Opinion: People and Pedestrians First – The GVG Goal and the Need for a Bridge

Published on: 6 Aug, 2016
Updated on: 8 Aug, 2016

Bill Stokoe, Guildford Vision Group

By Bill Stokoe

director of the Guildford Vision Group (GVG)

If Guildford town centre is going to thrive in the years ahead, the Guildford Borough Council has to put people and pedestrians first. That is what GVG has sought to achieve through its lobbying for a town centre masterplan.

Wider pedestrianisation, coupled with re-invigoration of the riverside, will provide an essential ingredient for Guildford’s longevity as a place to visit, explore and enjoy.

It is no part of GVG’s agenda to promote the car. Hence GVG’S call for a new crossing is simply to redirect traffic away from the centre and riverside. See the accompanying map.

We happen to think that our new rail/river crossing and associated re-routeing will quite probably improve car movement around town. But that is not the main purpose of the crossing.

To those philosophically opposed to any new tarmac, look how much of the riverside north from Town Bridge can be recovered for people to enjoy. Our crossing is not a car magnet, it’s a car mover.

At the moment all pedestrians approaching North Street and the High Street from the station and from the west side of town have to cross traffic-heavy Onslow Street. Those from the station also have to negotiate the quite unsuitable Bridge Street, as recent tragic accidents have clearly underlined.

The new crossing would allow Bridge Street to be pedestrianised, apart from necessary bus, taxi and mobility access.

There are all manner of supporting arguments for the new crossing. Most of them have been rehearsed at our public meetings or articulated in our press releases and updates.

Why do we focus so much on pedestrianisation? Two words – Dwell Time. We believe the key to our town centre’s long-run viability is to make the centre a real magnet.

Shopping is changing, courtesy of the internet. People increasingly see shops as somewhere to browse rather than buy. Buying will be online, either at instore terminals, on your smartphone or from home.

Delivery will be to homes or edge-of-town car parks. No more lugging your shopping around with you. You’re hands free to enjoy the sights and handle the history!

Hence the successful town centres will be those that encourage extended dwell time through a much richer visitor experience.

So if we’re to win the competition for visitors and shoppers in the 21st century, we have to make sure Guildford is an outstanding place to visit.

We have great history to celebrate, stunning scenery to enjoy and a river running through our centre that we must open up, with lively riverside facilities and leisure attractions.

Both sides of the river in the centre have the potential to deliver a wonderful experience for residents and visitors alike.

For that we have to move the traffic away. That’s why we need the new crossing. That is why a new rail and river bridge would help.

And that’s why we need support to persuade the council to take the crossing on board.

Responses to Opinion: People and Pedestrians First – The GVG Goal and the Need for a Bridge

C Wiliams Reply

August 6, 2016 at 8:45 pm

I completely support the idea of taking traffic out of the town centre and increasing pedestrianisation but is it just me that thinks that GVG have lost a marble or two with the bridge idea?

Given the concerns around the now rejected Solum development being “Great Wall of Guildford” I am really surprised that GVG seem to be suggesting the Guildford equivalent of the Dartford Crossing slap bang in the middle of Guildford!

Surely the length, size and scale of a new bridge would be a complete eyesore on the Guildford town landscape? Imagine the view from the Cathedral, Pewley Hill or The Mount, evenif it were only one lane in each direction?

I am no urban designer, planner, surveyor or transport specialist but it seems to me that Guildford could learn a lot from the ‘Big Dig Project’ undertaken in Boston, Massachussets.

How about still closing Bridge Street, tunneling Onslow Street, from the York Road roundabout to the Friary or Town Bridge, then re-routing the A31 over the existing Farnham Road Bridge in two directions round and over either Friary or Town Bridge to meet the tunnel and the A281 at a junction?

I know tunnels are expensive but the proposed bridge wouldn’t be cheap either. The council’s Guildford Transport Strategy proposes a tunnel for the A3 so why not one in the town centre?
Bibhas Neogi Reply

August 7, 2016 at 12:02 pm

I wish to direct C Williams to visit my website that could be found by searching for ‘revamp guildford gyratory’. It suggests similar ideas for bridges and tunnels and it has been in the public domain since 2009.

The view of the new bridge over the tracks would not substantially change the view of the station from places that have an uninterrupted line of sight. The existing footbridge over the platforms is not exactly an example of architectural marvel.

The flyover would be hidden between buildings along most of its route to the east of the railway station site and by terminating it at Mary Road, as I have suggested, rather than at York Road roundabout, as suggested by Guildford Vision Group, the structure would not be exposed to view from Woodbridge Road and Onslow Street areas.

Whatever is done, congestion has to be reduced and the town made pedestrian friendly even if it does mean deterioration of some precious views from vantage points.
Bill Stokoe Reply

August 9, 2016 at 6:17 pm

I don’t think I’ve lost my marbles yet but I might admit to hair loss as I’ve been pulling it out over the past four years with the Guildford Vision Group (GVG), trying to help people properly understand our goals.

The comment by C Wiliams has prompted another hair pulling episode.

Where, oh where, in the myriad of GVG communications or public meeting exchanges over the past four years has he found any comparison made by GVG with the Dartford Crossing, or any suggestion that its height, width or length is what we want to see?

Look at the three existing bridges close to the station that span the railway. Do they intrude? With new housing almost certain either side of the tracks a new bridge is likely to be substantially hidden from town centre or many other views.

GVG supports great design so would like the bridge to be something special and sympathetic to its setting. Perhaps a competition might be the best way to achieve that?

But GVG remains firmly convinced that a new East/West crossing is absolutely vital if we are to properly pedestrianise the Town centre and make the riverside a place people want to visit, as explained in the Opinion piece.

The recent accident statistics just underline the need to separate people and cars in the centre, as well as to improve air quality. See the recent Dragon article. Pedestrianising Bridge Street and taking traffic away from Onslow Street would save lives and injury.

The bridge could be a thing of beauty (many examples exist), a landmark that says Guildford welcomes the 21st century while respecting our town’s wonderful history.

It could mark the start of the journey from the old town to the exciting new world of the University and Research Park. Or to the majesty and reflective embrace of the Cathedral.

But please, please can we examine the subject of the crossing in a calm, objective manner without too much over-exaggeration?

Bill Stokoe is a Director of GVG (Vision for Guildford Ltd)