248 ‘Stalin-esque’ Flats Approved for Car Park Site Near Station

Published on: 5 Mar, 2026
Updated on: 5 Mar, 2026

Artist illustration of the apartment blocks near Guildford Park Road. Wates Residential/ Guildford Borough Council

By Emily Dalton

local democracy reporter

Plans to build 248 new homes on a Guildford car park have been given the green light despite some councillors describing the designs as “uninspiring” and “Stalin-esque”.

Guildford Borough Council’s Planning Committee backed the redevelopment of Guildford Park Road car park on Thursday, March 4. The scheme paves the way for four apartment blocks and 15 townhouses just a short walk from Guildford railway station.

Map to show location of development site. Apple Maps

The £86 million project will transform the existing surface car park into a new residential neighbourhood, delivering 248 homes in total. The scheme includes 99 affordable homes, made up of 65 for affordable rent and 34 shared ownership properties.

Cllr Pat Oven

Councillors broadly agreed the town needed the homes, although several raised concerns about the design of the development. Cllr Patrick Oven (GGG, Send) criticised the appearance, comparing it to “Stalin-esque 1950s architecture”, although he added: “It’s not that bad but I think a little bit of imagination could have made it better.”

Council officers recommended the scheme for approval, saying it would significantly boost housing supply at a time when the authority cannot demonstrate a five-year housing land supply.

The site, next to the railway line and close to the University of Surrey, will include new landscaping, a children’s play area, cycle parking and improved pedestrian routes. Buses, cyclists and pedestrians will still be able to travel through the site to the university.

‘Uninspiring at best’

Cllr Stephen Hives

Cllr Stephen Hives compared the design to Eastern European housing blocks but said that was not grounds for refusal. “For me they look more like the [buildings] you find on the outskirts of Odessa,” he said.

Cllr Hives complained that members often hear they need to “Guildford’s identity” but then the council seems to “flip flop” as to what the identity is.

Cllr Joss Bigmore

Cllr Joss Bigmore (R4GV, Merrow) agreed, saying: “Guildford is very eclectic in its character. [The problem is] we don’t have a defining [style]. We have some wonderful historic areas and we have some newbuild bits.” He warned the town risked ending up with piecemeal development unless clearer design principles were introduced.

Bigmore described the proposals as underwhelming for such a prominent gateway site. “It’s dull and uninspiring at best,” he said.

Cllr Howard Smith

But Cllr Howard Smith (Lab, Westborough) said the scheme would provide much-needed housing in a sustainable location. He said: “I’m sold on this and would vote for it every day of the week.”

However, Cllr Smith questioned the level of shared ownership housing in the plans, asking what evidence there was for demand and suggesting more homes should be provided for social or affordable rent.

Planning officers said the mix reflected evidence from a 2015 housing needs assessment that underpins the borough’s Local Plan, with further work already under way on an updated assessment for the next plan.

Despite those concerns, councillors ultimately agreed there were no planning grounds to refuse the scheme. Construction is expected to start in summer 2026, with the development due to be completed by the end of 2028.

Responses to 248 ‘Stalin-esque’ Flats Approved for Car Park Site Near Station

Bernard Quoroll Reply

March 5, 2026 at 9:44 pm

Little boxes, little boxes …. and they all look just the same. I wonder if they will be made out of ticky tacky. A worthy companion to the “Great Wall of Guildford!” Pete Seeger must be turning in his grave.

And whatever happened to the Guildford’s Vision, on which so much thought, energy and treasure has been exoended. Perhaps it could help to stop this cancer spreading.

Oh yes I remember, nothing. The council are sitting on it.
- Ramsey Nagaty Reply
  
  March 12, 2026 at 5:11 pm
  
  When a GBC Councillor I was part of a team looking at plans for this site. It included houses and flats. This took a lot of time and design costs etc.
  
  Whilst I objected to the height of the tallest block of flats the rest of the scheme was far better than the current one.
  
  We turned up for a meeting and were told forget what we have been working on for 18 months as now GBC was going to go out to tender with four firms, competing to be awarded the project and that this would probably be developers’ standard “mansion” blocks. And so it is. Awful.
  
  A prime GBC site centrally located not car dependent and ideal for a greater mix of social housing.
  
  Ramsey Nagaty is a former GGG borough councillor
M Durant Reply

March 6, 2026 at 10:36 am

A new development is delivering 248 homes, including 99 labelled as “affordable”, 65 for affordable rent and 34 shared‑ownership, the building itself looks uninspiring, and the deeper issue remains unchanged.

The real issue is that nothing built in Guildford for years has offered anything genuinely affordable for people on normal wages. There is nowhere under about £600 a month all‑in, and almost everything is geared toward students or high‑priced co‑living.

More flats keep going up, yet they don’t reflect stagnant wages or the reality that many people simply can’t afford £850+ for a room, studio flats. None of these new buildings address that gap.
Nathan Cassidy Reply

March 6, 2026 at 11:22 am

Councillor Patrick Owen is mistaken in calling these designs ‘Stalin-esque’. Stalinist architecture takes inspiration from classical and baroque styles (see the Warsaw Palace of Culture and Science, for example). Even the Stalinka apartment blocks were predominantly built in a neoclassical style.

I think what Cllr Owen meant to say is that they’re Khrushchev-esque style, like the Khrushchevka panel construct ‘commie’ blocks built throughout the 1970s.

Ironically, if these were truly ‘Stalin-esque’ style I believe that perhaps critics would have a more favorable view.
Wayne Smith Reply

March 7, 2026 at 10:02 pm

A fine example of the awful architecture that Guildford Borough Council Planning Committee has either approved or has had foisted upon the town, after appeal.

In future, what would be the point of a unitary authority delegating planning decisions to a Guildford Parish or Town Council, if created, if this is the sort of thing we can expect? A remote, faceless bureaucrat may as well do it.

Editor’s note: Parish, community and town councils only have the right to be consulted on planning proposals. Any decision would have to be taken by the relevant planning authority which will be the new unitary council, once in operation.
Sara Tokunaga Reply

March 8, 2026 at 1:03 pm

No surprise this was passed, even though the plans are very uninspiring, with a tiny “play” area and lack of parking. However, at least Guildford Park Avenue and Rupert Road will no longer have the threat of a multi-storey car park looming over them.

I would like to ask GBC to clearly signpost where the site is so that we do not have HGVs continuously rumbling round Guildford Park Avenue as happened during the earlier works.

Also, GBC needs to properly fence off the illegal access which is now used from the car park to Guildford Park Avenue’s garage area and was created by GBC demolishing its garages and not building a proper barrier between the two sites.