Letter: Why We Are Challenging The Waitrose Planning Permission

Published on: 4 Aug, 2013
Updated on: 5 Aug, 2013

From Bill Stokoe

Guildford Vision Group (Steering Group)

We were asked recently by a newcomer to Guildford to explain, in words of one syllable, why we were challenging the foodstore permission on the Bellerby site. Here is a slightly expanded reply, which we think other critics of our activity might like to see:

GVG wants to see development in the town centre
That could include a 2000 sq m food store
Waitrose would be great
Bellerby, owned by the council (GBC), was long designated for housing
But GBC allowed the 2007 permission for 75 houses to lapse in 2010
The site had been dormant many years; long before GVG formed in May 2012
Guildford urgently needs housing that workers and families can afford
Bellerby can accommodate much more than 75 houses; 200+ is possible
Losing housing on Bellerby threatens Green Belt land as we need the numbers
Lack of housing also holds back Guildford’s growth, as surveys show and GBC knows
GBC redesignated the site from sustainable housing to a foodstore
GBC used an inappropriate interpretation of planning rules at Bellerby
That is what GVG is questioning via judicial review (JR)
The interpretation also creates a precedent that eager developers will note
The scheme means the loss of a popular, busy subway nearby
It’s much used by an adjoining primary school’s kids & mums
They will have to use a new, traffic light crossing. Think Debenhams
York Rd is busy; even Waitrose & Surrey CC concede that
Up to 90 cars could be queueing up York Rd at peaks times
Do 168 surface parking spaces sit well alongside GBC’s ‘Park & Ride’ policy?
Congestion already gridlocks key places; GBC knows it holds back Guildford’s growth
The gyratory, into/out of which York Rd feeds, can be dreadful
The Waitrose architecture looks pretty grim next to a Conservation Area
The foodstore brought 159 separate objectors vs 102 pro
In the 3 nearest wards, 120 objected vs 52 for. Overwhelming support?
GBC plans to develop up to 60,000 sq m of new retail space in North St
A 2,000 sq m foodstore could be easily included; UK policy says it should go there
Can’t John Lewis include a Waitrose in its North St store scheme?
GBC’s advisors recommend a major bus interchange at Leapale Road
Waitrose HGVs will thus tangle with manoeuvring buses in Leapale Road
GBC has stated aims to remove or reduce traffic in North Street
The HGVs have to use North St; they will thus run into (over?) pedestrians
Does that seem like great planning?
But the JR judges the planning process/procedures of GBC, not the scheme
An oral hearing will allow us to better articulate our reasoning
But GVG recognises its course is expensive and not risk-free
GVG remains open to discussions and have initiated proposals on a regular basis
GVG’s objectives are unchanged; it wants a proper Masterplan for the town
Over several decades, planning in Guildford has been piecemeal
The foodstore consent is the latest in a long line of such piecemeal schemes
There is little or no thought or action on improving supporting infrastructure
Waitrose will not be paying for any alleviation. GBC keeps all the cash
Pedestrians, and cyclists, get a poor deal in Guildford’s centre
Bad planning has left the riverside area desolate and underused as a public amenity
The town needs a Masterplan to plot its future. Simples, as they say.