The Woolmead site offers an Eastern gateway to our historic town.

A pedestrian piazza connecting it, Brightwells and South Street would give us a civic centre to be proud of.

A Georgian façade will connect West Street, the Borough and the east side of the town in one architectural sweep.

What Farnham has to decide is what lies behind that magnificent façade.

Do we want a vibrant cultural centre with a theatre for classic and contemporary plays, for local groups to perform in, for the brilliant shows that UCA creates?

Do we want a youth centre for our young people to congregate, instead of hanging around the street corners and Gostrey Meadow?

Do we want cafés, artists’ studios, a new library and meeting places? Do we want a covered town square for the Farmers’ market?

In short, do we want the Woolmead to be a place for the community to come together to relax, be entertained and rebuild the society we lost in the pandemic?

Or do we want “downsizers seeking town centre living?”

This is our chance. The developers Farnham Estates, your councillors, our MP Greg Stafford are all listening.

Speak now, Farnham, and tell them what you want – or forever hold your peace.

David Edwards

Crondall Lane

Farnham

Your interesting Peeps into the Past article about the Farnham area in the time of the Black Death includes a substantial error in its reference to UK deaths from Covid.

It looks like a case of the decimal point being misplaced at some stage of the calculation of what 230,000 deaths represents as a percentage of the total population.

Taking the ONS figure of 69,487,000 population in 2025, the number of deaths is only 0.33 per cent of the population, not 3.4 per cent as stated in the article.

Ron Jacobs

Longhope Drive

Farnham

I've just read the Peeps into the Past article about the deadliest year in Farnham’s history.

It contains a statistic that is incorrect - it says 230,000 people in the UK have died of Covid related causes, stating this is 3.4 per cent of the population.

But the 3.4 per cent is very wrong - that would mean the current UK population is 6.8 million people, rather than the 68 million people that it is.

I think the article meant to state 0.34 per cent of the population, not 3.4 per cent. In fact, saying 0.34 per cent would strengthen the point the author is making.

I am keen to see the figure of 3.4 per cent corrected as I think it could cause unnecessary upset given the recency of events it refers to.

Sorry to be a pedant, but quantitative research is my trade and inaccurate statistics can be harmful.

Rebecca

Farnham

A long and comprehensive article on the BBC website on May 21 reminded me of the large sign on Harrier Way, Petersfield, advertising a massive forthcoming ‘Residents Village’ to be constructed by a large national company.

Such developments typically consist of individual residential homes, together with common community facilities for meals and recreation.

They offer the dual benefits of more individual freedom than a care home, with the option of supported services, as and when needed.

However, only people over a certain age can usually buy such homes, and when the owner is no longer in residence the property cannot be rented. Planning permission for this development was granted in 2024.

Given the shortage of housing in the Petersfield area, especially for young families, perhaps it would have been better for the site to have been used to put up some affordable housing.

Not only would this provide more suitable housing, it would also result in less increased traffic on Rival Moor Road and Pulens Lane.

This is because all residential villages not only have occupants and relatives who use cars, but so do all the service staff who provide care.

There is also a risk that the development will become an eyesore, if new buyers cannot be found for empty homes in future, as has happened in other parts of the country.

Two years on, and there is little sign that any above ground building work is about to start on the site off Harrier Way, and I am wondering whether the developers are having second thoughts.

A couple we know have been caught in exactly this trap near Leeds. A two bedroomed home in a Retirement Village was bought for £350,000. However adequate ‘care’ was not provided and a year ago the elderly parent had to be moved to a traditional care home.

Her empty home now joins some 50 per cent of similar empty homes in the Village that cannot be easily resold.

It has been on the market for over a year, incurring annual services charges of £10,000.

I just hope that such a situation does not develop in Petersfield. Ideally the original planning permission granted by the South Downs National Park should be revisited. However, I understand that this is procedurally very difficult.

Instead, I hope the developer can be persuaded to modify its regulations and allow younger people to buy such homes and that until an empty property is resold it can be rented.

Charles Bevan,

Petersfield