Letter: What About Other Roads That Might Need Cycle Lanes More?

Published on: 17 Feb, 2024
Updated on: 17 Feb, 2024

From: Jane Hepburn

In response to: ‘Don’t Bow to Naysayers’ Say Cycling Campaigners

I wouldn’t be a London Road scheme naysayer if I felt there had been a democratic process over the choice of road for a new cycle lane.

The London Road scheme has been presented as a fait accomplis without discussions over other roads that could equally, if not more, deserve cycling provision. Anyone disagreeing with the London Road scheme is automatically branded a “naysayer”, whereas they might want cycle lanes elsewhere for equally valid reasons.

There are roads leading into and out of Guildford that don’t, unlike London Road, even have white-lined cycle lanes.

Let’s do a feasibility study and give other routes a chance too.

Every now and again mention is made of children cycling to George Abbot School. If this is the driving force for the scheme then why not be upfront about it? Why not make this the focus of a campaign for safe cycling for George Abbot kids? Why couch it in general terms and ignore the school-run elephant in the room?

If it’s about a school run, then the Guildford to Godalming College, Portsmouth Road to Godalming death trap should also be a consideration. And how about the other death trap leading through Guildford, up the Farnham Road to the County School? Not a cycle lane in sight.

Responses to Letter: What About Other Roads That Might Need Cycle Lanes More?

Mark Stamp Reply

February 17, 2024 at 8:13 pm

Surrey and Guildford councils have been collaborating on the local cycling and walking infrastructure plan which has prioritised a number of routes across the borough for future investment. Local groups including residents associations were invited to be part of the initial consultations and it was based on Department for Transport guidance.

I am not sure if the final proposals have been published but I assume that the individual projects that have been identified will be subject to consultation at the point where funding is identified for them.
- Jim Allen Reply
  
  March 11, 2024 at 9:37 pm
  
  Sadly Mr stamp is in error. SCC refused to discuss such matters with the Burpham Community Association and the statutory body the Burpham Neighbourhood Forum. We would have properly informed the community of Burpham!
  
  I have documentary evidence of our request in 2020 2021 and 2022! It was a surprise in December 2022! Hence the outrage at the meeting of over 400 in January 2023.
Giles Redditch Reply

March 8, 2024 at 5:40 pm

GBC couldn’t be less interested in sustainable transport. Nothing is ever done properly, if at all. Guildford is an absolute, stinking, car-locked shambles of a place. That isn’t going to change in an eon; there is no will whatsoever.
- Bibhas Neogi Reply
  
  March 10, 2024 at 5:57 pm
  
  Guildford Borough Council is not generally responsible for roads, Surrey County Council is. GBC initially under the administration before the Lib Dem/ R4GV coalition took it upon itself to improve the A331 off-slip to the A31 (now operational) and Ash Road Bridge over the railway (under construction) to expedite house building in Ash under the Local Plan.