A MAJOR legal battle over the future of the Brightwells regeneration scheme in Farnham town centre looks set to be fought in the High Court this summer after campaigners launched one last bid to overthrow the controversial project.

Waverley Borough Council could now face a judicial review hearing as early as next month after allowing its Brightwells development partner Crest Nicholson a raft of amendments and variations to the scheme since awarding the contract 14 years ago.

The Farnham Interest Group (FIG), which has launched the legal offensive on behalf of The Farnham Society, Farnham Building Preservation Trust and East Street Action, is anxiously awaiting the High Court’s judgement on whether or not there is a case to answer.

But in the meantime, the group is calling on those concerned about the potential impacts of the “massive and unsustainable” Brightwells scheme - comprising 239 new flats, high street shops, restaurants and a six-screen cinema on land south of East Street - to dig deep and help fund its so-called “fight for Farnham”.

A “mystery donor” has already swollen FIG’s war chest with a donation of £50,000, but campaigners have set a target to raise another £85,000 for “high quality legal representation” by Sunday, August 1, to stand a realistic chance of defeating Brightwells in the courts.

This covers FIG’s own legal costs and court fees plus Waverley’s costs should FIG be defeated in the High Court and the judge deem it necessary to reimburse the council. Likewise, FIG has promised to return any surplus funds to donors pro-rata.

Setting out its case in a leaflet to be distributed to thousands of Farnham households next week, FIG says in granting concessions to its development partner, Waverley has put Crest’s “demands for profit before local needs” and has called for the tendering process to be re-run.

The leaflet, which is part of FIG’s wider publicity campaign comprising social media, TV and radio interviews, lists some of the “changes, losses and broken promises” as follows:

• The proposed new Gostrey Centre for the elderly, paid for by Crest Nicholson, is to be moved away from the development site in the centre of Farnham to the Memorial Hall, with the £2.3 million bill “to be paid by the ratepayers of the borough”.

• Surrey County Council, the local highways authority, is allowing Crest “to pretend it can come up with an answer to the increasing congestion and air pollution in the town centre”. With hundreds more cars coming in to serve the needs of 239 new flat-owners, FIG says the health risks “are bound to increase for customers and shopkeepers, pedestrians and residents alike”.

• In 2008, Waverley expected a land payment from Crest Nicholson of £8.76m in return for a long-lease on the land. It is now being offered just £3.19m. In December 2003, for a bigger earlier scheme, Waverley invited Herald readers to submit ideas for how to spend a dividend from Crest Nicholson ’in the region of £20m’, prompting FIG to observe “while land values have rocketed, the return to us has plummeted”.

• FIG also argues that the development has been much-delayed, not by the protesters but by Crest’s unsuccessful attempts to raise the money in the commercial markets.

“Now Waverley has taken its begging bowl to its buddies in Surrey County Council, and persuaded them foolishly to invest an estimate of £30m of our money in an outdated and workable scheme,” the campaigners added.

• Brightwells affordable housing provision also now contains no social housing for renting available for those on the council waiting list, with Crest to instead offer 72 solely shared ownership apartments part-owned by Thames Valley Housing Association.

This means - in combination with F&C REIT’s new Woolmead development which proposes no affordable housing at all - of the 335 homes to be built across the two schemes in East Street, not one home will be made available to those on Waverley’s housing waiting list - contrary to the promises in Waverley’s original 2002 development brief for East Street.

FIG lists other public assets lost to make way for Crest’s scheme as the Brightwells Bowling Club and tennis club, the gardens and grounds of Brightwell House, the Redgrave Theatre, The Marlborough Head pub and around 100 established trees.

East Street Action campaigner Celia Sandars, speaking on behalf of FIG, told The Herald: “The scheme has been sold to people by Waverley without telling them there are any disadvantages at all.

“For instance Kevin Deanus, Waverley’s portfolio holder for parking, recently boasted about the extra parking revenue Brightwells will bring in, but in fact there are going to be less parking spaces at that end of the town than there are now.

“We can visualise chaos in the town centre with people trying to find somewhere to park and our problem is that once people find there are not adequate parking spaces, people will stop trying to come into town.

“Waverley and Crest both say ‘don’t worry about it, we’ll deal with it when it happens’. But that’s a ridiculous attitude to take, and it’s irresponsible. These are the things that affect everybody’s lives and shouldn’t we be looking at a different kind of scheme - one that works for people?”

FIG’s judicial review claim is currently being assessed by Waverley’s solicitors, and responding to The Herald’s request for a comment a Waverley spokesman confirmed “the council will not be responding at this stage”.

For more information about FIG’s campaign and the judicial review process, and for its payment details to contribute funds for the impending legal battle, visit the website www.farnhamsociety.org.uk or email Simon Bradbury of FIG at

Find out about planning applications that affect you by visiting the Public Notice Portal.