THE party leader of Waverley Borough Council’s opposition Farnham Residents group, Jerry Hyman, has questioned whether Tory plans for a ‘£5 to £10 million’ redesign of Farnham town centre signal an end to developer Crest Nicholson’s “dangerous and impractical” plans for East Street.

On December 29, The Herald reported that MP Jeremy Hunt’s long-held aspirations to overhaul Farnham’s congested road network could at long last see the light of day this spring after Surrey County Council’s Waverley Local Committee recommended £25,000 be allocated to send the draft plans out to public consultation.

Speaking to The Herald, Mr Hunt hailed this as “really big and exciting moment in Farnham’s history” adding the impacts of the draft scheme had been fully modelled. But, together with chairman of the Local Committee, councillor Pat Frost, they declined to discuss the scheme in further detail ahead of the consultation.

Responding this week, Farnham Residents’ leader Mr Hyman poured cold water on the prospect of a consultation going ahead in early 2017 - commenting that it is still dependent on cash-strapped Surrey County Council confirming its budget for the next financial year in February.

However, Mr Hyman added that, if Surrey’s proposals have indeed been modelled as suggested, it could have “major implications” for Waverley Borough Council and development partner Crest Nicholson Sainsbury’s long-delayed Brightwells scheme - and specifically the ambition to part-pedestrianise East Street opposite the Woolmead.

Mr Hyman has long claimed that Crest’s plans would more than double the waiting times for both motorists and pedestrians at the adjoining Royal Deer crossroads, with obvious impacts on Farnham’s already poor air quality - and for this reason he says the developer has failed to acquire crucial Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) funding for its proposals, holding back the entire regeneration scheme.

My Hyman said: “We know that neither Surrey County Council nor Crest have been able to model the East Street project’s infeasible new road scheme, and we know that the LEP refused to fund Crest’s road scheme in 2013 due to the falsified transport assessment, so if Mr Hunt’s claim that his new pedestrianisation proposals have been modelled is true, then it indicates that we’ve finally achieved the long-awaited abandonment of Crest’s dangerous and impractical plans.

“That would indeed be a major announcement, as it requires a major redesign of the Brightwells project and has huge implications for the Local Plan, the Air Quality Action Plan (AQAP) and the imminent East Street legal action.

“If the announcement is genuine, then Mrs Frost will confirm that the new proposals do not include Crest’s discredited proposals, and that those plans have been abandoned.”

However, responding in turn to Mr Hyman’s comments this week, Mrs Frost confirmed the traffic model Surrey’s highways department is using to test options for pedestrianisation does include the Crest Nicholson development - as well as taking into account other potential developments within Surrey and Hampshire in the transport corridor between Bordon, Farnham and Aldershot.

She added the county council now intends to undertake comprehensive public consultation on the options being investigated this autumn - rather than in the spring as previously reported - “to assess public acceptability”.

“If a larger more comprehensive scheme could be delivered along the lines of that in the press, we’d work with Crest Nicholson to ensure that their S278 development works can still be delivered as part of that larger scheme.

“Alternatively with Crest’’s agreement, the Brightwells works could be either adjusted to suit the more comprehensive works or potentially the equivalent cost of the Brightwells highways works be paid to Surrey County Council as matched funding.

“Even if the latter were to be the end result, all parties would need to be satisfied that (a) the eventual scheme remained capable of mitigating the Brightwells impact and (b) that the more comprehensive scheme could be delivered within a timescale to suit the completion of the Brightwells development.

“The timing of these things plays a large part, but we could only seek the adjustment of the Brightwells works, or a cash equivalent contributions with the support and agreement of both the borough council and Crest Nicholson.”

Responding to similar questioning by Mr Hyman’s father Michael at Tuesday night’s meeting of Waverley’s executive committee, council leader Julia Potts also hinted that Surrey’s scheme will compliment rather than hinder the Brightwells regeneration.

Miss Potts said: “I can confirm that Surrey County Council as the highways authority have confirmed to us that any future town centre highways schemes for Farnham will also need to work in connection with the approved Brightwells development.

“I would also remind members that the Brightwells scheme itself is extant and capable of implementation.”