Is Chapel Street Refurbishment Really Necessary? Ask Aldermen and Residents

Published on: 13 Jul, 2018
Updated on: 13 Jul, 2018

Chapel Street, off Guildford High Street. A refurbishment proposal is provoking controversy.

By Amina Sahbegovic

A council proposal to resurface Chapel Street, in Guildford’s town centre, is causing controversy among local residents.

Chapel Street is one of Guildford oldest streets leading from the High Street to the castle.

Guildford Borough Council is considering resurfacing it in the same style as the recent Tunsgate refurbishment but has said more design work is required before final decisions are made.

While Tunsgate refurbishment cost over £800,000, aldermen, residents and businesses question the need of this proposal, especially in light of current spending constraints.

One businessman on Chapel Street said he had not been consulted on the project and commented: “In my opinion, the crisis is on housing at the moment and the council should focus on that. The street refurbishment is not a priority.”

The use of taxpayers money in refurbishing the street is questioned by local residents who find the street not only to be fine the way it is and appreciate its character.

Jeff Pero, a Guildford town centre resident, believes it is a waste of taxpayers money and said: “The Tunsgate refurbishment was pretty but too costly.”

Sally Lingard, from Merrow, who uses a mobility scooter, said she does find it easier to circulate in Tunsgate now but does not think historic parts of the town should necessarily be changed for disabled people.

Sally Lingard appreciates the easy access of Tunsgate but questions the need for a similar refurbishment of Chapel Street.

She said: “Rather than resurfacing Chapel Street, which has a certain charm, I think the money would be better spent filling in potholes and maintaining roads that carry more traffic. When it comes to allocating limited funds, one person’s priority is another person’s waste of money!”

Residents spoken to had a common question, why do it now? It appears that local shops and businesses have not yet been consulted on the matter but they question the necessity and are concerned about the impact the project might have on them.

Bernard Parke

Bernard Parke, a GBC alderman and former mayor, voiced his concerns: “The Tunsgate project has taken a year to complete and has caused the traders in that area a considerable amount of financial heartache.

“We are now told that Chapel Street is in line for a similar cosmetic facelift. Perhaps we should ask why?

“The traditional granite setts in that thoroughfare have only just received remedial care and to rip them up in favour of a new colour scheme is surely debatable.

“Consideration should also be given to the traders in that area; we do not wish to see them face the same financial deprivation as their fellow traders in nearby Tunsgate especially with the reported with the downturn of high street trading.”

Economic factors are agitating feelings as the refurbishment will presumably be expensive, although no scheme plans have been made yet.

Gordon Bridger

Another alderman and former mayor Gordon Bridger, said: “It is with disbelief that I heard that the council were considering removing the granite setts in Chapel Street which give a character and are a continuation of our High Street heritage.”

“About a third of the street was “recobbled” a short while ago and the rest is much in keeping with the heritage of this area. Why do they need replacing? Have local residents, or retailers been asked?

“Everyone I have mentioned this to recoils with disbelief at the idea?

“If this is a serious idea I would suggest that the council floats the idea with the public first, before committing themselves to what does not seem at all a good idea. What would it cost, what are the benefits and why is it necessary?”

He has been led to believe that one factor behind the proposal is sourcing sufficient numbers of setts similar to those used on the High Street.

When the High Street was relaid, the council is understood to have sourced reclaimed setts from the redevelopment of Kings Cross in London but has indicated that it is impossible to find further suitable granite setts.

However, today (July 13, 2018) setts from the same reclamation are still being advertised on eBay.

Reclaimed granite setts still being advertised for sale on eBay.

Historical note: The name Chapel Street derives from a nonconformist chapel that was situated in the street. (An earlier historical reference was incorrect.)

Responses to Is Chapel Street Refurbishment Really Necessary? Ask Aldermen and Residents

Brian Holt Reply

July 13, 2018 at 12:57 pm

It would be a waste of money. I have never seen anyone walking along Chapel Street, probably busier in the evenings with its restaurants and eating places.

I say keep the character of these old streets as they were built. Old buildings with new granite setts will not look right.
Dave Middleton Reply

July 13, 2018 at 1:24 pm

Bit of a tidy up and a deep clean maybe, but no need for a massive refurbishment.
- Sally Brabridge Reply
  
  July 16, 2018 at 10:12 am
  
  Absolutely right Dave – what’s needed is to repair and care for the existing surface on an on-going basis, not let it fall into disrepair so we can spend an absolute fortune on a new all shiny surface, the setts and small lanes are what gives Guildford its character.
Elisabeth Markwick Reply

July 13, 2018 at 4:25 pm

I agree the setts should be left alone.

However, perhaps the council would have a thought about replacing the tarmac patching in Market Street — that would be worthwhile. Maybe the utility company who dug them up could be made to pay?
Gordon Bridger Reply

July 13, 2018 at 11:19 pm

Congratulations on a very good piece of reporting. Any chance of a similar investigation into the proposal for a new pedestrian/cycle bridge over the River Wey?
Bernard Parke Reply

July 14, 2018 at 7:47 am

I might be wrong , but I cannot remember the colour brick scheme for Tunsgate ever going out for public discussion.
Harry Elson Reply

July 14, 2018 at 8:18 am

The condition of the North Street road surface is now of third world proportions. We as council taxpayers should be demanding action to rectify this disgraceful state of affairs. It seems crazy to talk about other projects when the main thoroughfare has become totally trashed.

Vanity projects may be what the council thinks we all want but all we really need is a simple resurfacing over a weekend.
Dave Middleton Reply

July 16, 2018 at 10:10 am

I understand that SCC have accepted that North Street is in appalling condition and resurfacing is planned for the not too distant future, thank goodness, along with a “speed table” [a larger speed hump as can be found at the top of the Upper High Street]] somewhere up around the area of the library, which I’m not quite so keen on.
- Martin Elliott Reply
  
  July 16, 2018 at 1:08 pm
  
  The “speed table” works as a traffic calming measure, but is hardly necessary due to the narrowing and bend in the road. It is a useful crossing point for buggies, wheelchairs, etc but it creates total confusion because too many drivers and pedestrians assume it is a pedestrian crossing. Who hasn’t seen a near-miss when assumptions don’t align?
  
  Perhaps this and the new table could be designated a pedestrian crossing? Though I doubt either location would meet the rigid, no discretion allowed, SCC criteria for a crossing.
Mary Bedforth Reply

July 16, 2018 at 4:18 pm

Leave well alone. I dislike the look of the Tunsgate approach roadway intensely let alone the cost. It jars.

Get going with the pothole repairs and the worn out roads in the borough.

We should have a competition to name the worst road surface in the borough. It is third world.