THE effect of the East Street redevelopment on Farnham's much debated traffic system emerged as the most contentious issue, as Crest Nicholson Developments unveiled its refined plans at the first design consultative forum for the development held by Waverley Council. The plans in general received a mixed response from the representatives of those organisations invited to take part. But on the traffic issue, and in particular an assertion by the developer's transport consultant that there is no evidence that the town suffers from gridlock or that the development will increase congestion, the invited speakers were united. There was derisory laughter from the public gallery, as Colin McKay explained the finding of the traffic assessment so far. He was asked by a Waverley councillor if he was sure the road arrangements would be adequate. "The efforts we are going to to model the traffic impact of the development are subject to the scrutiny of the county council. It isn't a matter we take lightly," Mr McKay replied. But a moving representation of the anticipated traffic flow shown on a screen, based on Surrey County Council's traffic model produced for the Hickleys Corner scheme, also failed to impress. Waverley councillor Leonard Bate queried why the traffic was shown flowing smoothly away to the south of the model. "Farnham gets to saturation point every time a train comes across," he observed. The term "saturation point" was also used by Farnham Society spokesman Gordon Harris, who expressed "some surprise" at Mr McKay's comment that there was no evidence of gridlock. Gary Meyjes, speaking for Farnham Chamber of Commerce, expressed a fear that traffic pressure in South Street, even with the intended changes to the Woolmead traffic flow, would harm efforts to integrate the development with the rest of the town. And Farnham Town Council leader Mark Norris said he agreed with those in the public gallery who had laughed at the assessment of Farnham's traffic situation. "If you get stuck in South Street on a weekday afternoon, it is very difficult to get out of town," he said. Mr McKay had explained that the developer would "feed back" to Farnham Town Council the impact the development would have on the urban safety management scheme, which the council is undertaking with a view to improving the traffic situation throughout Farnham. Mr Norris said he was pleased to hear the study mentioned, but added: "We are quite determined to press on with the TRL study - it seems to me that there needs to be very close consultation between you and us." In his general comments, the town council leader said there were a lot of good things in the master plan that the town had asked for, including the retention of Brightwell House, the Gostrey Club and the bowling green, a more or less uninterrupted vista to the river from the town square and the provision of Shopmobility facilities. He made a plea that the redevelopment should not be "a clone of some of the other schemes that Crest Nicholson has produced elsewhere in the country". He wanted to see something unique for Farnham, that increased the number of small shops to make it a specialist centre, rather than inserted more chain stores. Gary Meyjes, for the Chamber of Commerce, regretted that the forum hadn't been held sooner and stressed that the chamber was eager to see a successful conclusion to the scheme after the frustration of such slow progress. "It is essential that the project is brought to a positive and successful conclusion for the benefit of the town - sooner rather than later," he urged. Mr Meyjes said the area had been crying out for redevelopment, with traders, business and residents all suffering. The town had consistently missed out to other areas with better entertainment and leisure facilities, he added. But he pressed for "a holistic approach" to ensure that the scheme was integrated into the rest of the town, rather than becoming a separate leisure and retail entity. For this reason he was concerned that there were "only a restricted number of comparatively narrow access points". A further concern was the effect on the town during the construction period - believed to be three years. He urged that some consideration be given to the chamber's suggestion that a temporary access be provided direct to the site from the A31 for construction traffic. Delivering the Farnham Society's verdict, Dr Harris explained: "We consider that the proposed scheme still represents an overdevelopment of the area, the overall footprint of new buildings being too large. The scale, height and massing of too many of the proposed buildings is too great and the provision of 294 dwellings too many." Dr Harris stressed that the Farnham Society had supported the regeneration of East Street from the outset, but that it had begun as a far less ambitious proposal, relating only to Woolmead House and the cinema site. He made a plea for architectural design of the highest quality and for buildings of a height and scale in keeping with the town's historic core. Although changes had been made in this respect, he didn't consider they had gone far enough. Dr Harris said that the extent of the redevelopment was demonstrated by the fact that the location of the bowling green might not be viable because of the height and proximity of adjacent buildings. "Bad, but good in parts" was the assessment of the refined masterplan by Brian Davey, representing pressure group East Street Action. He told the forum that he endorsed the criticisms of the masterplan made by the Regional Design Panel, which referred to "monolithic blocks" and expressed concerns about the large underground car park. He said the proposal was "a gross overdevelopment in terms of massing, height and density, extended on land bought for recreation for the people of Farnham in 1920". Asserting that 21 planning policies appeared to be breached by the current proposal, he described a lack of public parking spaces, especially in view of the 1,200-seater cinema to be provided as "a fundamental and fatal flaw". Possible dates for the next two design consultative forums have been given as July 14 and August 11. The developer has said it is hoped to submit a planning application by the end of the year.
