings at 18 Critchmere Hill, Haslemere, and build two identical pairs of semi-detached houses was upheld on appeal by planning inspector Robert Jackson.

But the borough council’s rejection of an application to replace three agricultural barns in Fisherstreet, near Haslemere, with a single dwelling was dismissed by planning inspector Rachel Walmsley.

Turning down the Critchmere Hill plan, Mr Jackson said: “I have concluded the proposal would be significantly harmful to the character and appearance of the area and have an unacceptable impact on the living conditions of both 16 and 22 Critchmere Hill, through a mix of overbearing effect and loss of light and outlook.”

Miss Walmsley allowed the appeal at Garden Cottage Farm, in Shillinglee Park Road, to build a new house on the footprint of two of the barns and to remove the third barn, despite the change from agricultural to residential being counter to national policies seeking to restrict new residential development in the open countryside.

The situation was complicated by Waverley planners having granted consent in 2014 for the three barns to become three dwellings, but refusing permission for the three barns to become a single dwelling last year.

Judging replacing the barns with a single dwelling to be less intrusive than the “fall-back” position in the extant permission to build three, she said. “In light of this fall-back position, the location of the proposal is not sufficient reason to justify dismissal of the appeal.

“Furthermore, the proposal would be appropriate in design and scale and would not have a detrimental impact on the character of the site or its surroundings . Having regard to the fall-back position I find the proposed development