THE leader of Waverley’s opposition Farnham Residents group has blasted council chiefs for seeking to bolster a strategy deterring people from the heathland Special Protection Areas (SPAs) surrounding Farnham while simultaneously agreeing to submit a planning application for a new visitor centre and car park at one of the SPAs it seeks to protect.

Farnham Castle councillor John Williamson cut a lonely figure at a recent meeting of Waverley Borough Council’s decision-making executive committee, as Tory leaders approved the draft Thames Basin Heaths SPA Avoidance Strategy Review for consultation and, later in the meeting, agreed to press on with plans for a major upgrade to the facilities at Frensham Great Pond.

However, he made his views clear on both decisions, vehemently objecting to the principle of Waverley’s avoidance strategy - that seeks to offset the impact of new homes on the SPAs surrounding Farnham such as Frensham Common by improving access to the borough’s sole registered Suitable Alternative Natural Green Space (SANGS) at Farnham Park.

The SPA decision - which could have the consequence of allowing an additional 1,155 new homes to be built in Farnham by increasing the unallocated SANGS capacity of Farnham Park based on the findings of the park’s 2014 visitor survey - was hailed by Frensham councillor and portfolio holder for planning Brian Adams as it would “allow for a few years of housing developments in and around Farnham” before another SANGS can be made available.

And the improvements to Frensham Great Pond, which forms part of the Wealden Heaths SPA and is leased by Waverley from the National Trust, were also praised.

Waverley’s deputy leader Julia Potts said: “Currently amenities on the site are not fit for purpose – the building is falling apart and is costing too much money to run. By carrying out this work we expect to see the maintenance costs drop by £40k a year.

“The new building will mean better toilet facilities, a bigger cafe with more seating indoors and outdoors, an educational room and much more. The vision is to transform the area and improve the visitor experience, while protecting the natural environment.”

But opposition leader Mr Williamson warned of the unintended impact of the council’s decisions - particularly to introduce parking charges at Frensham Great Pond seven-days-a-week all-year round - and urged the council’s leadership to rethink its SPAs avoidance strategy.

He said: “The proposed new building looks really quite nice, but that really isn’t the point. This is a SPA and it’s this council’s policy to reduce visitor pressure on SPAs. This is a proposal to urbanise Frensham Great Pond and even more importantly it is a proposal that would urbanise the SPA. For those reasons, I’m against this in principle.

“The existing car park is informal for those people who visit there. The bays are unmarked with charging only for people who park there at weekends and bank holidays from April through to September.

“During that period it’s noticeable how many people park free on Bacon Lane, and by charging for parking at all times you will encourage even more people to find alternative, informal parking elsewhere on this 400-acre SPA.

“If you’re trying to protect the wildlife, which is what the SPA is all about, introducing parking charges would be the last thing that you would do, because what you’re doing is encouraging people to park their cars and take their dogs into the places where birds are nesting.”

Referencing Waverley’s avoidance strategy, Mr Williamson repeated his calls for the council to provide evidence that SANGS are effective in deterring people away from the SPAs - pointing to the Natural England 2012/13 visitor survey which found the number of visitors to the Thames Basin Heaths SPA had increased by about 10 per cent since 2005.

He added: “This proposal [to increase the unallocated SANG capacity of Farnham Park] is based on a misrepresentation of the results of the 2014 Farnham Park visitor survey, which actually found that although the number of visitors to the park had not increased, which it clearly says, the number of park users who are also using the SPAs had increased considerably. That’s the exact opposite to the result you’d want to see if it was effective.

“The council report fails to mention the main constraint that the avoidance strategy seeks to overcome - that consents for plans and projects cannot be granted unless the council has before it an appropriate assessment containing convincing objective, scientific evidence that the strategy is effective.

“To omit the main legal constraint is just not on. It gives the impression of flouting the legal constraints to avoid the necessary limitations on housebuilding that affects not just Farnham but two thirds of the borough that lie within the visitor catchment area of the Thames Basin and Wealden Heath SPAs.

“The main point that matters is whether the strategy works. It’s ridiculous to consult on this without providing the public with an assessment of whether it actually works.

“On behalf of residents, I simply ask that you demand the evidence of this mitigation is effective before spending more time and money on this pretence and move on to producing a genuine Local Plan.”