A PETITION has been launched seeking support for Waverley Borough Council’s Brightwells regeneration scheme on land south of East Street.

The petition has mustered more than 600 signatures in just two weeks since going live and comes as a direct response to the Farnham Interest Group’s pending judicial review seeking to overthrow Waverley’s long-delayed scheme in favour of a new “community-led” development.

It states: “This petition is started to demonstrate how much the people of Farnham want the Brightwells East Street development scheme to go ahead.

“At present the ‘Farnham Interest Group’ are trying to ruin it for us by taking it to judicial review. I think it’s time the community join together and support the regeneration of such a run down area of Farnham.

“We are lucky to have a developer willing to pour money into our town, let’s let them do it. The development will regenerate and provide Farnham residents with much-needed community facilities such as a cinema, more restaurants and shops such as M&S in a part of Farnham that is currently extremely run down.

“It will make the town much more vibrant and desirable and our house prices will increase. The main concern is parking but look at the station, they have doubled the capacity in a matter of weeks, it is not a reason to stop the scheme.

“There is only so much time and money an investor will spend on a scheme until they cut their losses and walk away and this WILL happen unless we support, support, support! Lets not let a minority drive away our developer.

“I want a local cinema for my children to wander to, nice restaurant and shops that will satisfy an ever more demanding younger generation, do we want the children of Farnham going to Aldershot and Guildford for this when we could have it here on our doorstep, absolutely not.”

The petition can be signed online at http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/support-farnhams-brightwell-scheme and is accompanied by a Facebook group titled ‘Support Farnham’s Brightwells Scheme’.

In comparison, 5,848 people wrote letters of objection against Crest Nicholson’s original 2008 application with just 27 supporting the development.