By Martin Giles
What is your view on building heights in Guildford? Should there be limits, perhaps depending on the location? If so, what should those limits be?
Guildford Borough Council is asking residents, community groups and developers for their feedback on its draft Tall Buildings Supplementary Planning Document (SPD).
The document is intended to help guide developers and support the assessment of development proposals and planning applications for tall buildings in Guildford town centre. The consultation is now open and respondents can have your say until 12 noon on Friday, August 8.
When finalised, GBC says the SPD will:
Cllr Fiona White [Lib Dem, Ash Wharf], lead councillor for Planning, said: “Guildford town centre continues to provide an opportunity for brownfield redevelopment and regeneration. Given its special character, it is vital that we achieve high quality urban design, and ensure we retain a sense of place through good architecture, townscape and public space.
“Poorly designed tall buildings can harm the character of an area, its heritage, wider views and local amenities. However, with appropriate guidance on their suitability and design, taller buildings could be a positive addition to the town, providing an opportunity for regeneration and the efficient use of land.
“Supplementary Planning Documents play a vital role in making sure that our policies are applied properly and lead to good development across the town centre. The Tall Buildings SPD cannot set a blanket height limit for proposed buildings, but it will support the careful assessment of sites and tall building proposals from an early stage.
“I encourage anyone with an interest in the future shape of Guildford town centre to take part in our consultation and have their say.”
Cllr Richard Mills, a member of the Conservative Group at GBC, said: “Having persistently pressed the Liberal Democrats to introduce a heights policy that could better protect the town centre from the remorseless spread of tall tower blocks, out of keeping with its character, we warmly welcomed their agreement last September to prepare supplementary planning guidance for this purpose.
“Sadly, this draft falls short. It carefully elaborates existing guidance on the design of tall buildings but will do little to strengthen the council’s capacity to resist unwelcome tall building applications within or impacting on the town centre.
“Guidance is now needed that makes clear developers will be expected to respect the informal 5-storey limit that, with rare exceptions, has prevailed until recent years. That need not rule out higher buildings, but it should make clear they are only likely to be supported where there is exceptional justification and where the town’s distinctive character is respected.”
A spokesperson for Guildford Labour said: “While it’s important to consult residents, at some point the administration will have to make a decision and further delay is no longer an option.
“Extra height in certain parts of the town – for example, Walnut Tree Close, for student accommodation – is acceptable to most. But we see the danger in the development at the station and the higher-up we go in Guildford, for example Pewley Down, the more considered the council need to be.
“Developers need clarity, and as usual with this executive, making a decision on height has been kicked into the long grass for too long.”
Alistair Smith, chair of the Guildford Society, commented: “We have been urging the council to create and adopt a heights SPD for several years. This included reviewing other Heights SPDs to see how they were structured, our report, which we shared with GBC, can be seen at https://www.guildfordsociety.org.uk/TallBldgSPDDraft.html
“We are delighted that a draft Supplementary Planning document has been published for consultation. As a draft adopted by the GBC Executive it carries some weight when considering planning applications. We will make comments on the draft as part of the consultation process.
“An immediate concern is that the proposed SPD needs to consider an area that is larger than just the Town Centre. A danger will be that tall buildings are developed on the town boundary. A positive approach to zoning heights in the town and across the borough needs to be considered.”
John Rigg, chair of the Guildford Vision Group, also welcomed the new draft planning document and endorsed it.
He said: “It’s one of the most coherent and clearly articulated planning documents produced by the council in recent years.
“We credit the marked improvement in planning leadership to the work of senior officers, particularly the new assistant director of Planning Development.”
GVG thinks the document could be strengthened further by:
The consultation will run for six weeks to give local people time to consider the detailed SPD and submit their feedback. GBC will also invite stakeholders registered on our planning policy database to take part.
The draft Tall Buildings SPD can be read online here. Printed copies are available to view at our Millmead office and at libraries across the borough.
Comments can be made:
The council will review all consultation responses and the issues raised. An updated SPD will then be considered for adoption by the Council’s Executive later this year.
Other local parties and organisations were invited to comment.
This website is published by The Guildford Dragon NEWS
Contact: Martin Giles mgilesdragon@gmail.com
Log in- Posts - Add New - Powered by WordPress - Designed by Gabfire Themes
Jim Allen
July 1, 2025 at 2:31 pm
The document’s primary deficiency lies in its limited scope, specifically focusing on the town centre. The assertion that the Local Plan adequately addresses tall buildings outside of Guildford town is questionable, as the plan’s effectiveness should be consistent throughout the designated area.
The current iteration allows for uncontrolled development, such as a 10-story structure on strategic sites, without comprehensive regulation this document provides.
George Potter
July 2, 2025 at 12:06 pm
Guildford Labour claim that this consultation on the Building Heights planning document is the Lib Dem council kicking things into the long grass and delaying making a decision. However, a public consultation is a legal requirement before any type of planning document can be adopted. Their comment only makes sense if they are unaware of this basic legal fact, so presumably whoever produced the comment in question was ignorant of it.
If so, then should anyone listen seriously to anything they have to say on planning when, despite having three councillors, they still seem incapable of understanding the very basics of the planning system?
George Potter is a Lib Dem borough councillor for Burpham.
David Milne
July 3, 2025 at 2:54 pm
The draft states: “The Council’s view is that buildings of 18m or taller (which tends to align with buildings of 5-6 storeys) have a greater likelihood of harm to aspects of the local context (e.g. significant views, heritage assets) and it is sensible to detail further guidance specific for these buildings to avoid or mitigate harm, whilst enhancing positive design features.”
Given this, I would suggest that there be an 18m limit unless the developer can prove that there are exceptional beneficial reasons for exceeding 18m, not including profit as an exceptional reason.
Carina Coverly
July 4, 2025 at 10:35 am
We don’t want great big eyesores like they have in Woking. It would be better to blend in with the current buildings or we will be risking the historic character of the town centre which is why people love Guildford.
Fiona White
July 4, 2025 at 12:20 pm
In view of the comments from Cllr Mills [Con, Castle ward] and the local Labour Party, please could I point out that the SPD [Supplementary Plannining Document] was discussed with Guildford Borough Council’s Local Plan panel in a series of meetings, including consideration of the final draft.
The Local Plan Panel consists of councillors from all groups on the council. Officers made a number of amendments to the draft in response to comments from Panel members.
Fiona White is the Lib Dem lead councillor for Planning