THE long-awaited planning application for the East Street development is still not out of the starting blocks, after Waverley Council declared the first submission to be "invalid for a number of reasons" and bounced it back to the developers. Two other applications submitted by Crest Nicholson Sainsbury's - for listed building consent for works to Brightwell House and a sister planning application for extensions and alterations to Brightwell House - were also found to be deficient and declared invalid. On Tuesday, the council told The Herald that "the applications are being returned to the applicant in order that they may rectify the information gaps and errors". But on Wednesday, a contradictory statement was issued indicating that Waverley had received a fresh outline planning application for the East Street regeneration scheme on Friday last week. It was explained that an early inspection of the new application suggested that it meets the criteria to make the application valid and it was hoped it would be registered within seven days. However, according to the statement, public consultations on the plan's content still won't begin until yet more outstanding information is submitted. "Officers believe that this would be more helpful to those interested in the application and it would not affect the time allowed for public consultation and responses," it was explained. Regarding the Brightwell House applications, there had been no change and they remain invalid. The debacle, coming shortly after Brightwell Bowls Club was issued with six months' notice to quit its premises after 81 years on the site, has provided the scheme's critics with yet more ammunition. However, Roger Steel, of East Street Action, while awarding the developers "less than a C minus" for their paperwork, declared it "encouraging that Waverley is looking at this scrupulously". Ian White, director and head of mixed use at Crest Nicholson Regeneration, commented: "Obviously we were keen to submit the planning applications relating to the site as soon as possible, in line with our commitment earlier in the year. "Because of the nature of the scheme and extent of the paperwork involved, the application itself was made up of a number of volumes, to the extent that a van was required to deliver it." While Mr White dismissed the omissions as a matter of "crossed t's and dotted i's" and claimed the situation was not unusual with major applications, council leader Gillian Ferguson was not impressed. "I am very disappointed - they have had so much time to prepare for this," she said. Asked about the scale of the problem with the initial plans, she replied: "It is major that it hasn't come in in the right form and that is major enough." At a meeting of Waverley's executive last week, Miss Ferguson underlined the council's commitment to work with the Brightwell Bowls Club to assist with their relocation. She told The Herald that the provision of new, shared premises for the Brightwell club and the Bourne Royal British Legion Club at Langhams Recreation Ground had now been ruled out - in part because of restrictive covenants. The notice to quit effectively means that the club has played its last season at Brightwells, though the bowlers have resolved to fight their eviction tooth and nail, and placed the matter in the hands of a solicitor. Miss Ferguson said that Waverley is hoping that a new home may be found for them at Monkton Lane. The site has been targeted by Surrey County Council as a potential quarry, but also by Farnham Rugby Club for a new headquarters alongside other leisure facilities. The leader admitted that the East Street scheme was "not being viewed with great enthusiasm" by a number of councillors of both main parties; also that the ruling Lib Dems consider themselves "saddled with it" through the contract signed by the Conservatives just before the last local government election. "We can't walk away without very good reasons. All the way through, because of the signed contract, we have had to go along with the conditions." A key debate looms next Monday in Waverley's corporate overview and scrutiny committee, on the "long-stop date" in the contract. Currently set at December 31 this year, it is the date by which the developer must have finalised a range of matters such as securing planning consent and land assembly, or the council can walk away from the contract. With the deadline seemingly impossible to meet, especially if the application is called in for a public inquiry, Waverley officers are recommending that the date be extended.
