Questionnaire on East Street
An NOP questionnaire about the East Street redevelopment has been sent to all residents of Farnham in postal areas GU9 and GU10. Its purpose is to gather the views of the people of Farnham about what they do and don't want to see in the final version of the redevelopment plans.
 
The questionnaire, compiled by National Opinion Polls, is extremely vague. Significantly, there is no mention of theatre at all. There is a question that asks if you want included such things as cafes, restaurants and a cinema but, quite deliberately, Waverley and NOP have failed to mention that the site already includes one of the best small theatres in the country and that they are prepared to rip it down.
 
There is, however, room on the questionnaire for you to add anything that they haven't mentioned. This is your chance to mention the Redgrave. We suggest that you write clearly in this space that you want the Redgrave open, working and included in the East Street scheme. 
 
Please ask your friends and neighbours to do the same - Waverley will only take notice if large numbers of people are expressing the same views.
 
If you are not in the GU9 or GU10 area you can still make your views known by going to the Waverley website, by following this link:
 
This will be our last chance to influence the Council - don't leave the last chance to chance!
 

David Wylde, one of the directors of the New Farnham Repertory Company (NFRC), offers the following comments on the questionnaire.

 

NFRC and the EAST STREET BROCHURE – sorry, QUESTIONNAIRE

 

NFRC advises those of you who intend to fill in the questionnaire - and we hope every one of you will do so - to reply as you think and in your own words. But if you would like information or guidance, these are the issues that could be raised.

 

A BROCHURE, not a questionnaire – NFRC’s view

 

This is not really a questionnaire — it is a Waverley brochure and sales pitch for its own scheme.

 

No fault attaches to NOP, the polling organisation which has compiled the scheme. Waverley gave NOP information which is partial, evasive or just downright mushy, and was designed to produce questions that will evoke the answers the council wants.

 

An example of partiality:— “Residential accommodation in the town” sounds fine, but we are not told it consists of 5-8 flats in 4-storey block, in a Georgian town without 4-storey blocks.

 

An example of evasiveness:— The survey contains no question about the Sainsbury’s new store. Why not? Sainsbury’s are the developers(!) along with their partners Crest Nicholson, and the company already has 2 Farnham stores.

 

An example of mush:— “An avenue to the river from the town square” - sounds lovely doesn’t it? Who could possibly oppose it? But on one side of it are the 4-storey blocks; more of a canyon than an avenue, like the bit of the Borough between the bottom of Castle Street and the East/South Street lights.

 

Garbage in, garbage out - and a lot of this is garbage. It is Waverley’s attempt to stitch things up.

 

 

FORTUNATELY WE CAN UNPICK IT

 

Here are NFRC’s comments on the questions.

 

When you have considered them, we suggest which boxes for each question you could fill in -  the choice is yours. A lot of the questions are difficult to answer, because their wording makes it difficult to disagree. It’s surprising there isn’t a question about motherhood and apple pie! Repeat: the choice is yours.

 

QUESTION 1 How the scheme’s design…

 

It doesn’t. 558 flats in blocks up to 4-storeys high.

In mass, scale and density, it is utterly unsuited. The whole scheme is much too big and is about how Waverley can make as much money as possible to spread throughout the Borough.

 

QUESTION 2 A new town square…

          

The Redgrave should be retained and the new Sainsbury’s store removed from the plan, making room for the Redgrave and the town square. Don’t be afraid to have a go at Sainsbury’s - they are the developers and it’s not a coincidence they have given themselves the prime spot on the site.

 

QUESTION 3 Having most of the car park…

 

Your choice - it depends what you think of underground car parks.

 

QUESTION 4 Leisure facilities, cafes…

Yes, but fewer.

 

QUESTION 5 New shops on East Street…

 

Yes, but fewer.

 

QUESTION 6 Residential accommodation....

 

Same point as in Question 1.

 

QUESTION 7 Restoring Brightwell House and garden…

 

Yes, but the Redgrave must be included in the restoration

 

QUESTION 8 The avenue to the river...

More of a canyon than an avenue.

 

QUESTION 9 Pedestrianising East Street…

 

There will be more traffic than admitted.

Sainsbury’s (surprise, surprise) is the only store with access provided; all the other shops will need provisioning by lorries and vans.

The East/South Street junction will have confusing amounts of traffic.

 

QUESTION 10 The hotel in East Street…

 

Not needed, the Bush will do. Sainsbury’s store can then stay where it is.

 

NFRC recommends you to choose from the boxes crossed below when responding to the Questionnaire's 10 questions.

 

1 integrates with town cntre

 

 

 

 

x

2 new town square

 

x

x

x

x

3 underground parking

x

x

x

x

x

4 cafes, restaurants...

 

x

x

x

x

5 new East shops

 

x

x

x

x

6 resid accommo in centre

 

 

 

 

x

7restore Brightwell Hse+gdn

 

x

x

x

x

8 avenue to river fr square

 

x

x

x

x

9 pedestrianise East St

 

 

x

x

x

10 hotel in South St

 

 

 

 

x

 

 

The choice is yours, having read our comments

 

WHATEVER ELSE YOU PUT, as an NFRC supporter, PUT ‘GIVE US BACK THE REDGRAVE’ as many times as you like on the blue panels where you can say what you think.

 

Please fill in one questionnaire only per household, and no more.

 

If Waverley can accuse us of any sort of chicanery, it will. Don’t give it the chance: one questionnaire only per person or household.

 

Dennis Chinnery's vision of a future Redgrave Theatre