Letter: Park & Ride Plan And Missed Opportunities

Published on: 12 Nov, 2012
Updated on: 12 Nov, 2012

From Julian Lyon

I was at the Meeting of the Planning Committee meeting and found the Park & Ride debate a bizarre discussion. Putting aside Cllr Taylor voting with pre-determination and majoring in his representation on non-planning issues, what was most strange was how important the impact of extra traffic on the surrounding roads was, to the group of Councillors opposing the application, compared to their ambivalence towards the same issue regarding the Bellerby application just minutes before.

I was stunned by the planning officer comment in the agenda “a proposal cannot be expected to resolve an existing problem”. Have they never come across the concept of planning gain? Did they not see a main ‘justification’ of the redevelopment of the Bellerby Site as resolving issues of antisocial behaviour and urban decay? Do they presume an access will not need to be provided over the railway as part of the Solum development because that is an existing problem?

When this juxtaposed with the Council’s position as applicant and the acknowledged issue of access to and from Beechcroft Drive straight off the A3 that urgently needs to be resolved, this smacks of arrogant complacency and bad planning.

But the most bizarre thing of all, from my perspective, is that of the opening times and function of this tarmacadam field.
If a visitor to Guildford wanted to linger in town and go for dinner or to G-Live or the theatre, he or she would have to get the bus back back to the park & ride, pick up their car and drive it back into town pretty much during rush hour (via the Farnham Road bridge and the back of the station which gets very congested). Or they could take their evening custom elsewhere once in their car.

Meanwhile, the major car parking issues in the Onslow area are: Student parking relating to the University – provision of which is systematically constrained by successive planning policies (but this does not prevent students and staff parking in Onslow Village); Research Park employee parking; and, most notably of all, hospital visitor parking.

Here was an opportunity at least to solve the latter issue by running the shuttle bus past the hospital from, say, 4pm to 9.30pm when the car park becomes less busy with shoppers. It would ensure that those forced to stay in the hospital would be better able to receive visitors and the stress levels of families and friends would be greatly reduced.

As to the night-life in town, the Council has previously said that it wanted the hours in which the town was lively to be increased – urging shops to stay open later and commending a café culture.

Again, I am afraid the Planners and Planning Committee seem to speak with one mind and decide with another. Such confusion of purpose and action leaves little wonder why Guildford is failing.

I and others have called for a comprehensive plan. This project and other recent events have shown more vividly than ever how essential that is.

I only hope Cllr Mansbridge [the new Council Leader] can garner the support to take on some of the headstrong officers who, I am sure with the best of intentions, do not seem able, in my view, to design and implement Guildford’s future projects.