Letter: Let’s Not Throw The Vision Opportunity Away

Published on: 9 Sep, 2014
Updated on: 9 Sep, 2014

From Robert Burch

Nigel Trellis’ response [see Letter: The Vision Group Are Not Living in the Real World ] raises some important issues, but misses the point. GVG’s* vision for Guildford is exactly that – a vision of what could be possible in Guildford with some bold and innovative thinking.

Yes it may not work as they have suggested and the right solution may be that proposed by Allies and Morrison in which through traffic will still use Onslow Street.

But this is the only innovative thinking about Guildford’s town centre on offer and we would all do well to get behind it and encourage the Guildford Borough Council to progress with the detailed studies now required. The vision group fought hard to get this opportunity, so let’s not throw it away.

*Guildford Vision Group

Responses to Letter: Let’s Not Throw The Vision Opportunity Away

Martin Elliott Reply

September 9, 2014 at 12:09 pm

I don’t think anybody is saying any ideas about the traffic problems should be thrown away.

However, at this stage of development of complete, integrated regeneration of the town centre from the cricket ground to Shalford park, and Farnham Hospital to York Road, with all the facilities and infrastructure working together, studies need to be far more detailed than this.

The brief for a traffic plan should by now have a proper set of information of actual traffic flow requirements, currently and in the future. There should be proper documentation on the causes and nature of ‘pinch points’. If the GBC has a philosophy to change the residents and visitors needs, they seem to ignore this for parking, it should also be clearly identified.

Without any of that we have a concept which most people can demolish in five minutes. So useful input but, as with all consultants report improperly specified and managed, the most obvious conclusion is the requirement for another (expensive) study (by the same consultant).
Nigel Trellis Reply

September 11, 2014 at 8:30 pm

Robert Burch fails to understand that any vision needs to address ALL the factors involved equally. If it doesn’t then the whole plan is undermined.

Yes, I know that some small details in such a scheme might need fine tuning, but what has been put forward has very serious deficiencies with regard to the major traffic issues.

To properly address these would have a major knock on effect on the other elements of the plan.
- Robert Burch Reply
  
  September 12, 2014 at 3:08 pm
  
  A Vision and a plan are quite different things as Adrian Atkinson highlights here:
  https://guildford-dragon.com/2014/09/12/letter-great-vision-plan-strategy/
  
  GVG’s work is all about a vision and they have been clear that there are many details to be worked out before a plan could be created. In particular they highlighted at the recent public meeting their work on traffic studies. It is key to understanding what can be achieved.
  
  The need for detailed investigation does not obviate the need for an initial vision. At least this gives us something to work towards. This has been sorely lacking in Guildford in recent years and remains absent in the borough-wide Local Plan.
Bibhas Neogi Reply

September 13, 2014 at 9:26 am

Over the past four years I have offered suggestions on my website for a holistic and staged improvement to Guildford traffic together with relocated bus station/modified bus routes/waiting rooms and bus shelters for an integrated transport system connecting the town centre and the railway station.

Additional parking on top of the bus station when relocated on Mary Road car park site could also help. These ideas are independent on whether the gyratory remains or not and obviates the need for a temporary bus station.

Recently I have added the concept of a cut and cover tunnel to take the through A281 traffic below the town centre if Guildford Vision Group’s idea is taken forward to relocate Millbrook stretch on to a widened Frairy Street thus leaving Millbrook to become a pleasant riverside area.

This alternative scenario does not take the A281 traffic to the west of the river and thus keeps the changes and disruptions to a minimum.