hon alderman and former Mayor of Guildford
The resurfacing of Tunsgate now appears to have been completed, although a little overdue.
During that period of time the traders have suffered financially, so I have been told.
Not as a hon alderman, but as a council tax payer I have asked the following questions:
I have been told, in the past, that I have only just to ask if I have such a query, but on this occasion, after several emails, I have not even received an acknowledgement, so I decided to make a request under The Freedom of Information Act.
Yet again I have not received a reply.
I do not think that this request is unreasonable taking into consideration the escalating rise of our council tax burden.
Guildford Borough Council have been invited to respond. Ed
This website is published by The Guildford Dragon NEWS
Contact: Martin Giles mgilesdragon@gmail.com
Log in- Posts - Add New - Powered by WordPress - Designed by Gabfire Themes
Mary Bedforth
July 31, 2018 at 1:05 pm
There is also the loss of revenue to GBC car parks to be added to the final sum. The contractors took a whole row of parking spaces in the Bright Hill car park for the duration for storage of materials and equipment. Much of it is still there.
Then there’s the destruction (and replacement) of the newly erected single lamppost. Plus the cost of an illuminated bollard in the island at the bottom of South Hill/Sydenham Road and the damage to the illuminated traffic sign on the traffic island in South Hill, also damaged during the very long construction period of Tunsgate. Presumably, both have been replaced at a cost to the council tax payers and not the developers.
Sorry, should I say “Tunsgate Quarter”?
Mike Gibson
July 31, 2018 at 6:46 pm
And what about the cost of the work to widen the cycle track along Parkway? I am sure most, including cyclists, would have preferred the money spent on mending the potholes in the local area?