The Farnham Society has done some excellent work in response to the consultation on the town centre infrastructure proposals (you can see their response here).
      But, curiously, their report in the 27 October Farnham Herald skates over what are clearly very serious misgivings about the process.  This is a shame as I believe these are shared by many local residents.
      The Farnham Society accuses the Council of ‘sculpting and leading’ the public to make a choice between two unpalatable options. In their opening remarks, they say: “The most important point is that neither of the schemes presented provides pedestrianisation of the town,” and “more consultation options would have been welcome”.
      In this the Society is entirely right. Even if their suggested amendments were adopted, we would be left with a plan that delivers a zero-sum gain. Traffic will simply be diverted from a narrowly defined centre to the streets a couple of hundred yards further out, meaning the pollution, congestion and environmental blight is visited upon the surrounding residents.
      There is no acknowledgement that the only way to improve conditions in the town centre is to give local people realistic alternatives to using their car, particularly better bus services but also improved cycling and walking options.  These are wholly absent from the current plans and disappointingly from the Society’s response too.
      The strange coalition of Farnham Residents’ councillors, who are driving this scheme, seems to have lost all sight of the original objectives which were lower carbon emissions, cleaner air, healthy lifestyles and a reduction in the impact of traffic. And, I fear the Farnham Society has too.
      So, while I completely share the Society’s concern that the opportunity to improve Farnham should not be allowed to evaporate, as they say in the Herald, I don’t think we should be dragooned into accepting these proposals just because our councillors are worried about their chances in next May’s elections. We cannot afford to waste our precious public resources on ineffectual half-measures.