Haslemere developer runs into trouble.

When does a ‘ so-called ‘ non-material amendment to a controversial housing scheme become a material amendment?

When a developer wants to create a large body of water, slap  next to the boundary of nearby properties.

Amendment to WA/2020/1213 to amend the drainage design and layout. LAND COORDINATES 490217 132204 SCOTLAND LANE, HASLEMERE

‘Your Waverley’ planners certainly viewed the proposal by Elivia Homes Limited as unacceptable, but Haslemere Town Council didn’t object.  

The developer received consent following a controversial planning appeal for 50 homes on a site now called Scotland Park in February 2022. (WA/2020/1213 / APP/R3650/W/21/3280136).

However, Elivia Homes have now discovered the drainage design and layout require “minor amendments” to ensure that the proposed scheme is consistent with the level’s work.

What it claims:

Minor amendments to the approved drawing pack are to regularise the changes caused by the detailed drainage scheme. This includes, change in SuDs pond shape, deletion of the swale and minor realignment of the paths surrounding the ponds. 

The scheme remains for 50 dwellings, the mix is unchanged and the layout/open spaces unchanged. The original consent proposed a drainage basin in the same location. The pathways also remain broadline in the same location.

However, David  Coleman of Treetops 3 Scotlands Close was deeply concerned about surface water drainage schemes.

He said  Several issues need to be urgently addressed:

This is a fundamental change, not a “Minor non material amendment”

  • The most critical concern lies in the fact that the amended plan places residential properties in such close proximity to a large volume of water. This situation raises alarm bells for multiple reasons.


  • There are potential environmental problems due to inadequate drainage systems or mismanagement of surface water runoff, as there is no indication of an amendment to the plans to manage the surface water and or runoff.


  • This could lead to waterlogging, increased risk of flooding, and damage to both the new development and existing properties nearby.


An additional critical concern is the safety of our community, especially young children. As parents of a five-year-old son, my family and I are deeply worried about the potential risks associated with having such a substantial body of water in such close proximity to our homes. The plan change now shows the body of water almost on our boundary and in an elevated position.

 Ensuring the well-being and security of our children should be of paramount importance.

It is crucial to ensure the safety, security, and environmental sustainability of the area. Adequate measures must be implemented to mitigate the risks associated with the proximity of residential properties to the large body of water; it must be relocated away from existing property


SECOND SCHEDULE Paragraph 002 (reference ID: 17a-002-20140306 of the National Planning Practice Guidance states that there is no statutory definition of ‘non-material’. This is because it will be dependent on the context of the overall scheme; an amendment that is non-material in one context may be material in another. In determining a non-material minor amendment, the Local Planning Authority must be satisfied that the amendment sought is non-material in order to grant an application under Section 96A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. The Local Planning Authority has to be satisfied it is not material; they must have regard to the effect of the change, together with any previous changes made under this section, on the planning permission as granted initially. The proposal involves major layout changes, which are considered to be material.

It is considered that this alteration is a material amendment which is considered to have a material effect on the layout and appearance of the development, and it is considered to have a material effect on the amenities of neighbours. DECISION: REFUSE NMA/2023/1165

3 thoughts on “Haslemere developer runs into trouble.”

  1. It will be over turned.
    Nothing stands in their way.
    Especially common sense.


  2. There are NMA’s flying all over the Borough. Well done the Planning Officers for their refusal. Credit where credit is due. But as already mentioned I am sure the Developers will find another way of doing exactly what they want to do regardless of the existing Residents or this decision!


    “Following a grant of planning permission, it may be necessary to make amendments to the proposals that were originally approved. A non-material amendment may be applied for to approve a minor change to the planning permission and does not breach any conditions originally placed on the consent.
    If the amendment is not considered minor by the Local Planning Authority, a new planning application will be required.”


    Waverley Borough Council have advised consistent with non-material.

    “Changes to existing planning permission
    If you already have planning permission, you may be able to make small changes to it. This could be moving a door or window or changing a finish. These changes are classed as ‘non-material’.

    What is a non-material change?
    Whether the change is non-material or not will depend on the circumstances of the case – for example, moving a window could be material if it results in overlooking a neighbour, but could be non-material if it does not.

    We will not consider the following to be non-material:
    increase/decrease in the size of the building/extension
    significant increase in the height of an eaves or roof
    move of a building or extension, even if it is within the same site area
    change of site area (red line)
    changes which conflict with a specific condition
    significant change in elevation (where the proposal would appear materially different to that permitted) inserting a new feature (such as dormer windows that could create an overlooking problem)
    changes which alter the nature or description of the development
    multiple minor changes
    new works or elements not part of the original scheme
    new works or elements not considered by any environmental statement submitted with the application.”

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.