Solum Appeal – Reactions: ‘Extremely Disappointing’, ‘A Hammer Blow’, ‘How Sad for Our Beautiful Town’

Published on: 23 Jan, 2018
Updated on: 24 Jan, 2018

Developer’s impression of how the profile of the approved station frontage will look

Local political leaders and organisation spokesmen were unusually unified in their condemnation of the decision to allow Solum’s appeal that will allow a huge redevelopment of Guildford railway station.

The council leader says Guildford Borough Council will: “…consider all options open to us regarding this depressing decision.”

Cllr Paul Spooner

Paul Spooner (Con, Ash South and Tongham), leader of Guildford Borough Council, said: “The Planning Inspector’s appeal decision, to overturn the council Planning Committee’s unanimous refusal for permission and allow the Solum scheme at Guildford’s main railway station, is extremely disappointing for our whole community. Alongside poor design and little gain for users of the station, it is a blow to our aims for more affordable housing in the town.

“The Inspector recognised the ‘strong and well-presented’ arguments we put to the Inquiry, which reflects the high calibre of work by council officers and the external advice we received from experts led by Morag Ellis QC and her team.

…extremely disappointing for our whole community

“This is also the type of outcome that illustrates the critical importance of having a Local Plan in place. This site and area of the town is included in the plan we submitted for inspection last month and supports the strategic approach we take for future design and development.

“We agree with the inspector’s conclusion that this proposal has ‘polarised opinion’ and will cause some ‘shock’, especially as market housing appears to outweigh the critical need for affordable housing in our borough. Whatever the final result of the scheme, we will continue our work with Network Rail and other partners to provide the supporting infrastructure vital to our borough’s future.

“Our aim remains to balance the needs of everyone who lives or works in Guildford and we will consider all options open to us regarding this depressing decision.”

Cllr Caroline Reeves

Caroline Reeves (Lib Dem Friary and St Nicolas), leader of the opposition at Millmead, in whose ward the station lies, said: “This is extremely disappointing. While we have always acknowledged that this is a highly sustainable site for housing, the scale and design of this large city-style development will impact on the town is so many ways.

“The busiest station on the Portsmouth line will still have appallingly bad disabled access, a public space that doesn’t improve the traffic flow and compromises the taxi service.

“To challenge the locally derived name of ‘The Guildford Wall’ the Inspector points out the articulation of the housing blocks but this doesn’t overcome the point that these buildings will be seen from the whole surrounding area and impact on all views into the town.

…better suited to a city than a county town

“Green walls and or roofs could have lessened the impact but instead we have a style of development better suited to a city than a county town. And once again a planning inspector has endorsed reducing the number of ‘affordable homes.’

“The unanimous planning committee decision was based on very strong planning reasons. Planning officers and our legal team spent very many hours in preparation before and during the hearing plus the Guildford Society made very strong representation but all to no avail. This decision just underlines the need for an up to date Local Plan, it really is a sad day for the town.”

Cllr Susan Parker

Susan Parker (GGG, Send) leader of the Guildford Greenbelt Group, said: “This Solum development is very unattractive. It is very disappointing that this design has been approved.  Design should always be a major factor in planning.  These buildings are very ugly, and therefore, in my view, inappropriate.

…these proposed soulless monoliths do not fit well in Guildford

“Our town is beautiful, and its historic buildings are important. Tourists come to see our historic centre: the High Street, castle and museum and the area around the river. These are beautiful and the heart of our town is important in terms of our national heritage.  But these proposed soulless monoliths do not fit well in Guildford.

“Furthermore, after permission was given for these ugly buildings by the Inspector, it is disappointing that these buildings do not even reflect the proportion of affordable housing set as a local target.  We need affordable housing, and seeking to avoid the council’s target for affordable homes on the grounds of viability is a typical developer’s tactic; it is a shame that it was effective here.”

Cllr James Walsh

James Walsh (Lab, Stoke) Labour group spokesperson said: “The Inspector’s decision to allow Solum’s proposed development of the station is a hammer-blow to Guildford. We are now faced with the prospect of having an ugly, oversized neo-Soviet megalith in place of a more thoughtful, sensitive and attractive development more in keeping with the special character of the town.

“And, disgracefully, we are now looking at yet another example of developers pulling the “viability” card to shirk their building of a fair number of affordable homes – in a lucrative development of 438 flats, numerous shops restaurants and offices in a prime location, Solum propose to build a paltry 45 “affordable” homes. In other words, slightly more than 10% of the total (not 25% as, I believe, is mistakenly stated in the inspector’s decision) when the council’s current target for new developments is 40%. And let us not forget that, in this case, “affordable” means “shared-ownership” – so not truly affordable units at all.

“Yet again, the big buck wins over social need.

“Guildford is a town with a special character borne, in part, by its rich pre- and post-industrial past. You don’t have to walk far around the town before you start to feel its history and personality seeping up from the setts, alleyways and ancient buildings as you pass by. This is not understood by those who don’t live here, and that much is apparent in the approval of a development that is aesthetically mute, functionally bland, ridiculously oversized and fails to contribute to some of the council’s key objectives.

…aesthetically mute, functionally bland, ridiculously oversized…

“Guildford Labour Party champions the provision of affordable housing in the borough and supports a minimum of 40% of the total in all new developments. We are not NIMBYs and, while we recognise that market forces are necessary to drive development and construction, we also believe that developers looking to work in the town must also actively exhibit a social conscience when drawing up their plans.

“I better not type any more because I can feel my language getting fruitier.”

Julian Lyon

Julian Lyon, Chairman of the Guildford Society said: “This decision defies Localism and rewards pigheaded planning and thuggish architecture. The scheme, if built, will absolutely block Platform Zero and so much more. The station will be one of the losers. What kind of design can rationally include a column in front of ticket barriers, and a layout that puts disabled people at a disadvantage and risk because of the idiocy of having the barriers so close to the top of the ramp, the wide gate on the opposite side of the opening, and no additional mobility assistance on the station.

No-one emerges from this in a good light. How sad for our beautiful town.

“If Network Rail were actually interested in a good, modern, functioning station, they would have used this opportunity. If the developers cared about Guildford, they would have found a way to make the development fit in better and deliver more than 10% affordable housing.

“The further worry is this decision will significantly ‘raise the bar’ in terms of what, from now on, will be considered as acceptable for Guildford in terms of height and bulk of new building.

“This development will impose further pressures on transportation in the immediate area and the tragedy of this decision is therefore further compounded with the failure of the planners at GBC and the highway engineers at SCC to secure, as part of this major development, any meaningful contribution to achieve much-needed improvements in town centre infrastructure.

“No-one emerges from this in a good light. How sad for our beautiful town.”

Guildford’s MP Anne Milton and Solum have been invited to comment.

See also: Solum Wins Planning Appeal for Controversial Railway Station Re-development and Solum Appeal Win – ‘A Sad Day for Guildford’ Says Guildford Vision Group

Share This Post