Letter: St Mary’s Wharf, We Have Not Been Fairly Consulted

Published on: 19 Aug, 2021
Updated on: 19 Aug, 2021

Comparative views of St Mary’s from Quarry Street. Top, as it is now, bottom, as it would be.

From: Nic Allen

member of the Guildford Society and RIBA

I would like to support the points made in Alistair Smith’s letter: The Guildford Society is Not Nimby, and in Peter Coleman’s letter: Debenham’s Redevelopment Should Respect Town’s Heritage and Valley Setting. As a member of the Guildford Society, I fully endorse its letter expressing concerns on mass and scale the Society has written to Native Land.

I believe that the consultation process for St Mary’s Wharf has been seriously flawed. The developer Native Land and their team have drip-fed information about their proposals to the public in a series of three “consultation” briefings.

The information presented in these three rounds has focused on the benefits of their scheme that they wish to sell to the public. There has been little opportunity for the public to debate or question these benefits or the impact of their proposals.

The developer has only gradually released information on the height, scale and massing of the development. There is still a large amount that has not been revealed especially the comprehensive set of views of the scheme from different locations around the town and its centre which show the development in context.

Comparative views of the proposed development from the High Street. Left, as it is now, right as it would be.

Likewise, only when detailed drawings that show the elevations and sections of the scheme in relation to its neighbouring buildings, streets and the river, will its scale be really evident. When these views and drawings are eventually revealed, probably when a planning application is submitted, will the public really be able to observe how dominant and damaging this scheme will be to the town and its heritage.

Some of the benefits being sold to the public may need questioning. Is all of the public realm being much promoted actually “public” or as it is privately owned will it be closed off at specific times?

Guildford is loved by residents and visitors because of its charm, scale of buildings and interest, much of which comes from being a gap town surrounded by hills. The challenge is to preserve and enhance what is special in the town centre, whilst using vacant sites sensitively to provide for, needed housing, and other uses.

The view of St Nicolas Church from The Mount with the outline of the new development shown in blue.

Most views across the town centre include, in the distance, the hills, countryside and skylines. This scheme with its height, twice the height of existing Debenhams and 5-6 floors higher than most of its surroundings, will permanently wipe out or significantly alter many of these views for ever.

Three of the views from the consultation are shown here although the view from the bottom of The Mount is only shown by a blue line whereas the impact of the actual building’s mass will be very visible and damage this view of St Nicolas Church. Whether it is the views from Quarry Street with St Mary’s Church, the oldest church in Guildford, or from St Nicolas Church or the High Street or Millmead on the opposite side of the River Wey or the Town Mill or the Yvonne Arnaud Theatre, all of these views will be altered.

These historic heritage buildings will be dwarfed, over-powered and overshadowed by these insensitively high new buildings and in many cases, the views of the hills and skyline lost.

To provide for a hundred or so residents of the apartments to have views over the River or Town Centre, tens of thousands of people, both now and in the future, will have lost the opportunity to enjoy Guildford’s heritage and views unblighted or unobstructed by this development.

There are probably 50 listed buildings and the historic core of the town centre plus the riverside itself that would be negatively impacted and damaged for ever by this development’s size.

A development of this height and scale would not be permitted in Cambridge, Winchester, Canterbury, Salisbury or Oxford, so why should it be permitted here, in Guildford? Do we want to destroy the best of our town?

I want and believe in us having a thriving Guildford, especially the town centre with exciting new development including more town centre and riverside housing but not at any cost.

Across the UK and Europe there are plenty of superb examples of well designed new developments on sensitive town or city centre sites that are in scale with their surroundings. Many of these designed by leading architects have been the trigger for wider regeneration.

I do believe the public has been misled. We have not been fairly consulted because we have only been given the developer’s choice of information on which to comment. Guildford town centre, after decades of indifferent development, deserves the best new development, urban design and architecture of a quality that enhances our Town and doesn’t destroy it.

Share This Post