Letter: To Believe Drivers Will Switch to Cycling is Absurd

Published on: 24 Oct, 2024
Updated on: 24 Oct, 2024

From: Malcolm Stanier

In response to: Objectors Fear SCC Will Give Green Light to London Road Active Travel Redesign

Cllr George Potter’s [Lib Dem, Guildford East] statement that a “minority remain opposed to the scheme” is just not true as is his assertion that the Highway Engineers have all accepted the below standard dimensions. I am not aware that Cllr Potter has the Highway Engineering qualifications to say this.

The belief that the engineers cannot be leaned on to produce acceptable results to the political machinations of SCC and the evangelical cycling lobby and ignore the something like 19,000 everyday road users and Burpham residents is incredible.

As Cllr Fiona Davidson [R4GV, Guildford South East] says the scheme is based on “A large amount of highly technical and theoretic argument” whereas local residents and road users of this main A road route to and from Guildford will have to live with the real-life situation which is all for the benefit of a supposed possible additional 200 (a Surrey County Council figure) cyclists at the cost of over £4 million.

I do not doubt the need to reverse the environmental damage that has occurred but to believe that this will be achieved by substantial numbers of car drivers being willing to switch to cycling is an absurd and unrealistic fantasy.

Responses to Letter: To Believe Drivers Will Switch to Cycling is Absurd

Valerie Thompson Reply

October 25, 2024 at 10:02 am

London Road is one of the principal routes into Guildford from the A3, a road unsuitable for bikes. To restrict its width by this traffic scheme is absurd. Lorries and buses will have serious difficulty with the new design.

As for increasing cycling, Malcolm Stanier is quite right in saying this will not happen.

Traffic on this road includes cars and larger transport coming to Guildford for a reason, to shop, to go to the Spectrum Leisure Centre or to travel elsewhere. Drivers of cars are using them for a reason; because they need to get somewhere faster than a bike could do, or to carry loads, not possible on a bike, or to carry passengers who could not, for reasons of age or fitness, cycle miles to do their chores.
Harry Dale Reply

November 5, 2024 at 3:19 pm

It’s very clear that Ms Thompson is not familiar with cycling in Guildford. It’s quicker to get anywhere on a bike, rather than sitting in a stinking traffic jam in a car whilst poisioning everyone around.
- John Perkins Reply
  
  November 6, 2024 at 6:42 am
  
  Using emotive words like stinking and poisoning are not conducive to healthy debate. Mr Dale makes no effort to answer the points raised.
  
  At those times when traffic jams occur it may well be quicker to travel by bike, but the rest of the time it is not.
  - Sam Watson Reply
    
    November 6, 2024 at 7:04 pm
    
    Mr Perkins needs to read the reply, rather than just responding with the usual anti-cycling, knee-jerk reaction. The reply makes the very valid point about the relative speeds of cycling vs driving around Guildford.
    
    Cycling is indeed – even without the aid of an electric bike – quicker than driving. Perhaps Mr Perkins should try it. As to “stinking” and “poisoning”, Mr Perkins should perhaps consider the case of Ella Adoo-Kissi-Debrah, the first child to have air pollution cited as a cause of death on her certificate. It may be an uncomfortable truth for Mr Perkins, but the fact is that pollution kills, and Guildford is full of it emanating from car exhausts and brakes.